Comments on: FxCop 1.36 and StyleCop 4.3 http://danrigby.com/2009/01/18/fxcop-136-and-stylecop-43/ Random thoughts about Life, Technology, and Software Fri, 27 Jan 2012 17:05:06 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Dan Rigbyhttp://danrigby.com/2009/01/18/fxcop-136-and-stylecop-43/comment-page-1/#comment-76 Dan Rigby Mon, 19 Jan 2009 15:14:20 +0000 http://danrigby.com/?p=160#comment-76 There's a really nice post by the StyleCop authors that talks about the origins of StyleCop and why there are a lot of differences in its rules as compared to common practice and even the to the .NET framework guidelines.It can be found here: <a href="http://blogs.msdn.com/sourceanalysis/archive/2008/05/25/a-difference-of-style.aspx" rel="nofollow">http://blogs.msdn.com/sourceanalysis/archive/2008/05/25/a-difference-of-style.aspx</a>The main points are that the framework guidelines were written by people on the framework team who mostly have a c/c++ background, so the c# framework conventions tend to flow from that background. StyleCop was not written by anyone in the Visual Studio/ FxCop, or Framework teams and arose separately. As such, they when they were creating the rules, they tried to ask some basic questions about the various stylistic possibilities and would choose a "best" based on those questions and not any any stylistic predispositions inherited from previous languages. There’s a really nice post by the StyleCop authors that talks about the origins of StyleCop and why there are a lot of differences in its rules as compared to common practice and even the to the .NET framework guidelines.

It can be found here: http://blogs.msdn.com/sourceanalysis/archive/2008/05/25/a-difference-of-style.aspx

The main points are that the framework guidelines were written by people on the framework team who mostly have a c/c++ background, so the c# framework conventions tend to flow from that background. StyleCop was not written by anyone in the Visual Studio/ FxCop, or Framework teams and arose separately. As such, they when they were creating the rules, they tried to ask some basic questions about the various stylistic possibilities and would choose a “best” based on those questions and not any any stylistic predispositions inherited from previous languages.

]]> By: Scotthttp://danrigby.com/2009/01/18/fxcop-136-and-stylecop-43/comment-page-1/#comment-75 Scott Mon, 19 Jan 2009 14:57:04 +0000 http://danrigby.com/?p=160#comment-75 Good references. FxCop and StyleCop are both great tools but the things they flag as issues should be reviewed and not just taken on faith, at least for the first few times either tool is run.Another thing to watch out for is that some of the StyleCop guidelines contradict the ones in FxCop (and likewise the Framework Design Guidelines). I'm told that they (Brad, Krzysztof, and Jason) are working through those kinds of issues but haven't seen anything resulting from it yet. Good references. FxCop and StyleCop are both great tools but the things they flag as issues should be reviewed and not just taken on faith, at least for the first few times either tool is run.

Another thing to watch out for is that some of the StyleCop guidelines contradict the ones in FxCop (and likewise the Framework Design Guidelines). I’m told that they (Brad, Krzysztof, and Jason) are working through those kinds of issues but haven’t seen anything resulting from it yet.

]]>