[Java:3626] Conditional returns should never be marked as redundant jumps

if ( condition )
    return; // FP

Some commented code, thay may be activated later or not.

The above code shows a very common example, where rule 3626 really does no good. Technically the return jump is redundant. But actually in the concrete example, it is only redundant, because the succeeding code is commented out. And hence marking the return as redundant is clearly wrong here. I would not want to comment out or even remove the return and the condition with it, just to quiet Sonar. And if I did, the next return above it would be marked redundant and so forth. This really can’t be, what the rule aims at.

Even, if there was no commented code after the “redundant” return, the rule should not hit here, because in praxis this situation is always because of the plan for future succeeding code and the above consequence would follow.

While the rule itself is nice, and I would not want to deactivate it, please ignore such situations.