File rolling_updates.rb
has 266 lines of code (exceeds 250 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
module Logic
module RollingUpdates
class UnknownFeatureError < StandardError; end
class UnknownFeatureConfigError < StandardError
include Bugsnag::MetaData
Method provider_can_use?
has a Cognitive Complexity of 11 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def provider_can_use?(feature)
return provider_account&.provider_can_use?(feature) if buyer?
return false if Logic::RollingUpdates.skipped?
return true if Logic::RollingUpdates.disabled?
- Read upRead up
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
Logic::RollingUpdates::Provider#provider_can_use? has approx 9 statements Open
def provider_can_use?(feature)
- Read upRead up
- 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.)
Logic::RollingUpdates::Provider#provider_can_use? calls 'Rails.env' 2 times Open
(Rails.env.test? || Rails.env.development?) ? raise(e) : false
- Read upRead up
- 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.
Logic::RollingUpdates::Features::Base#enabled? performs a nil-check Open
when nil
- Read upRead up
- 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)
Logic::RollingUpdates::Features::PlanChangesWizard#missing_config doesn't depend on instance state (maybe move it to another class?) Open
def missing_config
- Read upRead up
- Exclude checks
A Utility Function is any instance method that has no dependency on the state of the instance.
Logic::RollingUpdates::Features::ApicastV2 has the name 'ApicastV2' Open
class ApicastV2 < Base
- Read upRead up
- Exclude checks
An Uncommunicative Module Name
is a module 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.
Logic::RollingUpdates::Provider#provider_can_use? has the variable name 'e' Open
rescue StandardError => e
- Read upRead up
- 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.