Report SwallowedException on catchParameter

[picklebento]

This improves the ergonomics so that users can minimize the suppression scope.
Addresses #4154

I am using the detekt repo itself as the integration test for the PR change, otherwise I probably need to write an integration test in detekt-core which does not seem like the right place because the change is in detekt-rules-exceptions.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #4158 (0a1a994) into main (8894bc2) will decrease coverage by 0.01%.
The diff coverage is 57.14%.

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##               main    #4158      +/-   ##
============================================
- Coverage     83.44%   83.43%   -0.02%     
- Complexity     3177     3190      +13     
============================================
  Files           465      465              
  Lines          9104     9121      +17     
  Branches       1775     1780       +5     
============================================
+ Hits           7597     7610      +13     
  Misses          572      572              
- Partials        935      939       +4     

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
...kotlin/io/gitlab/arturbosch/detekt/api/Location.kt	84.61% <0.00%> (ø)
...ain/kotlin/io/github/detekt/metrics/LinesOfCode.kt	95.00% <0.00%> (ø)
...osch/detekt/rules/exceptions/SwallowedException.kt	73.68% <57.14%> (-0.87%)	⬇️
...tekt/rules/exceptions/TooGenericExceptionCaught.kt	87.50% <66.66%> (ø)
...tlin/io/gitlab/arturbosch/detekt/cli/JCommander.kt	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
...n/kotlin/io/github/detekt/report/html/HtmlUtils.kt	98.00% <100.00%> (ø)
...ab/arturbosch/detekt/rules/style/WildcardImport.kt	90.00% <0.00%> (-4.12%)	⬇️
...urbosch/detekt/rules/performance/ArrayPrimitive.kt	71.42% <0.00%> (-3.58%)	⬇️
.../detekt/rules/naming/ConstructorParameterNaming.kt	96.55% <0.00%> (-3.45%)	⬇️
...rbosch/detekt/rules/complexity/NestedBlockDepth.kt	91.83% <0.00%> (+0.72%)	⬆️
... and 2 more

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 8894bc2...0a1a994. Read the comment docs.

[BraisGabin]

I am using the detekt repo itself as the integration test for the PR change, otherwise I probably need to write an integration test in detekt-core which does not seem like the right place because the change is in detekt-rules-exceptions.

No you don't need to write any integration test. The engine that runs the rules in test honor the @Suppress so you can unit test it easily.

Or, if you prefer, you can test that the reported text is the correct one.

[TWiStErRob]

Will it still accept suppressing on try? because a change shouldn't force everyone to move suppressions.

[BraisGabin]

Yes, try is a parent of catch so the suppression engine should allow now both.

[BraisGabin]

Now this fixes #4153 too.

[TWiStErRob]

@BraisGabin in #4153 you said add a test, I don't see it here.