Bad example in Java rule description for "Abstract class names should comply with a naming convention"

Rules and Languages Report False-positive / False-negative...
,
1

Hi,

I’ve found an error in the description of the “Abstract class names should comply with a naming convention” Java rule.

There it’s shown this example as a compliant solution:

abstract class MyAbstractClass {
}

But this is wrong, because it’s not compliant with the regular expression

^Abstract[A-Z][a-zA-Z0-9]*$

Is this the right place for reporting the issue?

Thanks!

2

Hello @Vecchione, and welcome to the community!

The rule behave correctly, but the description is indeed incorrect, thanks for spotting this inconsistency.

I updated the description of the rule accordingly, the change will be part of the next release.

Best,
Quentin