Strange rule: initialize used in accessing related rule

[Ducasse]

I got the following rule violation for initialize and it does not make sense.

[astares]

I guess this happens anytime you put a method with an unary selector that does not return anything into the "accessing" category.

Maybe the idea behind this critique was that "accessing" typically hosts getters (unary) and setter methods (keyword) and laments when the getter forgets a return. So it looks at the #initialize when it is in "accessing" protocol as a kind of getter method as it is also unary. So it gives the warning that you might have forgotten the return for the getter.