Rule 6.1.7 implicit backing property(#443)

[aktsay6]

Which rule and warnings did you add?

In case of using "implicit backing property" scheme, the name of real and back property should be the same

This pull request closes #443

Actions checklist

• Implemented Rule, added Warnings
• Added tests on checks
• Added tests on fixers
• Updated diktat-analysis.yml
• Updated available-rules.md

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #465 (4f0debd) into master (052bd9d) will increase coverage by 0.17%.
The diff coverage is 92.42%.

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##             master     #465      +/-   ##
============================================
+ Coverage     81.68%   81.86%   +0.17%     
- Complexity     1641     1696      +55     
============================================
  Files            79       85       +6     
  Lines          4139     4257     +118     
  Branches       1307     1325      +18     
============================================
+ Hits           3381     3485     +104     
- Misses          229      237       +8     
- Partials        529      535       +6     

Flag	Coverage Δ	Complexity Δ
unittests	81.86% <92.42%> (+0.17%)	0.00 <38.00> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ	Complexity Δ
...at-rules/src/main/kotlin/generated/WarningNames.kt	0.00% <ø> (ø)	0.00 <0.00> (ø)
...lin/org/cqfn/diktat/ruleset/rules/PackageNaming.kt	93.75% <33.33%> (-1.19%)	32.00 <0.00> (ø)
...ktat/ruleset/rules/AvoidEmptyPrimaryConstructor.kt	90.00% <90.00%> (ø)	8.00 <8.00> (?)
...iktat/ruleset/rules/ImplicitBackingPropertyRule.kt	93.75% <93.75%> (ø)	23.00 <23.00> (?)
...tlin/org/cqfn/diktat/ruleset/constants/Warnings.kt	98.34% <100.00%> (+0.02%)	10.00 <0.00> (ø)
...cqfn/diktat/ruleset/rules/DiktatRuleSetProvider.kt	97.33% <100.00%> (+0.07%)	8.00 <0.00> (ø)
...qfn/diktat/ruleset/rules/classes/SingleInitRule.kt	78.46% <100.00%> (+0.68%)	16.00 <0.00> (+6.00)
.../cqfn/diktat/ruleset/rules/files/BlankLinesRule.kt	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)	13.00 <7.00> (+1.00)
...rg/cqfn/diktat/ruleset/rules/files/NewlinesRule.kt	83.95% <100.00%> (+0.17%)	110.00 <0.00> (+6.00)
...g/cqfn/diktat/ruleset/rules/kdoc/KdocFormatting.kt	77.12% <100.00%> (-0.15%)	73.00 <0.00> (ø)
... and 8 more

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update cd83754...4f0debd. Read the comment docs.

[petertrr]

See comments above

[petertrr]

Please take a look at snapshot check. Your rule triggers quite a lot in diktat-test-framework with false-positives. Please add similar examples to tests, one idea how to fix algorithm is in comment below.

[petertrr]

False-positives are still there, please add more tests (like TestProcessingFactory.allTestsFromResources in diktat-test-framework). We need to come up with better algorithm for identifying such backing properties. Maybe, check that a certain class property is used both in an assignment in setter and in the return statement in getter?

[petertrr]

https://github.com/cqfn/diKTat/pull/465/checks?check_run_id=1440909442
Warning is raised on declaredOptions in TestArgumentsReader, where local variable is returned from getter. We should trigger this warning only for class properties.

[petertrr]

Does this mean that any reference to non-local property will cause warning? What if some other class property is read for some reason? I think, similar to getters, we should check only left-hand side references in assignments. For example, this code:

val foo
    set(value) {
        if (isDebugMode) log.debug(value)
        field = value
    }

shouldn't raise a warning beca use there is no backing property.

[petertrr]

LGTM