Modify rule S1854: Expand and adjust for LaYC

[pdschbrt]

Review

A dedicated reviewer checked the rule description successfully for:

• logical errors and incorrect information
• information gaps and missing content
• text style and tone
• PR summary and labels follow the guidelines

[pdschbrt]

Hey @necto

I'm not yet happy with the updated rule description. I'm especially unhappy with What is the potential impact? section---any feedback is highly appreciated.

Cheers

[necto]

I think it is important to mention the side effects of the RHS. (In the "Pitfalls" section?)
For example, here the fwrite call is probably made for its side effect:

size_t written = fwrite(str, sizeof(*str), strlen(str), fd);

I would also mention the (void) trick to ignore the [[nodiscard]] return values:

[[nodiscard]] int f();

void g() {
  (void)f();
}

[pdschbrt]

I think it is important to mention the side effects of the RHS. (In the "Pitfalls" section?) For example, here the fwrite call is probably made for its side effect:

size_t written = fwrite(str, sizeof(*str), strlen(str), fd);

I would also mention the (void) trick to ignore the [[nodiscard]] return values:

[[nodiscard]] int f();

void g() {
  (void)f();
}

Sold! Thanks for the suggestions.

[necto]

Looks pretty solid. Only minor nits left

[necto]

LGTM! See the minor nits in line comments

[sonarqube-next]

SonarQube Quality Gate for 'rspec-tools'

0 Bugs
0 Vulnerabilities
0 Security Hotspots
0 Code Smells

No Coverage information
No Duplication information

[sonarqube-next]

SonarQube Quality Gate for 'rspec-frontend'

0 Bugs
0 Vulnerabilities
0 Security Hotspots
0 Code Smells

No Coverage information
No Duplication information