RD won't allow a rename of an enum member with otherwise illegal characters.

[ThunderFrame]

Standard naming rules don't apply to enum members (or enums themselves), this code is perfectly legal (but might be worthy of an inspection). At the very least, a leading underscore should be permitted in order to take advantage of the hidden enum member feature.

Enum Foo
  Apple = 1
  [_Min] = 1
  [`~!@#$%^&*()-_+=[']\/?{}|<>,.;:"] = 3
End Enum

A more difficult issue relates to the name of an enum, as per #2568, where special characters are also allowed, but the VBE pretty printer fails to add/retain the necessary square brackets:

Enum [`~!@#$%^&*()-_+=[']\/?{}|<>,.;:"]
  Apple = 1
  [_Min] = 1
  [`~!@#$%^&*()-_+=[']\/?{}|<   spaces!   >,.;:"] = 3
End Enum

'pretty print to become:

Enum `~!@#$%^&*()-_+=[']\/?{}|<>,.;:"
  Apple = 1
  [_Min] = 1
  [`~!@#$%^&*()-_+=[']\/?{}|<   spaces!   >,.;:"] = 3
End Enum

[Vogel612]

We really need a "WTF VBA?" tag

[rubberduck203]

Don't tempt me. We can make that happen.

[ThunderFrame]

@rubberduck203 it sounds like you're prioritizing the tag over the fix.. :sad:

[rubberduck203]

Well, I'm really just moral support at this point, but I do still have the power to create funny labels.

[daFreeMan]

@ThunderFrame I pray that you're the only person on the planet who thinks of these things and that's why they're untested in the VBE.

What kind of bizarre, twisted thoughts would be going through a programmer's head if he was using names like that in actual production code???

[rubberduck203]

And that ^ is precisely why RD should fix the bug.

[retailcoder]

Possibly related: #3238

[bclothier]

I'm inclined to think this should be closed because I just don't see the merits of enabling users to do stuff that nobody will want to do. Even if we did fix up the ducky to handle those horrid names, it doesn't seem sensible to support refactoring toward worse code. We want them to refactor away from bad code, no?

[mansellan]

Not sure... wouldn't the ideal be that the ducky can eat the bad granola, then explain why it's terrible code with some pithy inspections? Allow legal, suggest sensible?

[MDoerner]

It would be ideal indeed. Unfortunately, this is a really hard problem because it does not fit to the lexer rules at all. (I think, if the VBE did not remove the square brackets, RD could already handle this situation correctly.)

[mansellan]

IIUC the OP correctly though, that applies only to enum names, not enum member names. Does this need splitting out into separate issues?

EDIT: #2568 already covers enum names, I guess that's a better candidate for closure?