SONARJAVA-5936 : S1452 Remove FPs for wildcards in nested types

[rombirli]

⚠️ Warning: Impact on Rule S1452 Sensitivity

This PR aims to remove False Positives (FPs) in code examples involving nested generics, such as:

public class Baz {
  void bar() {
    foo(listOfLists());
  }

  boolean foo(List<List<? extends A>> listList) {
    return true;
  }

  // FP here: The rule suggests removing the wildcard, 
  // but returning List<List<A>> instead would break the code.
  List<List<? extends A>> listOfLists() { 
    return new ArrayList<>();
  }
}

The Proposed Solution:
The fix stops checking wildcards after depth 1 nested types (i.e., removing the recursive check).

Reviewer Note:
Please pay attention to this change in behavior; while it resolves the FPs, it means the rule will no longer flag potential issues in deeper nested structures. I would like your feedback on whether this trade-off makes sense or if we should consider a more surgical approach to the recursion.

[hashicorp-vault-sonar-prod]

SONARJAVA-5936

[BartLucien]

I just have a small comment concerning the tests.
While it may create some false negatives, as having wildcard in nested types won't be detected. I think it is better than having a issue raised that breaks the compilation if it is fixed. What do you think?

I do not approve as I think there should be a more authoritative answer to your concern.

[BartLucien]

I would add another example with another data structure to have a more robust test. Something similar to the FP that disappeared from the ITS tests seem like good candidates to me.

[sonarqube-next]

Quality Gate passed

Issues
0 New issues
0 Fixed issues
0 Accepted issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
0 Dependency risks
No data about Coverage
0.0% Duplication on New Code

See analysis details on SonarQube

[tomasz-tylenda-sonarsource]

Is there a particulat reason to use checks.A rather than just A?

[tomasz-tylenda-sonarsource]

It's easier to find samples if the filename ends in ...Sample.java. Maybe we can rename all sample for this check?