Feature/102 fix the sonarcloud issues in iforwardsover

[lmalenfant]

@hayakawa16 before I add reviewers to the PR, I would like to review the XML comments with you first, I think we should remove the comment that states "Overload of x function" because the fact that there are multiple method definitions, means that they are overloads so this comment seems redundant, what are your thoughts?

[hayakawa16]

This update does not remove build warning for Demo07pMCInversion: The event Demo07PmcInversion.PmcForwardSolver.PropertyChanged is never used. Will that be done in another update?

[lmalenfant]

I just updated the part that was affected by the IForwardSolver changes, do you think we should fix this also?

[lmalenfant]

I fixed this and a few other code quality suggestions in the file.

[hayakawa16]

HUGE effort on the reorganization of the IForwardSolver. Thank you!

[lmalenfant]

@dcuccia @hayakawa16 I plan to merge this PR tomorrow as it has been open for 2 weeks.

[sonarcloud]

Kudos, SonarCloud Quality Gate passed!   

0 Bugs
0 Vulnerabilities
0 Security Hotspots
0 Code Smells

No Coverage information
0.0% Duplication

[dcuccia]

@dcuccia @hayakawa16 I plan to merge this PR tomorrow as it has been open for 2 weeks.

I'll look at it tonight

[dcuccia]

@lmalenfant can you summarize what we did on this ticket? Was it just re-organizing the order of functions and fixing comments? (E.g. no changes to method signatures/API?) If we changed the API, a) how did we choose to augment/remove methods, and b) have we tested the "loosely types" Matlab calls??

[lmalenfant]

Was it just re-organizing the order of functions and fixing comments? (E.g. no changes to method signatures/API?)

Yes exactly, no other changes.

[dcuccia]

Was it just re-organizing the order of functions and fixing comments? (E.g. no changes to method signatures/API?)

Yes exactly, no other changes.

Thanks. Please go ahead with the merge. I did see the removal of implicit "target typed" constructor calls in the solver demos. In my opinion, those are unnecessary additions that add verbosity (and decrease conciseness), but that's just a preference based on my experience with functional style programming.

[lmalenfant]

@dcuccia

I did see the removal of implicit "target typed" constructor calls in the solver demos. In my opinion, those are unnecessary additions that add verbosity (and decrease conciseness), but that's just a preference based on my experience with functional style programming.

I completely agree with you for cases where the type is obvious but this in this code it is not obvious, this is the reasoning behind the change:
https://www.jetbrains.com/help/resharper/2023.2/ArrangeObjectCreationWhenTypeNotEvident.html

Since these scripts are for teaching purposes, I thought it would be good to put them back in. I tend to follow Resharper's advice because this type of change is their "Raison d’être" :)