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

function validate( messageArray ) {
  log.verbose( 'Running emptyLines Validation' );

  if ( base.isValidatorEnabled( constants.VALIDATOR_NAME ) ) {
    for ( let lineNumber = 0; lineNumber < messageArray.length; lineNumber += 1 ) {

Found in lib/validators/emptyLines.js and 1 other location - About 2 hrs to fix

Read up
Read up

lib/validators/lineLength.js on lines 56..66

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 93.

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

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 93.

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

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"

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 63.

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

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 63.

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

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 63.

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

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 63.

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

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 59.

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

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 59.

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

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"

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"

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"

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"

disallow the unary operators `++` and `--` (no-plusplus)

Because the unary ++ and -- operators are subject to automatic semicolon insertion, differences in whitespace can change semantics of source code.

var i = 10;
var j = 20;

i ++
j
// i = 11, j = 20

var i = 10;
var j = 20;

i
++
j
// i = 10, j = 21

Rule Details

This rule disallows the unary operators ++ and --.

Examples of incorrect code for this rule:

/*eslint no-plusplus: "error"*/

var foo = 0;
foo++;

var bar = 42;
bar--;

for (i = 0; i < l; i++) {
    return;
}

Examples of correct code for this rule:

/*eslint no-plusplus: "error"*/

var foo = 0;
foo += 1;

var bar = 42;
bar -= 1;

for (i = 0; i < l; i += 1) {
    return;
}

Options

This rule has an object option.

"allowForLoopAfterthoughts": true allows unary operators ++ and -- in the afterthought (final expression) of a for loop.

allowForLoopAfterthoughts

Examples of correct code for this rule with the { "allowForLoopAfterthoughts": true } option:

/*eslint no-plusplus: ["error", { "allowForLoopAfterthoughts": true }]*/

for (i = 0; i < l; i++) {
    return;
}

for (i = 0; i < l; i--) {
    return;
}

Source: http://eslint.org/docs/rules/

Unexpected require().
Open

  newValidator[ fileName ] = require( path.join( VALIDATORS_PATH, fileName ) );

Found in lib/validatorLoader.js by eslint

Read up
Read up
Exclude checks
- Disable engine
- Disable check

Enforce require() on the top-level module scope (global-require)

In Node.js, module dependencies are included using the require() function, such as:

var fs = require("fs");

While require() may be called anywhere in code, some style guides prescribe that it should be called only in the top level of a module to make it easier to identify dependencies. For instance, it's arguably harder to identify dependencies when they are deeply nested inside of functions and other statements:

function foo() {

    if (condition) {
        var fs = require("fs");
    }
}

Since require() does a synchronous load, it can cause performance problems when used in other locations.

Further, ES6 modules mandate that import and export statements can only occur in the top level of the module's body.

Rule Details

This rule requires all calls to require() to be at the top level of the module, similar to ES6 import and export statements, which also can occur only at the top level.

Examples of incorrect code for this rule:

/*eslint global-require: "error"*/
/*eslint-env es6*/

// calling require() inside of a function is not allowed
function readFile(filename, callback) {
    var fs = require('fs');
    fs.readFile(filename, callback)
}

// conditional requires like this are also not allowed
if (DEBUG) { require('debug'); }

// a require() in a switch statement is also flagged
switch(x) { case '1': require('1'); break; }

// you may not require() inside an arrow function body
var getModule = (name) => require(name);

// you may not require() inside of a function body as well
function getModule(name) { return require(name); }

// you may not require() inside of a try/catch block
try {
    require(unsafeModule);
} catch(e) {
    console.log(e);
}

Examples of correct code for this rule:

/*eslint global-require: "error"*/

// all these variations of require() are ok
require('x');
var y = require('y');
var z;
z = require('z').initialize();

// requiring a module and using it in a function is ok
var fs = require('fs');
function readFile(filename, callback) {
    fs.readFile(filename, callback)
}

// you can use a ternary to determine which module to require
var logger = DEBUG ? require('dev-logger') : require('logger');

// if you want you can require() at the end of your module
function doSomethingA() {}
function doSomethingB() {}
var x = require("x"),
    z = require("z");

When Not To Use It

If you have a module that must be initialized with information that comes from the file-system or if a module is only used in very rare situations and will cause significant overhead to load it may make sense to disable the rule. If you need to require() an optional dependency inside of a try/catch, you can disable this rule for just that dependency using the // eslint-disable-line global-require comment. Source: http://eslint.org/docs/rules/

Unexpected parentheses around single function argument having a body with no curly braces
Open

  const isEnabled = ( key ) => R.contains( key, enabledValidators );

Found in lib/validatorLoader.js by eslint

Read up
Read up
Exclude checks
- Disable engine
- Disable check

Require parens in arrow function arguments (arrow-parens)

Arrow functions can omit parentheses when they have exactly one parameter. In all other cases the parameter(s) must be wrapped in parentheses. This rule enforces the consistent use of parentheses in arrow functions.

Rule Details

This rule enforces parentheses around arrow function parameters regardless of arity. For example:

/*eslint-env es6*/

// Bad
a => {}

// Good
(a) => {}

Following this style will help you find arrow functions (=>) which may be mistakenly included in a condition when a comparison such as >= was the intent.

/*eslint-env es6*/

// Bad
if (a => 2) {
}

// Good
if (a >= 2) {
}

The rule can also be configured to discourage the use of parens when they are not required:

/*eslint-env es6*/

// Bad
(a) => {}

// Good
a => {}

Options

This rule has a string option and an object one.

String options are:

"always" (default) requires parens around arguments in all cases.
"as-needed" allows omitting parens when there is only one argument.

Object properties for variants of the "as-needed" option:

"requireForBlockBody": true modifies the as-needed rule in order to require parens if the function body is in an instructions block (surrounded by braces).

always

Examples of incorrect code for this rule with the default "always" option:

/*eslint arrow-parens: ["error", "always"]*/
/*eslint-env es6*/

a => {};
a => a;
a => {'\n'};
a.then(foo => {});
a.then(foo => a);
a(foo => { if (true) {} });

Examples of correct code for this rule with the default "always" option:

/*eslint arrow-parens: ["error", "always"]*/
/*eslint-env es6*/

() => {};
(a) => {};
(a) => a;
(a) => {'\n'}
a.then((foo) => {});
a.then((foo) => { if (true) {} });

If Statements

One of benefits of this option is that it prevents the incorrect use of arrow functions in conditionals:

/*eslint-env es6*/

var a = 1;
var b = 2;
// ...
if (a => b) {
 console.log('bigger');
} else {
 console.log('smaller');
}
// outputs 'bigger', not smaller as expected

The contents of the if statement is an arrow function, not a comparison.

If the arrow function is intentional, it should be wrapped in parens to remove ambiguity.

/*eslint-env es6*/

var a = 1;
var b = 0;
// ...
if ((a) => b) {
 console.log('truthy value returned');
} else {
 console.log('falsey value returned');
}
// outputs 'truthy value returned'

The following is another example of this behavior:

/*eslint-env es6*/

var a = 1, b = 2, c = 3, d = 4;
var f = a => b ? c: d;
// f = ?

f is an arrow function which takes a as an argument and returns the result of b ? c: d.

This should be rewritten like so:

/*eslint-env es6*/

var a = 1, b = 2, c = 3, d = 4;
var f = (a) => b ? c: d;

as-needed

Examples of incorrect code for this rule with the "as-needed" option:

/*eslint arrow-parens: ["error", "as-needed"]*/
/*eslint-env es6*/

(a) => {};
(a) => a;
(a) => {'\n'};
a.then((foo) => {});
a.then((foo) => a);
a((foo) => { if (true) {} });

Examples of correct code for this rule with the "as-needed" option:

/*eslint arrow-parens: ["error", "as-needed"]*/
/*eslint-env es6*/

() => {};
a => {};
a => a;
a => {'\n'};
a.then(foo => {});
a.then(foo => { if (true) {} });
(a, b, c) => a;
(a = 10) => a;
([a, b]) => a;
({a, b}) => a;

requireForBlockBody

Examples of incorrect code for the { "requireForBlockBody": true } option:

/*eslint arrow-parens: [2, "as-needed", { "requireForBlockBody": true }]*/
/*eslint-env es6*/

(a) => a;
a => {};
a => {'\n'};
a.map((x) => x * x);
a.map(x => {
  return x * x;
});
a.then(foo => {});

Examples of correct code for the { "requireForBlockBody": true } option:

/*eslint arrow-parens: [2, "as-needed", { "requireForBlockBody": true }]*/
/*eslint-env es6*/

(a) => {};
(a) => {'\n'};
a => ({});
() => {};
a => a;
a.then((foo) => {});
a.then((foo) => { if (true) {} });
a((foo) => { if (true) {} });
(a, b, c) => a;
(a = 10) => a;
([a, b]) => a;
({a, b}) => a;

require or disallow assignment operator shorthand where possible (operator-assignment)

JavaScript provides shorthand operators that combine variable assignment and some simple mathematical operations. For example, x = x + 4 can be shortened to x += 4. The supported shorthand forms are as follows:

Shorthand | Separate
-----------|------------
 x += y    | x = x + y
 x -= y    | x = x - y
 x *= y    | x = x * y
 x /= y    | x = x / y
 x %= y    | x = x % y
 x <<= y   | x = x << y
 x >>= y   | x = x >> y
 x >>>= y  | x = x >>> y
 x &= y    | x = x & y
 x ^= y    | x = x ^ y
 x |= y    | x = x | y

Rule Details

This rule requires or disallows assignment operator shorthand where possible.

Options

This rule has a single string option:

"always" (default) requires assignment operator shorthand where possible
"never" disallows assignment operator shorthand

always

Examples of incorrect code for this rule with the default "always" option:

/*eslint operator-assignment: ["error", "always"]*/

x = x + y;
x = y * x;
x[0] = x[0] / y;
x.y = x.y << z;

Examples of correct code for this rule with the default "always" option:

/*eslint operator-assignment: ["error", "always"]*/

x = y;
x += y;
x = y * z;
x = (x * y) * z;
x[0] /= y;
x[foo()] = x[foo()] % 2;
x = y + x; // `+` is not always commutative (e.g. x = "abc")

never

Examples of incorrect code for this rule with the "never" option:

/*eslint operator-assignment: ["error", "never"]*/

x *= y;
x ^= (y + z) / foo();

Examples of correct code for this rule with the "never" option:

/*eslint operator-assignment: ["error", "never"]*/

x = x + y;
x.y = x.y / a.b;

When Not To Use It

Use of operator assignment shorthand is a stylistic choice. Leaving this rule turned off would allow developers to choose which style is more readable on a case-by-case basis. Source: http://eslint.org/docs/rules/

DanielaValero/fit-commit-js

Showing 23 of 23 total issues

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

Duplicated Code

Tuning

Refactorings

Further Reading

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

Duplicated Code

Tuning

Refactorings

Further Reading

Function findFileInDirectory has a Cognitive Complexity of 13 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open

Cognitive Complexity

A method's cognitive complexity is based on a few simple rules:

Further reading

Similar blocks of code found in 4 locations. Consider refactoring. Open

Duplicated Code

Tuning

Refactorings

Further Reading

Similar blocks of code found in 4 locations. Consider refactoring. Open

Duplicated Code

Tuning

Refactorings

Further Reading

Similar blocks of code found in 4 locations. Consider refactoring. Open

Duplicated Code

Tuning

Refactorings

Further Reading

Similar blocks of code found in 4 locations. Consider refactoring. Open

Duplicated Code

Tuning

Refactorings

Further Reading

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

Duplicated Code

Tuning

Refactorings

Further Reading

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

Duplicated Code

Tuning

Refactorings

Further Reading

Function comaStringToArray has a Cognitive Complexity of 10 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open

Cognitive Complexity

A method's cognitive complexity is based on a few simple rules:

Further reading

Function findFileInDirectory has 26 lines of code (exceeds 25 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open

Function loadConfigFile has a Cognitive Complexity of 7 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open

Cognitive Complexity

A method's cognitive complexity is based on a few simple rules:

Further reading

Function getSupportedConfigFiles has a Cognitive Complexity of 6 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open

Cognitive Complexity

A method's cognitive complexity is based on a few simple rules:

Further reading

Function validateLine has a Cognitive Complexity of 6 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open

Cognitive Complexity

A method's cognitive complexity is based on a few simple rules:

Further reading

Unary operator '++' used. Open

disallow the unary operators ++ and -- (no-plusplus)

Rule Details

Options

allowForLoopAfterthoughts

Unexpected require(). Open

Enforce require() on the top-level module scope (global-require)

Rule Details

When Not To Use It

Unexpected parentheses around single function argument having a body with no curly braces Open

Require parens in arrow function arguments (arrow-parens)

Rule Details

Options

always

If Statements

as-needed

requireForBlockBody

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

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

Function `findFileInDirectory` has a Cognitive Complexity of 13 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring.
Open

Similar blocks of code found in 4 locations. Consider refactoring.
Open

Similar blocks of code found in 4 locations. Consider refactoring.
Open

Similar blocks of code found in 4 locations. Consider refactoring.
Open

Similar blocks of code found in 4 locations. Consider refactoring.
Open

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

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

Function `comaStringToArray` has a Cognitive Complexity of 10 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring.
Open

Function `findFileInDirectory` has 26 lines of code (exceeds 25 allowed). Consider refactoring.
Open

Function `loadConfigFile` has a Cognitive Complexity of 7 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring.
Open

Function `getSupportedConfigFiles` has a Cognitive Complexity of 6 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring.
Open

Function `validateLine` has a Cognitive Complexity of 6 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring.
Open

Unary operator '++' used.
Open

disallow the unary operators `++` and `--` (no-plusplus)

Unexpected require().
Open

Unexpected parentheses around single function argument having a body with no curly braces
Open

Expected empty line after require statement not followed by another require.
Open

Calls to require() should use string literals
Open

Assignment can be replaced with operator assignment.
Open