SA1119 claims mandatory parentheses are unnecessary

[AArnott]

In the following statement, SA1119 claims the parentheses are unnecessary:

var s = $"{(3 > 5 ? true : false)}";

Yet after removing them, C# produces a compiler error. So evidently they are indeed necessary.

[sharwell]

This appears to be a duplicate of #1284. I'll try to reproduce it tomorrow to make sure. 😄

[AArnott]

It sure looks like a dupe. But it still repros with 1.0.0-rc3

[pdelvo]

I tried your example and it does not repro for me.

[AArnott]

I'm seeing a lot of inconsistently reported issues (e.g. #2055) where VS and the command line produce different outputs, different machines produce different build logs, etc. So I can't say I'm too surprised that you're not seeing it, @pdelvo.
Another possibility perhaps is the assembly version issue (since last I checked all StyleCop.Analyzer versions have the same 1.0.0 assembly version, #1391) where although my project says to use 1.0.0-rc3, VS is using a different version of stylecop that was loaded for a different project.

[sharwell]

I'm seeing a lot of inconsistently reported issues where VS and the command line produce different outputs

This is a bug in Roslyn 1.1 (dotnet/roslyn#7446). A workaround is available (enable SA0000 - #1979), but is disabled by default in the 1.0 release due to its performance overhead. We implemented a better balance of performance/behavior for our upcoming 1.1 beta 1 release (#2033).

Another possibility perhaps is the assembly version issue (since last I checked all StyleCop.Analyzer versions have the same 1.0.0 assembly version, #1391)

This changed many releases ago. Each release has a new strong name now.

[AArnott]

Oh, good to know on both. Thanks. I guess I don't know why it doesn't repro for @pdelvo then.

[sharwell]

I'm not seeing this reported in the IDE or at compile time with Roslyn 1.1. Considering that there are also 3 tests for #1284 in SA1119UnitTests that pass under Roslyn 1.0, I'm going to mark this as a duplicate of #1284.

If you find a more specific example which reproduces this issue, please reopen it. 😄