Sign upLogin

3scale/porta

View on GitHub
Star
app/helpers/users_helper.rb

Summary

Maintainability
A
3 hrs
Test Coverage

UsersHelper#link_to_user refers to 'options' more than self (maybe move it to another class?)
Open

    options.reverse_merge! :content_method => :login, :title_method => :login, :class => :nickname
    content_text      = options.delete(:content_text)
    content_text    ||= user.send(options.delete(:content_method))
    options[:title] ||= user.send(options.delete(:title_method))
Severity: Minor
Found in app/helpers/users_helper.rb by reek

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.

UsersHelper#link_to_user refers to 'options' more than self (maybe move it to another class?)
Open

    options.reverse_merge! :content_method => :login, :title_method => :login, :class => :nickname
    content_text      = options.delete(:content_text)
    content_text    ||= user.send(options.delete(:content_method))
    options[:title] ||= user.send(options.delete(:title_method))
Severity: Minor
Found in app/helpers/users_helper.rb by reek

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.

UsersHelper#link_to_login_with_IP calls 'h(content_text)' 2 times
Open

      content_tag tag, h(content_text), options
    else
      link_to h(content_text), login_path, options
Severity: Minor
Found in app/helpers/users_helper.rb by reek

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.

UsersHelper#link_to_login_with_IP calls 'h(content_text)' 2 times
Open

      content_tag tag, h(content_text), options
    else
      link_to h(content_text), login_path, options
Severity: Minor
Found in app/helpers/users_helper.rb by reek

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.

UsersHelper#link_to_login_with_IP has the name 'link_to_login_with_IP'
Open

  def link_to_login_with_IP content_text=nil, options={}
Severity: Minor
Found in app/helpers/users_helper.rb by reek

An Uncommunicative Method Name is a method 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.

UsersHelper#link_to_login_with_IP has the name 'link_to_login_with_IP'
Open

  def link_to_login_with_IP content_text=nil, options={}
Severity: Minor
Found in app/helpers/users_helper.rb by reek

An Uncommunicative Method Name is a method 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.

Identical blocks of code found in 2 locations. Consider refactoring.
Open

  def link_to_user(user, options={})
    raise "Invalid user" unless user
    options.reverse_merge! :content_method => :login, :title_method => :login, :class => :nickname
    content_text      = options.delete(:content_text)
    content_text    ||= user.send(options.delete(:content_method))
Severity: Minor
Found in app/helpers/users_helper.rb and 1 other location - About 55 mins to fix
app/helpers/users_helper.rb on lines 153..159

Duplicated Code

Duplicated code can lead to software that is hard to understand and difficult to change. The Don't Repeat Yourself (DRY) principle states:

Every piece of knowledge must have a single, unambiguous, authoritative representation within a system.

When you violate DRY, bugs and maintenance problems are sure to follow. Duplicated code has a tendency to both continue to replicate and also to diverge (leaving bugs as two similar implementations differ in subtle ways).

Tuning

This issue has a mass of 44.

We set useful threshold defaults for the languages we support but you may want to adjust these settings based on your project guidelines.

The threshold configuration represents the minimum mass a code block must have to be analyzed for duplication. The lower the threshold, the more fine-grained the comparison.

If the engine is too easily reporting duplication, try raising the threshold. If you suspect that the engine isn't catching enough duplication, try lowering the threshold. The best setting tends to differ from language to language.

See codeclimate-duplication's documentation for more information about tuning the mass threshold in your .codeclimate.yml.

Refactorings

Further Reading

Identical blocks of code found in 2 locations. Consider refactoring.
Open

  def link_to_user(user, options={})
    raise "Invalid user" unless user
    options.reverse_merge! :content_method => :login, :title_method => :login, :class => :nickname
    content_text      = options.delete(:content_text)
    content_text    ||= user.send(options.delete(:content_method))
Severity: Minor
Found in app/helpers/users_helper.rb and 1 other location - About 55 mins to fix
app/helpers/users_helper.rb on lines 47..53

Duplicated Code

Duplicated code can lead to software that is hard to understand and difficult to change. The Don't Repeat Yourself (DRY) principle states:

Every piece of knowledge must have a single, unambiguous, authoritative representation within a system.

When you violate DRY, bugs and maintenance problems are sure to follow. Duplicated code has a tendency to both continue to replicate and also to diverge (leaving bugs as two similar implementations differ in subtle ways).

Tuning

This issue has a mass of 44.

We set useful threshold defaults for the languages we support but you may want to adjust these settings based on your project guidelines.

The threshold configuration represents the minimum mass a code block must have to be analyzed for duplication. The lower the threshold, the more fine-grained the comparison.

If the engine is too easily reporting duplication, try raising the threshold. If you suspect that the engine isn't catching enough duplication, try lowering the threshold. The best setting tends to differ from language to language.

See codeclimate-duplication's documentation for more information about tuning the mass threshold in your .codeclimate.yml.

Refactorings

Further Reading

Identical blocks of code found in 2 locations. Consider refactoring.
Open

  def link_to_login_with_IP content_text=nil, options={}
    ip_addr           = request.remote_ip
    content_text    ||= ip_addr
    options.reverse_merge! :title => ip_addr
    if tag = options.delete(:tag)
Severity: Minor
Found in app/helpers/users_helper.rb and 1 other location - About 30 mins to fix
app/helpers/users_helper.rb on lines 174..181

Duplicated Code

Duplicated code can lead to software that is hard to understand and difficult to change. The Don't Repeat Yourself (DRY) principle states:

Every piece of knowledge must have a single, unambiguous, authoritative representation within a system.

When you violate DRY, bugs and maintenance problems are sure to follow. Duplicated code has a tendency to both continue to replicate and also to diverge (leaving bugs as two similar implementations differ in subtle ways).

Tuning

This issue has a mass of 33.

We set useful threshold defaults for the languages we support but you may want to adjust these settings based on your project guidelines.

The threshold configuration represents the minimum mass a code block must have to be analyzed for duplication. The lower the threshold, the more fine-grained the comparison.

If the engine is too easily reporting duplication, try raising the threshold. If you suspect that the engine isn't catching enough duplication, try lowering the threshold. The best setting tends to differ from language to language.

See codeclimate-duplication's documentation for more information about tuning the mass threshold in your .codeclimate.yml.

Refactorings

Further Reading

Identical blocks of code found in 2 locations. Consider refactoring.
Open

  def link_to_login_with_IP content_text=nil, options={}
    ip_addr           = request.remote_ip
    content_text    ||= ip_addr
    options.reverse_merge! :title => ip_addr
    if tag = options.delete(:tag)
Severity: Minor
Found in app/helpers/users_helper.rb and 1 other location - About 30 mins to fix
app/helpers/users_helper.rb on lines 68..75

Duplicated Code

Duplicated code can lead to software that is hard to understand and difficult to change. The Don't Repeat Yourself (DRY) principle states:

Every piece of knowledge must have a single, unambiguous, authoritative representation within a system.

When you violate DRY, bugs and maintenance problems are sure to follow. Duplicated code has a tendency to both continue to replicate and also to diverge (leaving bugs as two similar implementations differ in subtle ways).

Tuning

This issue has a mass of 33.

We set useful threshold defaults for the languages we support but you may want to adjust these settings based on your project guidelines.

The threshold configuration represents the minimum mass a code block must have to be analyzed for duplication. The lower the threshold, the more fine-grained the comparison.

If the engine is too easily reporting duplication, try raising the threshold. If you suspect that the engine isn't catching enough duplication, try lowering the threshold. The best setting tends to differ from language to language.

See codeclimate-duplication's documentation for more information about tuning the mass threshold in your .codeclimate.yml.

Refactorings

Further Reading

Identical blocks of code found in 2 locations. Consider refactoring.
Open

  def link_to_current_user(options={})
    if current_user
      link_to_user current_user, options
    else
      content_text = options.delete(:content_text) || 'not signed in'
Severity: Minor
Found in app/helpers/users_helper.rb and 1 other location - About 20 mins to fix
app/helpers/users_helper.rb on lines 189..196

Duplicated Code

Duplicated code can lead to software that is hard to understand and difficult to change. The Don't Repeat Yourself (DRY) principle states:

Every piece of knowledge must have a single, unambiguous, authoritative representation within a system.

When you violate DRY, bugs and maintenance problems are sure to follow. Duplicated code has a tendency to both continue to replicate and also to diverge (leaving bugs as two similar implementations differ in subtle ways).

Tuning

This issue has a mass of 28.

We set useful threshold defaults for the languages we support but you may want to adjust these settings based on your project guidelines.

The threshold configuration represents the minimum mass a code block must have to be analyzed for duplication. The lower the threshold, the more fine-grained the comparison.

If the engine is too easily reporting duplication, try raising the threshold. If you suspect that the engine isn't catching enough duplication, try lowering the threshold. The best setting tends to differ from language to language.

See codeclimate-duplication's documentation for more information about tuning the mass threshold in your .codeclimate.yml.

Refactorings

Further Reading

Identical blocks of code found in 2 locations. Consider refactoring.
Open

  def link_to_current_user(options={})
    if current_user
      link_to_user current_user, options
    else
      content_text = options.delete(:content_text) || 'not signed in'
Severity: Minor
Found in app/helpers/users_helper.rb and 1 other location - About 20 mins to fix
app/helpers/users_helper.rb on lines 83..90

Duplicated Code

Duplicated code can lead to software that is hard to understand and difficult to change. The Don't Repeat Yourself (DRY) principle states:

Every piece of knowledge must have a single, unambiguous, authoritative representation within a system.

When you violate DRY, bugs and maintenance problems are sure to follow. Duplicated code has a tendency to both continue to replicate and also to diverge (leaving bugs as two similar implementations differ in subtle ways).

Tuning

This issue has a mass of 28.

We set useful threshold defaults for the languages we support but you may want to adjust these settings based on your project guidelines.

The threshold configuration represents the minimum mass a code block must have to be analyzed for duplication. The lower the threshold, the more fine-grained the comparison.

If the engine is too easily reporting duplication, try raising the threshold. If you suspect that the engine isn't catching enough duplication, try lowering the threshold. The best setting tends to differ from language to language.

See codeclimate-duplication's documentation for more information about tuning the mass threshold in your .codeclimate.yml.

Refactorings

Further Reading

There are no issues that match your filters.

Category
Status