Modify S3353: Migrate To LayC (#3302)

## Review

A dedicated reviewer checked the rule description successfully for:

- [ ] logical errors and incorrect information
- [ ] information gaps and missing content
- [ ] text style and tone
- [ ] PR summary and labels follow [the
guidelines](https://github.com/SonarSource/rspec/#to-modify-an-existing-rule)

---------

Co-authored-by: Zsolt Kolbay <[email protected]>

rules/S3353/csharp/metadata.json

@@ -1,5 +1,4 @@
 {
-  "title": "Unchanged local variables should be \"const\"",
   "quickfix": "partial",
   "tags": [
     "performance"

rules/S3353/csharp/rule.adoc

@@ -1,10 +1,12 @@
-== Why is this an issue?
+include::../why.adoc[]
 
-Marking a variable that is unchanged after initialization ``++const++`` is an indication to future maintainers that "no this isn't updated, and it's not supposed to be". ``++const++`` should be used in these situations in the interests of code clarity.
+include::../how.adoc[]
 
-=== Noncompliant code example
+=== Code examples
 
-[source,csharp]
+==== Noncompliant code example
+
+[source,csharp,diff-id=1,diff-type=noncompliant]
 ----
 public bool Seek(int[] input)
 {
@@ -19,22 +21,10 @@ public bool Seek(int[] input)
   return false;
 }
 ----
-or
 
-[source,csharp]
-----
-public class Sample
-{
-  public void Method()
-  {
-    var context = $"{nameof(Sample)}.{nameof(Method)}";  // Noncompliant (C# 10 and above only)
-  }
-}
-----
+==== Compliant solution
 
-=== Compliant solution
-
-[source,csharp]
+[source,csharp,diff-id=1,diff-type=compliant]
 ----
 public bool Seek(int[] input)
 {
@@ -49,9 +39,23 @@ public bool Seek(int[] input)
   return false;
 }
 ----
-or
 
-[source,csharp]
+==== Noncompliant code example
+
+[source,csharp,diff-id=2,diff-type=noncompliant]
+----
+public class Sample
+{
+  public void Method()
+  {
+    var context = $"{nameof(Sample)}.{nameof(Method)}";  // Noncompliant (C# 10 and above only)
+  }
+}
+----
+
+==== Compliant solution
+
+[source,csharp,diff-id=2,diff-type=compliant]
 ----
 public class Sample
 {
@@ -62,6 +66,12 @@ public class Sample
 }
 ----
 
+== Resources
+
+=== Documentation
+
+* Microsoft Learn - https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/csharp/language-reference/keywords/const[const]
+
 ifdef::env-github,rspecator-view[]
 
 '''

rules/S3353/how.adoc

@@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
+== How to fix it
+
+Mark the given variable with the `const` modifier.

rules/S3353/javascript/metadata.json

@@ -1,5 +1,4 @@
 {
-  "title": "Unchanged variables should be marked \"const\"",
   "tags": [
     "es2015"
   ],

rules/S3353/javascript/rule.adoc

@@ -1,47 +1,65 @@
-== Why is this an issue?
+include::../why.adoc[]
 
-Marking a variable that is unchanged after initialization ``++const++`` is an indication to future maintainers that "no this isn't updated, and it's not supposed to be". ``++const++`` should be used in these situations in the interests of code clarity.
+include::../how.adoc[]
 
-=== Noncompliant code example
+=== Code examples
 
-[source,javascript]
+==== Noncompliant code example
+
+[source,javascript,diff-id=1,diff-type=noncompliant]
 ----
 function seek(input) {
   let target = 32;  // Noncompliant
-  for (let i of input) {  // Noncompliant
-    if (i == target) {
+  for (const i of input) {
+    if (i === target) {
       return true;
     }
   }
   return false;
 }
-
-function getUrl(query) {    
-  let url; // Noncompliant
-  url = "http://example.com";
-  return url; 
-}
 ----
 
-=== Compliant solution
+==== Compliant solution
 
-[source,javascript]
+[source,javascript,diff-id=1,diff-type=compliant]
 ----
 function seek(input) {
   const target = 32;
   for (const i of input) {
-    if (i == target) {
+    if (i === target) {
       return true;
     }
   }
   return false;
 }
+----
 
-function getUrl(query) {  
-  const url = "http://example.com";  
+[source,javascript,diff-id=2,diff-type=noncompliant]
+----
+
+function getUrl(protocol, domain, path) {    
+  let url; // Noncompliant
+  url = `${protocol}/${domain}/${path}`;
   return url; 
 }
 ----
+
+==== Compliant solution
+
+[source,javascript,diff-id=2,diff-type=compliant]
+----
+function getUrl(protocol, domain, path) {  
+  const url = `${protocol}/${domain}/${path}`;
+  return url;
+}
+----
+
+== Resources
+
+=== Documentation
+
+* MDN - https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Statements/const[const]
+
 ifdef::env-github,rspecator-view[]
 
 '''

rules/S3353/metadata.json

@@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
 {
-  "title": "Unchanged local variables should be \"final\"",
+  "title": "Unchanged variables should be marked as \"const\"",
   "type": "CODE_SMELL",
   "code": {
     "impacts": {

rules/S3353/why.adoc

@@ -0,0 +1,7 @@
+== Why is this an issue?
+
+If a variable that is not supposed to change is not marked as `const`, it could be accidentally reassigned elsewhere in the code, leading to unexpected behavior and bugs that can be hard to track down.
+
+By declaring a variable as `const`, you ensure that its value remains constant throughout the code. It also signals to other developers that this value is intended to remain constant. This can make the code easier to understand and maintain.
+
+In some cases, using `const` can lead to performance improvements. The compiler might be able to make optimizations knowing that the value of a `const` variable will not change.