Peter Gafert

@Kaammill We have formatters for IntelliJ and Eclipse checked in [here](https://github.com/TNG/ArchUnit/tree/main/develop). That would automatically do the imports and other style consistently then :slightly_smiling_face: (also compare [CONTRIBUTING](https://github.com/TNG/ArchUnit/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md) where this an other...

May I ask what the state of this PR is? :slightly_smiling_face:

The reason I usually use white listing (only allow x,y,z) vs. black listing (don't allow x) is that in time some strange "bypasses" might evolve, where `x -/> y` is...

The problem for me is that I'm not sure there are "the" best practices. I feel in many cases it depends on the circumstances, how many teams/people are working on...

Yes, I think this surely makes sense to be added :slightly_smiling_face: I think it should in fact be added to `CodeUnitsShould`, so it can be automatically used for `methods()...should()` and...

Hmm, I think actually `accessTo` and `accessFrom` behave a little inconsistent here :frowning: `accessFrom` checks if the call target **resolves** to this method, i.e. where the method is defined that...

Yes, your rule looks reasonable. Note that there are predefined methods for `methods().that().areDeclaredInClassesThat().areAnnotatedWith(..)` and `methods().that().areAnnotatedWith(..)` which maybe could replace your `areRestEndpoints()` predicate. But other than that I wouldn't know how...

I don't completely get what you mean by "the return type selector pattern"? That sounds to me like `methods().that().haveRawReturnType(..)`? But there you might have to supply a predicate if it...

Maybe if you paste `areRestEndpoints()` here, I understand better :wink:

Ah, okay, now I understand :smiley: I don't know, if you want to make it more explicit it might sense to extract it and give it a custom description :+1:...