SonarSource Rules
  • Products

    In-IDE

    Code Quality and Security in your IDE with SonarQube Ide

    IDE extension that lets you fix coding issues before they exist!

    Discover SonarQube for IDE

    SaaS

    Code Quality and Security in the cloud with SonarQube Cloud

    Setup is effortless and analysis is automatic for most languages

    Discover SonarQube Cloud

    Self-Hosted

    Code Quality and Security Self-Hosted with SonarQube Server

    Fast, accurate analysis; enterprise scalability

    Discover SonarQube Server
  • SecretsSecrets
  • ABAPABAP
  • AnsibleAnsible
  • ApexApex
  • AzureResourceManagerAzureResourceManager
  • CC
  • C#C#
  • C++C++
  • CloudFormationCloudFormation
  • COBOLCOBOL
  • CSSCSS
  • DartDart
  • DockerDocker
  • FlexFlex
  • GitHub ActionsGitHub Actions
  • GoGo
  • HTMLHTML
  • JavaJava
  • JavaScriptJavaScript
  • JSONJSON
  • JCLJCL
  • KotlinKotlin
  • KubernetesKubernetes
  • Objective CObjective C
  • PHPPHP
  • PL/IPL/I
  • PL/SQLPL/SQL
  • PythonPython
  • RPGRPG
  • RubyRuby
  • RustRust
  • ScalaScala
  • ShellShell
  • SwiftSwift
  • TerraformTerraform
  • TextText
  • TypeScriptTypeScript
  • T-SQLT-SQL
  • VB.NETVB.NET
  • VB6VB6
  • XMLXML
  • YAMLYAML
Java

Java static code analysis

Unique rules to find Bugs, Vulnerabilities, Security Hotspots, and Code Smells in your JAVA code

  • All rules 733
  • Vulnerability60
  • Bug175
  • Security Hotspot40
  • Code Smell458

  • Quick Fix 65
Filtered: 20 rules found
bad-practice
    Impact
      Clean code attribute
        1. Similar tests should be grouped in a single Parameterized test

           Code Smell
        2. An iteration on a Collection should be performed on the type handled by the Collection

           Code Smell
        3. "enum" fields should not be publicly mutable

           Code Smell
        4. "Thread.sleep" should not be used in tests

           Code Smell
        5. Formatting SQL queries is security-sensitive

           Security Hotspot
        6. Loops with at most one iteration should be refactored

           Bug
        7. JUnit4 @Ignored and JUnit5 @Disabled annotations should be used to disable tests and should provide a rationale

           Code Smell
        8. Declarations should use Java collection interfaces such as "List" rather than specific implementation classes such as "LinkedList"

           Code Smell
        9. Track uses of "CHECKSTYLE:OFF" suppression comments

           Code Smell
        10. Track uses of "NOPMD" suppression comments

           Code Smell
        11. "switch" statements should have at least 3 "case" clauses

           Code Smell
        12. Track uses of "NOSONAR" comments

           Code Smell
        13. Execution of the Garbage Collector should be triggered only by the JVM

           Code Smell
        14. Interfaces should not solely consist of constants

           Code Smell
        15. Nested code blocks should not be used

           Code Smell
        16. Throwable and Error should not be caught

           Code Smell
        17. "@Override" should be used on overriding and implementing methods

           Code Smell
        18. Strings literals should be placed on the left side when checking for equality

           Code Smell
        19. Deprecated elements should have both the annotation and the Javadoc tag

           Code Smell
        20. Standard outputs should not be used directly to log anything

           Code Smell

        Similar tests should be grouped in a single Parameterized test

        consistency - conventional
        maintainability
        Code Smell
        • tests
        • bad-practice
        • clumsy

        Why is this an issue?

        More Info

        When multiple tests differ only by a few hardcoded values they should be refactored as a single "parameterized" test. This reduces the chances of adding a bug and makes them more readable. Parameterized tests exist in most test frameworks (JUnit, TestNG, etc…​).

        The right balance needs of course to be found. There is no point in factorizing test methods when the parameterized version is a lot more complex than initial tests.

        This rule raises an issue when at least 3 tests could be refactored as one parameterized test with less than 4 parameters. Only test methods which have at least one duplicated statement are considered.

        Noncompliant code example

        with JUnit 5

        import static org.junit.jupiter.api.Assertions.assertEquals;
        
        import org.junit.jupiter.api.Test;
        
        public class AppTest
        {
            @Test
            void test_not_null1() {  // Noncompliant. The 3 following tests differ only by one hardcoded number.
              setupTax();
              assertNotNull(getTax(1));
            }
        
            @Test
            void test_not_null2() {
              setupTax();
              assertNotNull(getTax(2));
            }
        
            @Test
            void test_not_nul3l() {
              setupTax();
              assertNotNull(getTax(3));
            }
        
            @Test
            void testLevel1() {  // Noncompliant. The 3 following tests differ only by a few hardcoded numbers.
                setLevel(1);
                runGame();
                assertEquals(playerHealth(), 100);
            }
        
            @Test
            void testLevel2() {  // Similar test
                setLevel(2);
                runGame();
                assertEquals(playerHealth(), 200);
            }
        
            @Test
            void testLevel3() {  // Similar test
                setLevel(3);
                runGame();
                assertEquals(playerHealth(), 300);
            }
        }
        

        Compliant solution

        import static org.junit.jupiter.api.Assertions.assertEquals;
        
        import org.junit.jupiter.params.ParameterizedTest;
        import org.junit.jupiter.params.provider.CsvSource;
        
        public class AppTest
        {
        
           @ParameterizedTest
           @ValueSource(ints = {1, 2, 3})
           void test_not_null(int arg) {
             setupTax();
             assertNotNull(getTax(arg));
           }
        
            @ParameterizedTest
            @CsvSource({
                "1, 100",
                "2, 200",
                "3, 300",
            })
            void testLevels(int level, int health) {
                setLevel(level);
                runGame();
                assertEquals(playerHealth(), health);
            }
        }
        
          Available In:
        • SonarQube IdeCatch issues on the fly,
          in your IDE
        • SonarQube CloudDetect issues in your GitHub, Azure DevOps Services, Bitbucket Cloud, GitLab repositories
        • SonarQube Community BuildAnalyze code in your
          on-premise CI
          Available Since
          9.1
        • SonarQube ServerAnalyze code in your
          on-premise CI
          Developer Edition
          Available Since
          9.1

        © 2008-2025 SonarSource SA. All rights reserved.

        Privacy Policy | Cookie Policy | Terms of Use