Audit of implemented rules

[dedece35]

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
There is a lot of implemented rules for each language in ecocode plugin.
Maybe some rules already exist natively in SonarQube.
And second point, check the veracity of each rule :

• ex1 with "change i++ to ++i" : warning with this modification because sometimes this change de behaviour. The best would be that we change only if there is no risk on code behaviour
• ex2 : [EC63] [Java] Rule "The variable exception is not assigned" irrelevant ? #53
• ex3 : [EC2] [Java] Rule "using a switch statement instead of multiple if-else conditions (more than one)" discussion #52
• ex3 : [EC4] [Java] Rule "Avoid using global variables" discussion #51

Describe the solution you'd like
It would be good to make a verification audit to check if :

• implemented rules doesn't exist in SonarQube native rules yet
• implemented code of each rule to check that all enabled statement is really managed on casting process ! (see [PRIORITY HIGH] Crash SonarQube analysis #42 )
• check if native SonarQube rule (ex : "Pattern.compile in static scope instead of method scope") can be tagged (with our common tool in ecoCode-common repository) with eco-design tag

Describe alternatives you've considered
For ambiguous rules (implemented VS SonarQube native), list them and discuss about it during a core team point.

[dedece35]

also see #60