Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Deprecate CA1801 in favor of IDE0060 #21882

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Dec 8, 2020

Conversation

Evangelink
Copy link
Member

Summary

Deprecate CA1801 in favor of IDE0060.

Relates to dotnet/roslyn-analyzers#4498

@Evangelink Evangelink requested a review from gewarren as a code owner December 8, 2020 14:19
@dotnet-bot dotnet-bot added this to the December 2020 milestone Dec 8, 2020
@@ -45,6 +45,10 @@ This rule does not examine the following kinds of methods:

This rule does not flag parameters that are named with the [discard](../../../csharp/discards.md) symbol, for example, `_`, `_1`, and `_2`. This reduces warning noise on parameters that are needed for signature requirements, for example, a method used as a delegate, a parameter with special attributes, or a parameter whose value is implicitly accessed at run time by a framework but is not referenced in code.

> [!NOTE]
> This rule has been deprecated in favor of [IDE0060](https://docs.microsoft.com/dotnet/fundamentals/code-analysis/style-rules/ide0060). You can enforce this analyzer by following [this guide](https://docs.microsoft.com/dotnet/fundamentals/code-analysis/overview#code-style-analysis).
> For more information, see [Deprecated rules](https://docs.microsoft.com/visualstudio/code-quality/fxcop-unported-deprecated-rules).
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

  • Do we need a parallel PR to MicrosoftDocs/visualstudio-docs page?
  • The linked page says deprecated rules for FxCop, which was deleted recently, so the change only affects NetAnalyzers package. Do the linked page needs to be updated regarding this?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'd just suggest leaving this part out for now (for more info, see deprecated rules).

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Also, those deprecated rules refer to FxCop rules that were never ported as an analyzer. CA1801 was ported, so I don't think it belongs in that list.

Co-authored-by: Youssef Victor <31348972+Youssef1313@users.noreply.github.com>
docs/fundamentals/code-analysis/quality-rules/ca1801.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@@ -45,6 +45,10 @@ This rule does not examine the following kinds of methods:

This rule does not flag parameters that are named with the [discard](../../../csharp/discards.md) symbol, for example, `_`, `_1`, and `_2`. This reduces warning noise on parameters that are needed for signature requirements, for example, a method used as a delegate, a parameter with special attributes, or a parameter whose value is implicitly accessed at run time by a framework but is not referenced in code.

> [!NOTE]
> This rule has been deprecated in favor of [IDE0060](https://docs.microsoft.com/dotnet/fundamentals/code-analysis/style-rules/ide0060). You can enforce this analyzer by following [this guide](https://docs.microsoft.com/dotnet/fundamentals/code-analysis/overview#code-style-analysis).
> For more information, see [Deprecated rules](https://docs.microsoft.com/visualstudio/code-quality/fxcop-unported-deprecated-rules).
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'd just suggest leaving this part out for now (for more info, see deprecated rules).

Co-authored-by: Genevieve Warren <24882762+gewarren@users.noreply.github.com>
@gewarren gewarren merged commit 2031561 into dotnet:master Dec 8, 2020
@gewarren
Copy link
Contributor

gewarren commented Dec 8, 2020

@Evangelink Thank you!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants