Prepare for .NET8 analyzers

[jnyrup]

I installed the latest .NET8 preview to see what analyzers we would trigger.

These three lines trigger CA1861: Avoid constant arrays as arguments

fluentassertions/Src/FluentAssertions/Common/MemberPath.cs

Line 119 in 343e80f

.Split(new[] { '.', '[', ']' }, StringSplitOptions.RemoveEmptyEntries);

fluentassertions/Src/FluentAssertions/Common/StringExtensions.cs

Line 121 in 343e80f

@this.Split(new[] { '\r', '\n' }, StringSplitOptions.RemoveEmptyEntries).Select(x => $"\t{x}"));

fluentassertions/Src/FluentAssertions/Equivalency/Execution/ObjectReference.cs

Line 42 in 343e80f

.Split(new[] { '.' }, StringSplitOptions.RemoveEmptyEntries);

As I see it, we have three options here:

• Follow the analyzer and extract the constant arrays to static readonly fields.
  • Downside: Reduced locality of the values
• Suppress CA1861 locally with #pragmas.
  • Downside: Added preprocessor noise.
• Suppress CA1861 for the entire project like I did for tests.
  • Downside: no warnings anywhere

I'm probably fine with either, but lean mostly towards either of the first two.

IMPORTANT

• If the PR touches the public API, the changes have been approved in a separate issue with the "api-approved" label.
• The code complies with the Coding Guidelines for C#.
• The changes are covered by unit tests which follow the Arrange-Act-Assert syntax and the naming conventions such as is used in these tests.
• If the PR adds a feature or fixes a bug, please update the release notes with a functional description that explains what the change means to consumers of this library, which are published on the website.
• If the PR changes the public API the changes needs to be included by running AcceptApiChanges.ps1 or AcceptApiChanges.sh.
• If the PR affects the documentation, please include your changes in this pull request so the documentation will appear on the website.
  • Please also run ./build.sh --target spellcheck or .\build.ps1 --target spellcheck before pushing and check the good outcome

[coveralls]

Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build 5356382532

Warning: This coverage report may be inaccurate.

We've detected an issue with your CI configuration that might affect the accuracy of this pull request's coverage report.
To ensure accuracy in future PRs, please see these guidelines.
A quick fix for this PR: rebase it; your next report should be accurate.

• 0 of 0 changed or added relevant lines in 0 files are covered.
• 1 unchanged line in 1 file lost coverage.
• Overall coverage remained the same at 97.214%

---

Files with Coverage Reduction	New Missed Lines	%
Src/FluentAssertions/Common/ExpressionExtensions.cs	1	92.96%

Totals
Change from base Build 5254254669:	0.0%
Covered Lines:	12870
Relevant Lines:	13112

---

💛 - Coveralls

[ITaluone]

.Split(new[] { '.', '[', ']' }, StringSplitOptions.RemoveEmptyEntries);

A dump way could be: .Split(".[]".ToCharArray(), StringSplitOptions.RemoveEmptyEntries);

[lg2de]

A dump way could be: .Split(".[]".ToCharArray(), StringSplitOptions.RemoveEmptyEntries);

This creates an array on the fly, too. This is what the rule tries to prevent, isn't it?

I recommend a field. This is not that local definition, but gives the list a name.

[dennisdoomen]

Will a local const variable also work?

[jnyrup]

Will a local const variable also work?

No, it gives: CS0133: The expression being assigned must be constant

@dennisdoomen Can I interpret this as you vote for option 2?

[dennisdoomen]

Can I interpret this as you vote for option 2?

I'm leaning a little bit towards 3, but I can live with 2.