New rule: memberNoDefaultAccess. Disallows public access modifiers th…

[meros]

…at are not explicit in the class

This pull request replaces a previous one since I had to rebase it onto current master. Sorry about that.

[meros]

This is the old pull request: #404

[adidahiya]

should be alphabetical by prop (rule) name

[meros]

I think I got all of them. By that rule should be refactored, did you mean the hasModifiers utility? Because I changed to the snippet of code you suggested. The tests pass, but take a look so that it looks sane (I haven't looked into that utility very much to be honest :)

[adidahiya]

this interface is no longer being used and can be removed

[adidahiya]

thanks for the revisions @meros! just a few more small comments.

I'd still like this rule to be named member-access. The idea here is that all rules with "no-" in the name are explicitly banning the existence of some syntax. "member-no-default-access" would be trying to ban the non-existence of access modifiers, which is slightly confusing.

Overall, I think the rule reads better as "member-access ensure that all class members have access modifiers" rather than "member-no-default-access bans the default access modifier (a.k.a. the lack of an access modifier)"

[meros]

@adidahiya Here you go :)

[adidahiya]

great, thanks @meros!