ReviewUnusedParameter: Do not trigger when MyInvocation.BoundParameters or PSCmdlet.MyInvocation.BoundParameters is used

[jegannathanmaniganadan]

PR Summary

• ReviewUnusedParameter returns false positives when parameters are splatted using $MyInvocation.BoundParameters & $PSCmldet.MyInvocation.BoundParameters variable. As of now it bails out only for $PSBoundParameter. This fix extends that logic to other bound parameter references.
• fix PSReviewUnusedParameter has false positive when using $MyInvocation.BoundParameters #1505

PR Checklist

• PR has a meaningful title
  • Use the present tense and imperative mood when describing your changes
• Summarized changes
• Change is not breaking
• Make sure all .cs, .ps1 and .psm1 files have the correct copyright header
• Make sure you've added a new test if existing tests do not effectively test the code changed and/or updated documentation
• This PR is ready to merge and is not Work in Progress.
  • If the PR is work in progress, please add the prefix WIP: to the beginning of the title and remove the prefix when the PR is ready.

[ghost]

All CLA requirements met.

[bergmeister]

Thanks. Implementation looks good to me, just a minor suggestion.
Every new feature or fix needs to be accompanied by one or more test cases though. If you look qt the existing tests, it should be very easy to add 2 tests for the cases that you added:

PSScriptAnalyzer/Tests/Rules/ReviewUnusedParameter.tests.ps1

Lines 53 to 57 in 67805a1

	It "has no violations when using PSBoundParameters" {
	$ScriptDefinition = 'function Bound { param ($Param1) Get-Foo @PSBoundParameters }'
	$Violations = Invoke-ScriptAnalyzer -ScriptDefinition $ScriptDefinition -IncludeRule $RuleName
	$Violations.Count | Should -Be 0
	}

Also, when you use a closing keyword in the PR description it will close the referenced issue
https://help.github.com/en/github/managing-your-work-on-github/linking-a-pull-request-to-an-issue#linking-a-pull-request-to-an-issue-using-a-keyword

[rjmholt]

LGTM, with two small comments

[jegannathanmaniganadan]

Thanks both for your feedback. @bergmeister did not approve the PR, so requested review again.

Every new feature or fix needs to be accompanied by one or more test cases though. If you look qt the existing tests, it should be very easy to add 2 tests for the cases that you added:

Writing pester tests for testing PSSA rule behavior is the most easiest job I have come across :)

[bergmeister]

Thanks, looks good 😊