Fix typo in exceptionVariableName in EmptyCatchBlockCheck

[izeye]

This PR fixes a typo in exceptionVariableName in EmptyCatchBlockCheck.

This PR also changes to use "ignored" for exception variable names instead of "ignore".

See gh-35047

[bclozel]

Should we apply this?
I configured the check like this because we had already legitimate usage of both "ignore" and "ignored" in the codebase.

I get that "ignore" is not a noun so maybe not very well suited for a variable name. Do we really need to go that far on everything? Should we also refactor the entire codebase to only allow nouns as variable names?

[sbrannen]

Should we apply this? I configured the check like this because we had already legitimate usage of both "ignore" and "ignored" in the codebase.

Indeed, it's a regular expression, not a typo.

It's just not immediately obvious from the Checkstyle configuration.

Perhaps changing the pattern to expected|ignore(d)? would make it clearer and more robust.

And perhaps limiting it to only ^expected|ignore(d)?$ would be even better.

I get that "ignore" is not a noun so maybe not very well suited for a variable name. Do we really need to go that far on everything? Should we also refactor the entire codebase to only allow nouns as variable names?

"expected" is also not a noun, so we certainly don't need to enforce any kind of "nouns only" check.

In light of the above, I am closing this PR.

However, we can still consider tightening the RegEx we use for exceptionVariableName to ensure that only "expected", "ignore", or "ignored" is used to permit an empty catch block.

[izeye]

@bclozel @sbrannen Thanks for the feedback!

I just thought it would be better to use a consistent name for the same purpose.

[bclozel]

Thanks @izeye
The original intent was not clear in the checkstyle configuration.