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: 21 rules found
junit
    Impact
      Clean code attribute
        1. Methods setUp() and tearDown() should be correctly annotated starting with JUnit4

           Code Smell
        2. JUnit5 test classes and methods should not be silently ignored

           Bug
        3. Migrate your tests from JUnit4 to the new JUnit5 annotations

           Code Smell
        4. JUnit5 inner test classes should be annotated with @Nested

           Bug
        5. JUnit5 test classes and methods should have default package visibility

           Code Smell
        6. JUnit assertTrue/assertFalse should be simplified to the corresponding dedicated assertion

           Code Smell
        7. Only one method invocation is expected when testing checked exceptions

           Bug
        8. Assertion methods should not be used within the try block of a try-catch catching an Error

           Bug
        9. Only one method invocation is expected when testing runtime exceptions

           Code Smell
        10. Exception testing via JUnit @Test annotation should be avoided

           Code Smell
        11. Exception testing via JUnit ExpectedException rule should not be mixed with other assertions

           Code Smell
        12. Unit tests should throw exceptions

           Code Smell
        13. Assertion arguments should be passed in the correct order

           Code Smell
        14. JUnit rules should be used

           Code Smell
        15. Literal boolean values and nulls should not be used in assertions

           Code Smell
        16. Tests should include assertions

           Code Smell
        17. Test assertions should include messages

           Code Smell
        18. JUnit test cases should call super methods

           Code Smell
        19. TestCases should contain tests

           Code Smell
        20. JUnit assertions should not be used in "run" methods

           Code Smell
        21. JUnit4 @Ignored and JUnit5 @Disabled annotations should be used to disable tests and should provide a rationale

           Code Smell

        Assertion arguments should be passed in the correct order

        intentionality - logical
        maintainability
        Code Smell
        Quick FixIDE quick fixes available with SonarQube for IDE
        • junit
        • tests
        • suspicious

        Why is this an issue?

        How can I fix it?

        The standard assertions library methods such as org.junit.Assert.assertEquals, and org.junit.Assert.assertSame expect the first argument to be the expected value and the second argument to be the actual value. For AssertJ instead, the argument of org.assertj.core.api.Assertions.assertThat is the actual value, and the subsequent calls contain the expected values.

        What is the potential impact?

        Having the expected value and the actual value in the wrong order will not alter the outcome of tests, (succeed/fail when it should) but the error messages will contain misleading information.

        This rule raises an issue when the actual argument to an assertions library method is a hard-coded value and the expected argument is not.

          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