On the naming of some of the existing rules

[paulo-ferraz-oliveira]

Now that we have a few years of experience with creating and naming rules, some might be Ok to revisit (I'm not attached to any of them - and I'm pretty sure this'll potentially happen in the future, so we should try to have a simple function that would translate them internally, but still warn on the wrong name):

The no_ "category":

• god_modules > no_god_modules
• nesting_level > no_deep_nesting
• invalid_dynamic_call > no_invalid_dynamic_calls
• used_ignored_variable > no_used_ignored_variable

The consistent_ category:

• param_pattern_matching > consistent_param_pattern_matching
• numeric_format > consistent_numeric_format
• operator_spaces > consistent_operator_spaces

Those are the ones that pop in my head, atm.

[elbrujohalcon]

• The no_ "category": I support your proposals 100%.
• The consistent_ category: I would go the other way around entirely:
  • consistent_generic_type > generic_type
  • consistent_variable_casing > variable_casing

Either that or find a shorter word for them, because consistent_param_pattern_matching sounds a lot like ObjectiveC to me…