Method record_answers
has a Cognitive Complexity of 14 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def record_answers(responses)
pending = {}
responses.each do |key, answers|
next if key == 'id'
- Read upRead up
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
Cognitive Complexity
Cognitive Complexity is a measure of how difficult a unit of code is to intuitively understand. Unlike Cyclomatic Complexity, which determines how difficult your code will be to test, Cognitive Complexity tells you how difficult your code will be to read and comprehend.
A method's cognitive complexity is based on a few simple rules:
- Code is not considered more complex when it uses shorthand that the language provides for collapsing multiple statements into one
- Code is considered more complex for each "break in the linear flow of the code"
- Code is considered more complex when "flow breaking structures are nested"
Further reading
ResponseProcessor#record_answers contains iterators nested 2 deep Open
question.response_pairs(answers).each do |pair|
fail SurveyError,
"Invalid choice '#{pair.last}' for question #{key}" unless
question.valid_choice_value?(pair.last)
- Read upRead up
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
- Exclude checks
A Nested Iterator
occurs when a block contains another block.
Example
Given
class Duck
class << self
def duck_names
%i!tick trick track!.each do |surname|
%i!duck!.each do |last_name|
puts "full name is #{surname} #{last_name}"
end
end
end
end
end
Reek would report the following warning:
test.rb -- 1 warning:
[5]:Duck#duck_names contains iterators nested 2 deep (NestedIterators)
ResponseProcessor#record_intersections has approx 9 statements Open
def record_intersections(pending)
- Read upRead up
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
- Exclude checks
A method with Too Many Statements
is any method that has a large number of lines.
Too Many Statements
warns about any method that has more than 5 statements. Reek's smell detector for Too Many Statements
counts +1 for every simple statement in a method and +1 for every statement within a control structure (if
, else
, case
, when
, for
, while
, until
, begin
, rescue
) but it doesn't count the control structure itself.
So the following method would score +6 in Reek's statement-counting algorithm:
def parse(arg, argv, &error)
if !(val = arg) and (argv.empty? or /\A-/ =~ (val = argv[0]))
return nil, block, nil # +1
end
opt = (val = parse_arg(val, &error))[1] # +2
val = conv_arg(*val) # +3
if opt and !arg
argv.shift # +4
else
val[0] = nil # +5
end
val # +6
end
(You might argue that the two assigments within the first @if@ should count as statements, and that perhaps the nested assignment should count as +2.)
ResponseProcessor#record_answers has approx 14 statements Open
def record_answers(responses)
- Read upRead up
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
- Exclude checks
A method with Too Many Statements
is any method that has a large number of lines.
Too Many Statements
warns about any method that has more than 5 statements. Reek's smell detector for Too Many Statements
counts +1 for every simple statement in a method and +1 for every statement within a control structure (if
, else
, case
, when
, for
, while
, until
, begin
, rescue
) but it doesn't count the control structure itself.
So the following method would score +6 in Reek's statement-counting algorithm:
def parse(arg, argv, &error)
if !(val = arg) and (argv.empty? or /\A-/ =~ (val = argv[0]))
return nil, block, nil # +1
end
opt = (val = parse_arg(val, &error))[1] # +2
val = conv_arg(*val) # +3
if opt and !arg
argv.shift # +4
else
val[0] = nil # +5
end
val # +6
end
(You might argue that the two assigments within the first @if@ should count as statements, and that perhaps the nested assignment should count as +2.)
ResponseProcessor#record_intersections contains iterators nested 2 deep Open
all_values = intersection.keys.map {|f| pending[f] }
# Skip if any field in the intersection is a nil
# rubocop:disable Style/SymbolProc
next if all_values.any? {|x| x.nil? }
- Read upRead up
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
- Exclude checks
A Nested Iterator
occurs when a block contains another block.
Example
Given
class Duck
class << self
def duck_names
%i!tick trick track!.each do |surname|
%i!duck!.each do |last_name|
puts "full name is #{surname} #{last_name}"
end
end
end
end
end
Reek would report the following warning:
test.rb -- 1 warning:
[5]:Duck#duck_names contains iterators nested 2 deep (NestedIterators)
ResponseProcessor#record_answers refers to 'pair' more than self (maybe move it to another class?) Open
question.valid_choice_value?(pair.last)
pending[pair.first] ||= []
pending[pair.first] << pair.last
- Read upRead up
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
- Exclude checks
Feature Envy occurs when a code fragment references another object more often than it references itself, or when several clients do the same series of manipulations on a particular type of object.
Feature Envy reduces the code's ability to communicate intent: code that "belongs" on one class but which is located in another can be hard to find, and may upset the "System of Names" in the host class.
Feature Envy also affects the design's flexibility: A code fragment that is in the wrong class creates couplings that may not be natural within the application's domain, and creates a loss of cohesion in the unwilling host class.
Feature Envy often arises because it must manipulate other objects (usually its arguments) to get them into a useful form, and one force preventing them (the arguments) doing this themselves is that the common knowledge lives outside the arguments, or the arguments are of too basic a type to justify extending that type. Therefore there must be something which 'knows' about the contents or purposes of the arguments. That thing would have to be more than just a basic type, because the basic types are either containers which don't know about their contents, or they are single objects which can't capture their relationship with their fellows of the same type. So, this thing with the extra knowledge should be reified into a class, and the utility method will most likely belong there.
Example
Running Reek on:
class Warehouse
def sale_price(item)
(item.price - item.rebate) * @vat
end
end
would report:
Warehouse#total_price refers to item more than self (FeatureEnvy)
since this:
(item.price - item.rebate)
belongs to the Item class, not the Warehouse.
ResponseProcessor#record_answers calls 'pending[pair.first]' 2 times Open
pending[pair.first] ||= []
pending[pair.first] << pair.last
- Read upRead up
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
- Exclude checks
Duplication occurs when two fragments of code look nearly identical, or when two fragments of code have nearly identical effects at some conceptual level.
Reek implements a check for Duplicate Method Call.
Example
Here's a very much simplified and contrived example. The following method will report a warning:
def double_thing()
@other.thing + @other.thing
end
One quick approach to silence Reek would be to refactor the code thus:
def double_thing()
thing = @other.thing
thing + thing
end
A slightly different approach would be to replace all calls of double_thing
by calls to @other.double_thing
:
class Other
def double_thing()
thing + thing
end
end
The approach you take will depend on balancing other factors in your code.
ResponseProcessor#record_answers calls 'pair.first' 2 times Open
pending[pair.first] ||= []
pending[pair.first] << pair.last
- Read upRead up
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
- Exclude checks
Duplication occurs when two fragments of code look nearly identical, or when two fragments of code have nearly identical effects at some conceptual level.
Reek implements a check for Duplicate Method Call.
Example
Here's a very much simplified and contrived example. The following method will report a warning:
def double_thing()
@other.thing + @other.thing
end
One quick approach to silence Reek would be to refactor the code thus:
def double_thing()
thing = @other.thing
thing + thing
end
A slightly different approach would be to replace all calls of double_thing
by calls to @other.double_thing
:
class Other
def double_thing()
thing + thing
end
end
The approach you take will depend on balancing other factors in your code.
ResponseProcessor#record_answers calls 'pair.last' 3 times Open
question.valid_choice_value?(pair.last)
pending[pair.first] ||= []
pending[pair.first] << pair.last
- Read upRead up
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
- Exclude checks
Duplication occurs when two fragments of code look nearly identical, or when two fragments of code have nearly identical effects at some conceptual level.
Reek implements a check for Duplicate Method Call.
Example
Here's a very much simplified and contrived example. The following method will report a warning:
def double_thing()
@other.thing + @other.thing
end
One quick approach to silence Reek would be to refactor the code thus:
def double_thing()
thing = @other.thing
thing + thing
end
A slightly different approach would be to replace all calls of double_thing
by calls to @other.double_thing
:
class Other
def double_thing()
thing + thing
end
end
The approach you take will depend on balancing other factors in your code.
ResponseProcessor has no descriptive comment Open
class ResponseProcessor < Struct.new(:params, :survey)
- Read upRead up
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
- Exclude checks
Classes and modules are the units of reuse and release. It is therefore considered good practice to annotate every class and module with a brief comment outlining its responsibilities.
Example
Given
class Dummy
# Do things...
end
Reek would emit the following warning:
test.rb -- 1 warning:
[1]:Dummy has no descriptive comment (IrresponsibleModule)
Fixing this is simple - just an explaining comment:
# The Dummy class is responsible for ...
class Dummy
# Do things...
end
ResponseProcessor#record_answers performs a nil-check Open
fail SurveyError, "Question #{key} not found" if question.nil?
- Read upRead up
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
- Exclude checks
A NilCheck
is a type check. Failures of NilCheck
violate the "tell, don't ask" principle.
Additionally, type checks often mask bigger problems in your source code like not using OOP and / or polymorphism when you should.
Example
Given
class Klass
def nil_checker(argument)
if argument.nil?
puts "argument isn't nil!"
end
end
end
Reek would emit the following warning:
test.rb -- 1 warning:
[3]:Klass#nil_checker performs a nil-check. (NilCheck)
ResponseProcessor#record_intersections performs a nil-check Open
next if all_values.any? {|x| x.nil? }
- Read upRead up
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
- Exclude checks
A NilCheck
is a type check. Failures of NilCheck
violate the "tell, don't ask" principle.
Additionally, type checks often mask bigger problems in your source code like not using OOP and / or polymorphism when you should.
Example
Given
class Klass
def nil_checker(argument)
if argument.nil?
puts "argument isn't nil!"
end
end
end
Reek would emit the following warning:
test.rb -- 1 warning:
[3]:Klass#nil_checker performs a nil-check. (NilCheck)
ResponseProcessor#record_intersections has the variable name 'f' Open
all_values = intersection.keys.map {|f| pending[f] }
- Read upRead up
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
- Exclude checks
An Uncommunicative Variable Name
is a variable name that doesn't communicate its intent well enough.
Poor names make it hard for the reader to build a mental picture of what's going on in the code. They can also be mis-interpreted; and they hurt the flow of reading, because the reader must slow down to interpret the names.
ResponseProcessor#record_intersections has the variable name 'x' Open
next if all_values.any? {|x| x.nil? }
- Read upRead up
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
- Exclude checks
An Uncommunicative Variable Name
is a variable name that doesn't communicate its intent well enough.
Poor names make it hard for the reader to build a mental picture of what's going on in the code. They can also be mis-interpreted; and they hurt the flow of reading, because the reader must slow down to interpret the names.
Favor a normal unless-statement over a modifier clause in a multiline statement. Open
fail SurveyError,
"Invalid choice '#{pair.last}' for question #{key}" unless
question.valid_choice_value?(pair.last)
- Read upRead up
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
- Exclude checks
Checks for uses of if/unless modifiers with multiple-lines bodies.
Example:
# bad
{
result: 'this should not happen'
} unless cond
# good
{ result: 'ok' } if cond
Always use raise
to signal exceptions. Open
fail SurveyError, "Question #{key} not found" if question.nil?
- Read upRead up
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
- Exclude checks
This cop checks for uses of fail
and raise
.
Example: EnforcedStyle: only_raise (default)
# The `only_raise` style enforces the sole use of `raise`.
# bad
begin
fail
rescue Exception
# handle it
end
def watch_out
fail
rescue Exception
# handle it
end
Kernel.fail
# good
begin
raise
rescue Exception
# handle it
end
def watch_out
raise
rescue Exception
# handle it
end
Kernel.raise
Example: EnforcedStyle: only_fail
# The `only_fail` style enforces the sole use of `fail`.
# bad
begin
raise
rescue Exception
# handle it
end
def watch_out
raise
rescue Exception
# handle it
end
Kernel.raise
# good
begin
fail
rescue Exception
# handle it
end
def watch_out
fail
rescue Exception
# handle it
end
Kernel.fail
Example: EnforcedStyle: semantic
# The `semantic` style enforces the use of `fail` to signal an
# exception, then will use `raise` to trigger an offense after
# it has been rescued.
# bad
begin
raise
rescue Exception
# handle it
end
def watch_out
# Error thrown
rescue Exception
fail
end
Kernel.fail
Kernel.raise
# good
begin
fail
rescue Exception
# handle it
end
def watch_out
fail
rescue Exception
raise 'Preferably with descriptive message'
end
explicit_receiver.fail
explicit_receiver.raise
Always use raise
to signal exceptions. Open
fail SurveyError,
- Read upRead up
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
- Exclude checks
This cop checks for uses of fail
and raise
.
Example: EnforcedStyle: only_raise (default)
# The `only_raise` style enforces the sole use of `raise`.
# bad
begin
fail
rescue Exception
# handle it
end
def watch_out
fail
rescue Exception
# handle it
end
Kernel.fail
# good
begin
raise
rescue Exception
# handle it
end
def watch_out
raise
rescue Exception
# handle it
end
Kernel.raise
Example: EnforcedStyle: only_fail
# The `only_fail` style enforces the sole use of `fail`.
# bad
begin
raise
rescue Exception
# handle it
end
def watch_out
raise
rescue Exception
# handle it
end
Kernel.raise
# good
begin
fail
rescue Exception
# handle it
end
def watch_out
fail
rescue Exception
# handle it
end
Kernel.fail
Example: EnforcedStyle: semantic
# The `semantic` style enforces the use of `fail` to signal an
# exception, then will use `raise` to trigger an offense after
# it has been rescued.
# bad
begin
raise
rescue Exception
# handle it
end
def watch_out
# Error thrown
rescue Exception
fail
end
Kernel.fail
Kernel.raise
# good
begin
fail
rescue Exception
# handle it
end
def watch_out
fail
rescue Exception
raise 'Preferably with descriptive message'
end
explicit_receiver.fail
explicit_receiver.raise
Missing magic comment # frozen_string_literal: true
. Open
class ResponseProcessor < Struct.new(:params, :survey)
- Read upRead up
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
- Exclude checks
This cop is designed to help upgrade to Ruby 3.0. It will add the
comment # frozen_string_literal: true
to the top of files to
enable frozen string literals. Frozen string literals may be default
in Ruby 3.0. The comment will be added below a shebang and encoding
comment. The frozen string literal comment is only valid in Ruby 2.3+.
Example: EnforcedStyle: when_needed (default)
# The `when_needed` style will add the frozen string literal comment
# to files only when the `TargetRubyVersion` is set to 2.3+.
# bad
module Foo
# ...
end
# good
# frozen_string_literal: true
module Foo
# ...
end
Example: EnforcedStyle: always
# The `always` style will always add the frozen string literal comment
# to a file, regardless of the Ruby version or if `freeze` or `<<` are
# called on a string literal.
# bad
module Bar
# ...
end
# good
# frozen_string_literal: true
module Bar
# ...
end
Example: EnforcedStyle: never
# The `never` will enforce that the frozen string literal comment does
# not exist in a file.
# bad
# frozen_string_literal: true
module Baz
# ...
end
# good
module Baz
# ...
end