Implement "Statements" package

[jeongsoolee09]

Description

This PR implements the Statements package.

Change request type

• Release or process automation (GitHub workflows, internal scripts)
• Internal documentation
• External documentation
• Query files (.ql, .qll, .qls or unit tests)
• External scripts (analysis report or other code shipped as part of a release)

Rules with added or modified queries

• No rules added
• Queries have been added for the following rules:
  • RULE-9-4-2
  • RULE-9-5-1
  • RULE-9-5-2
• Queries have been modified for the following rules:
  • rule number here

Release change checklist

A change note (development_handbook.md#change-notes) is required for any pull request which modifies:

• The structure or layout of the release artifacts.
• The evaluation performance (memory, execution time) of an existing query.
• The results of an existing query in any circumstance.

If you are only adding new rule queries, a change note is not required.

Author: Is a change note required?

• Yes
• No

🚨🚨🚨
Reviewer: Confirm that format of shared queries (not the .qll file, the
.ql file that imports it) is valid by running them within VS Code.

• Confirmed

Reviewer: Confirm that either a change note is not required or the change note is required and has been added.

• Confirmed

Query development review checklist

For PRs that add new queries or modify existing queries, the following checklist should be completed by both the author and reviewer:

Author

• Have all the relevant rule package description files been checked in?
• Have you verified that the metadata properties of each new query is set appropriately?
• Do all the unit tests contain both "COMPLIANT" and "NON_COMPLIANT" cases?
• Are the alert messages properly formatted and consistent with the style guide?
• Have you run the queries on OpenPilot and verified that the performance and results are acceptable?
  As a rule of thumb, predicates specific to the query should take no more than 1 minute, and for simple queries be under 10 seconds. If this is not the case, this should be highlighted and agreed in the code review process.
• Does the query have an appropriate level of in-query comments/documentation?
• Have you considered/identified possible edge cases?
• Does the query not reinvent features in the standard library?
• Can the query be simplified further (not golfed!)

Reviewer

• Have all the relevant rule package description files been checked in?
• Have you verified that the metadata properties of each new query is set appropriately?
• Do all the unit tests contain both "COMPLIANT" and "NON_COMPLIANT" cases?
• Are the alert messages properly formatted and consistent with the style guide?
• Have you run the queries on OpenPilot and verified that the performance and results are acceptable?
  As a rule of thumb, predicates specific to the query should take no more than 1 minute, and for simple queries be under 10 seconds. If this is not the case, this should be highlighted and agreed in the code review process.
• Does the query have an appropriate level of in-query comments/documentation?
• Have you considered/identified possible edge cases?
• Does the query not reinvent features in the standard library?
• Can the query be simplified further (not golfed!)

[MichaelRFairhurst]

This is really coming along and looking really good!!

[Copilot]

Pull Request Overview

This PR implements the "Statements" package for the MISRA C++-2023 coding standards, adding three new query rules for analyzing statement structures in C++ code.

• Added rule implementations for RULE-9-4-2, RULE-9-5-1, and RULE-9-5-2
• Added comprehensive test files with both compliant and non-compliant examples
• Created supporting library code for analyzing increment operations and loop conditions

Reviewed Changes

Copilot reviewed 17 out of 17 changed files in this pull request and generated 2 comments.

Show a summary per file

File	Description
rule_packages/cpp/Statements.json	Package configuration defining metadata and properties for the three new statement rules
cpp/misra/src/rules/RULE-9-4-2/AppropriateStructureOfSwitchStatement.ql	Query implementation to check proper switch statement structure
cpp/misra/src/rules/RULE-9-5-1/LegacyForStatementsShouldBeSimple.ql	Query implementation to enforce simple legacy for-loop patterns
cpp/misra/src/rules/RULE-9-5-2/ForRangeInitializerAtMostOneFunctionCall.ql	Query implementation to limit function calls in range-based for initializers
cpp/misra/test/rules/RULE-9-/	Test files and expected results for all three rules
cpp/common/src/codingstandards/cpp/exclusions/cpp/Statements.qll	Auto-generated exclusion metadata for the new package
cpp/common/src/codingstandards/cpp/exclusions/cpp/RuleMetadata.qll	Updated metadata registry to include Statements package
cpp/common/src/codingstandards/cpp/ast/Increment.qll	New library for analyzing increment/decrement operations
cpp/common/src/codingstandards/cpp/Loops.qll	Extended loop analysis with LegacyForLoopCondition class

Comments suppressed due to low confidence (1)

rule_packages/cpp/Statements.json:1

• Fixed typo 'that that' should be 'that'.

{

---

_{Tip: Customize your code reviews with copilot-instructions.md. Create the file or learn how to get started.}

[MichaelRFairhurst]

This is looking really good. Every time I go through the code again, I'm really impressed with the overall organization and clarity. Nicely done!

Let me know if these next couple suggestions are unclear, we're so close! :)

[MichaelRFairhurst]

Great, I believe we should just add tests for these two cases and ensure they pass, and then I think we're good!

for (int i = 0; f(i) < 10; ++i) {}
// and
void reject(int &args...) {}
void accept(const int &args...) {}
for(int i = 0; i < 10; ++i) reject(i); // non compliant
for(int i = 0; i < 10; ++i) accept(i); // compliant

[MichaelRFairhurst]

🎉 🎉 🎉 🍾 🍾 🎉 🎉 🎉

👏 L 👏 G 👏 T 👏 M 👏 !!!

[MichaelRFairhurst]

🥳