Unit tests for TooGenericExceptionThrown

[Whathecode]

• The two unit tests for TooGenericExceptionThrown were testing the wrong rule.
• Added a unit test to explicitely test that caught exceptions are excluded.
• Added a unit test to recreate False positive TooGenericExceptionThrown #4197, which doesn't fail at the moment, so more information on this bug report is needed.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #4198 (09ac1d7) into main (c5850c4) will increase coverage by 0.86%.
The diff coverage is n/a.

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##               main    #4198      +/-   ##
============================================
+ Coverage     83.43%   84.30%   +0.86%     
- Complexity     3149     3236      +87     
============================================
  Files           456      468      +12     
  Lines          9017    10185    +1168     
  Branches       1754     1786      +32     
============================================
+ Hits           7523     8586    +1063     
- Misses          567      659      +92     
- Partials        927      940      +13     

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
.../kotlin/io/gitlab/arturbosch/detekt/api/Context.kt	13.33% <0.00%> (-56.67%)	⬇️
...in/io/gitlab/arturbosch/detekt/api/SingleAssign.kt	83.33% <0.00%> (-16.67%)	⬇️
...b/detekt/tooling/internal/DefaultAnalysisResult.kt	87.50% <0.00%> (-12.50%)	⬇️
...lin/io/gitlab/arturbosch/detekt/api/ConfigAware.kt	50.00% <0.00%> (-10.00%)	⬇️
...b/arturbosch/detekt/rules/style/FileParsingRule.kt	92.30% <0.00%> (-7.70%)	⬇️
.../detekt/metrics/processors/ProjectSLOCProcessor.kt	92.85% <0.00%> (-7.15%)	⬇️
...bosch/detekt/rules/style/UnnecessaryInheritance.kt	92.85% <0.00%> (-7.15%)	⬇️
...ch/detekt/rules/coroutines/GlobalCoroutineUsage.kt	83.33% <0.00%> (-6.67%)	⬇️
...ab/arturbosch/detekt/rules/bugs/UnreachableCode.kt	93.75% <0.00%> (-6.25%)	⬇️
...rturbosch/detekt/rules/naming/VariableMaxLength.kt	93.75% <0.00%> (-6.25%)	⬇️
... and 346 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 c5850c4...09ac1d7. Read the comment docs.

[cortinico]

LGTM 👍
Could you add also the test you mentioned here: #4197 (comment)
So we could technically close #4197 till we have a new reproducer.

[Whathecode]

LGTM 👍 Could you add also the test you mentioned here: #4197 (comment) So we could technically close #4197 till we have a new reproducer.

I can, but the intent of the test I added was to reflect that use case in a clearer/descriptive way.

I see nothing different that happens in the provided source code, so in a way I think that test would be superfluous. I did test it to make sure, and it passed.

Let me know what you prefer:

• Keep it as is.
• Add it as a new test.
• Replace """fun f() { val ex = Exception() }""" with the code reported in the issue, but keep the test name/a single test.