Support no-visibility constructors in >=0.7.0

[junderw]

No description provided.

[junderw]

Though admittedly, since pre-0.7.0 visibility was required, but post-0.7.0 it was forbidden, anyone trying to glean rules about solidity by looking at the tests will be confused when they see a default visibility test in the with-visibility fixtures... without knowing it depends on the withContract function using >=0.7.0...

But I guess that's not what the tests are for... so it seems ok.

If you want to change it I will leave this branch open to edits by maintainers.

[junderw]

Looking forward to this. 👍

[junderw]

This should be good to merge. Any other problems that need fixing?

[fvictorio]

Hey @junderw, sorry for the delay (again).

I'm still not convinced about the pragma approach, it seems too brittle (again, a <0.7.0 would break it). I think the only alternative here is to add an option to the rule. I pushed a commit that does this. Can you check it out and tell me if that works for you?

[junderw]

That seems reasonable, but I think we should be actively alerting the user of this specific awkward instance.

1. I updated the docs by fixing the meta info and generating the docs.
2. I change the error message when it occurs on a constructor to alert people of the new option for >=0.7.0.

I think this is the best we can do in this situation... :-/

[junderw]

I have squashed the commits together.

The original commit structure at this point can be found here:

https://github.com/junderw/solhint/tree/oldPR

[junderw]

(Also I have rebased on protofire master)

[fvictorio]

I updated the docs by fixing the meta info and generating the docs.

Thanks! I was going to do that and then I forgot 😅

I change the error message when it occurs on a constructor to alert people of the new option for >=0.7.0.

That's a great idea, thank you for doing it!