Redundant base-constructor call

Severity: Info ID: redundant-base-constructor-call

Flags an explicit empty base-constructor specifier (e.g. is A() or constructor() A() {}) when the base contract either has no constructor or has a constructor that takes no arguments. The empty () adds no information and can be removed.

What it does

For every base contract listed in a contract's inheritance specifier or invoked from a derived constructor's header, the lint reports the empty () when the base does not require any arguments.

Why is this bad?

Writing A() suggests an explicit call, but if A has no constructor or a zero-parameter constructor, the parentheses are redundant noise that obscure the real inheritance shape.

Example

Bad

contract A {}
contract B { constructor() {} }

contract C is A() {}                 // A has no constructor
contract D is B { constructor() B() {} } // B's constructor takes no arguments

Good

contract A {}
contract B { constructor() {} }

contract C is A {}
contract D is B { constructor() {} }