Suggested ReSharper fixes about packetnet HOT 7 CLOSED

Pinging @chmorgan, if you have any feedback on this, feel free to comment here. I'll be adding suggested fixes in the first post as I find them.

from packetnet.

Can you clarify what would change with Parameter renaming? Is it the .net recommendations of camelCase? https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/standard/design-guidelines/naming-parameters

from packetnet.

Currently a lot of parameters are named like this:
SomeMethod(Int32 Number, UInt16 AnotherName)
Which should be:
SomeMethod(Int32 number, Uint16 anotherName).

from packetnet.

@Phyxion ahh ok, so good then. These all look like solid cleanup changes.

from packetnet.

How would you receive the changes? In one go or per point? I'm not sure how well ReSharper manages with one change though as it likes to do other changes as well (along with what you changed, such as formatting changes).

from packetnet.

If it's easy to run with all of these changes enabled and submit a PR we can look at the total number of lines changed. In one go probably makes sense as long as there are no significant functional changes. Fortunately we do have the unit tests in place and AppVeyor that helps to ensure nothing is broken.

from packetnet.

Correct, I'don't expect too many things getting broken though, I've never had this with ReSharper. I'll see if I can submit a PR later this week :)

from packetnet.