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

• Cognitive Complexity docs
• Cognitive Complexity: A new way of measuring understandability

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

• Cognitive Complexity docs
• Cognitive Complexity: A new way of measuring understandability

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

• Cognitive Complexity docs
• Cognitive Complexity: A new way of measuring understandability

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

• Cognitive Complexity docs
• Cognitive Complexity: A new way of measuring understandability

enforce a maximum number of statements allowed in function blocks (max-statements)

The max-statements rule allows you to specify the maximum number of statements allowed in a function.

function foo() {
  var bar = 1; // one statement
  var baz = 2; // two statements
  var qux = 3; // three statements
}

Rule Details

This rule enforces a maximum number of statements allowed in function blocks.

Options

This rule has a number or object option:

• "max" (default 10) enforces a maximum number of statements allows in function blocks

Deprecated: The object property maximum is deprecated; please use the object property max instead.

This rule has an object option:

• "ignoreTopLevelFunctions": true ignores top-level functions

max

Examples of incorrect code for this rule with the default { "max": 10 } option:

/*eslint max-statements: ["error", 10]*/
/*eslint-env es6*/

function foo() {
  var foo1 = 1;
  var foo2 = 2;
  var foo3 = 3;
  var foo4 = 4;
  var foo5 = 5;
  var foo6 = 6;
  var foo7 = 7;
  var foo8 = 8;
  var foo9 = 9;
  var foo10 = 10;

  var foo11 = 11; // Too many.
}

let foo = () => {
  var foo1 = 1;
  var foo2 = 2;
  var foo3 = 3;
  var foo4 = 4;
  var foo5 = 5;
  var foo6 = 6;
  var foo7 = 7;
  var foo8 = 8;
  var foo9 = 9;
  var foo10 = 10;

  var foo11 = 11; // Too many.
};

Examples of correct code for this rule with the default { "max": 10 } option:

/*eslint max-statements: ["error", 10]*/
/*eslint-env es6*/

function foo() {
  var foo1 = 1;
  var foo2 = 2;
  var foo3 = 3;
  var foo4 = 4;
  var foo5 = 5;
  var foo6 = 6;
  var foo7 = 7;
  var foo8 = 8;
  var foo9 = 9;
  var foo10 = 10;
  return function () {

    // The number of statements in the inner function does not count toward the
    // statement maximum.

    return 42;
  };
}

let foo = () => {
  var foo1 = 1;
  var foo2 = 2;
  var foo3 = 3;
  var foo4 = 4;
  var foo5 = 5;
  var foo6 = 6;
  var foo7 = 7;
  var foo8 = 8;
  var foo9 = 9;
  var foo10 = 10;
  return function () {

    // The number of statements in the inner function does not count toward the
    // statement maximum.

    return 42;
  };
}

ignoreTopLevelFunctions

Examples of additional correct code for this rule with the { "max": 10 }, { "ignoreTopLevelFunctions": true } options:

/*eslint max-statements: ["error", 10, { "ignoreTopLevelFunctions": true }]*/

function foo() {
  var foo1 = 1;
  var foo2 = 2;
  var foo3 = 3;
  var foo4 = 4;
  var foo5 = 5;
  var foo6 = 6;
  var foo7 = 7;
  var foo8 = 8;
  var foo9 = 9;
  var foo10 = 10;
  var foo11 = 11;
}

Related Rules

• [complexity](complexity.md)
• [max-depth](max-depth.md)
• [max-len](max-len.md)
• [max-nested-callbacks](max-nested-callbacks.md)
• [max-params](max-params.md) Source: http://eslint.org/docs/rules/

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

• Cognitive Complexity docs
• Cognitive Complexity: A new way of measuring understandability

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

• Cognitive Complexity docs
• Cognitive Complexity: A new way of measuring understandability

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

• Cognitive Complexity docs
• Cognitive Complexity: A new way of measuring understandability

disallow variable redeclaration (no-redeclare)

In JavaScript, it's possible to redeclare the same variable name using var. This can lead to confusion as to where the variable is actually declared and initialized.

Rule Details

This rule is aimed at eliminating variables that have multiple declarations in the same scope.

Examples of incorrect code for this rule:

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

var a = 3;
var a = 10;

Examples of correct code for this rule:

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

var a = 3;
// ...
a = 10;

Options

This rule takes one optional argument, an object with a boolean property "builtinGlobals". It defaults to false. If set to true, this rule also checks redeclaration of built-in globals, such as Object, Array, Number...

builtinGlobals

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

/*eslint no-redeclare: ["error", { "builtinGlobals": true }]*/

var Object = 0;

Examples of incorrect code for the { "builtinGlobals": true } option and the browser environment:

/*eslint no-redeclare: ["error", { "builtinGlobals": true }]*/
/*eslint-env browser*/

var top = 0;

The browser environment has many built-in global variables (for example, top). Some of built-in global variables cannot be redeclared. Source: http://eslint.org/docs/rules/

Disallow Case Statement Fallthrough (no-fallthrough)

The switch statement in JavaScript is one of the more error-prone constructs of the language thanks in part to the ability to "fall through" from one case to the next. For example:

switch(foo) {
    case 1:
        doSomething();

    case 2:
        doSomethingElse();
}

In this example, if foo is 1, then execution will flow through both cases, as the first falls through to the second. You can prevent this by using break, as in this example:

switch(foo) {
    case 1:
        doSomething();
        break;

    case 2:
        doSomethingElse();
}

That works fine when you don't want a fallthrough, but what if the fallthrough is intentional, there is no way to indicate that in the language. It's considered a best practice to always indicate when a fallthrough is intentional using a comment which matches the /falls?\s?through/i regular expression:

switch(foo) {
    case 1:
        doSomething();
        // falls through

    case 2:
        doSomethingElse();
}

switch(foo) {
    case 1:
        doSomething();
        // fall through

    case 2:
        doSomethingElse();
}

switch(foo) {
    case 1:
        doSomething();
        // fallsthrough

    case 2:
        doSomethingElse();
}

In this example, there is no confusion as to the expected behavior. It is clear that the first case is meant to fall through to the second case.

Rule Details

This rule is aimed at eliminating unintentional fallthrough of one case to the other. As such, it flags any fallthrough scenarios that are not marked by a comment.

Examples of incorrect code for this rule:

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

switch(foo) {
    case 1:
        doSomething();

    case 2:
        doSomething();
}

Examples of correct code for this rule:

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

switch(foo) {
    case 1:
        doSomething();
        break;

    case 2:
        doSomething();
}

function bar(foo) {
    switch(foo) {
        case 1:
            doSomething();
            return;

        case 2:
            doSomething();
    }
}

switch(foo) {
    case 1:
        doSomething();
        throw new Error("Boo!");

    case 2:
        doSomething();
}

switch(foo) {
    case 1:
    case 2:
        doSomething();
}

switch(foo) {
    case 1:
        doSomething();
        // falls through

    case 2:
        doSomething();
}

Note that the last case statement in these examples does not cause a warning because there is nothing to fall through into.

Options

This rule accepts a single options argument:

• Set the commentPattern option to a regular expression string to change the test for intentional fallthrough comment

commentPattern

Examples of correct code for the { "commentPattern": "break[\\s\\w]*omitted" } option:

/*eslint no-fallthrough: ["error", { "commentPattern": "break[\\s\\w]*omitted" }]*/

switch(foo) {
    case 1:
        doSomething();
        // break omitted

    case 2:
        doSomething();
}

switch(foo) {
    case 1:
        doSomething();
        // caution: break is omitted intentionally

    default:
        doSomething();
}

When Not To Use It

If you don't want to enforce that each case statement should end with a throw, return, break, or comment, then you can safely turn this rule off.

Related Rules

• [default-case](default-case.md) Source: http://eslint.org/docs/rules/

Disallow unnecessary concatenation of strings (no-useless-concat)

It's unnecessary to concatenate two strings together, such as:

var foo = "a" + "b";

This code is likely the result of refactoring where a variable was removed from the concatenation (such as "a" + b + "b"). In such a case, the concatenation isn't important and the code can be rewritten as:

var foo = "ab";

Rule Details

This rule aims to flag the concatenation of 2 literals when they could be combined into a single literal. Literals can be strings or template literals.

Examples of incorrect code for this rule:

/*eslint no-useless-concat: "error"*/
/*eslint-env es6*/

// these are the same as "10"
var a = `some` + `string`;
var a = '1' + '0';
var a = '1' + `0`;
var a = `1` + '0';
var a = `1` + `0`;

Examples of correct code for this rule:

/*eslint no-useless-concat: "error"*/

// when a non string is included
var c = a + b;
var c = '1' + a;
var a = 1 + '1';
var c = 1 - 2;
// when the string concatenation is multiline
var c = "foo" +
    "bar";

When Not To Use It

If you don't want to be notified about unnecessary string concatenation, you can safely disable this rule. Source: http://eslint.org/docs/rules/

disallow variable redeclaration (no-redeclare)

In JavaScript, it's possible to redeclare the same variable name using var. This can lead to confusion as to where the variable is actually declared and initialized.

Rule Details

This rule is aimed at eliminating variables that have multiple declarations in the same scope.

Examples of incorrect code for this rule:

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

var a = 3;
var a = 10;

Examples of correct code for this rule:

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

var a = 3;
// ...
a = 10;

Options

This rule takes one optional argument, an object with a boolean property "builtinGlobals". It defaults to false. If set to true, this rule also checks redeclaration of built-in globals, such as Object, Array, Number...

builtinGlobals

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

/*eslint no-redeclare: ["error", { "builtinGlobals": true }]*/

var Object = 0;

Examples of incorrect code for the { "builtinGlobals": true } option and the browser environment:

/*eslint no-redeclare: ["error", { "builtinGlobals": true }]*/
/*eslint-env browser*/

var top = 0;

The browser environment has many built-in global variables (for example, top). Some of built-in global variables cannot be redeclared. Source: http://eslint.org/docs/rules/

disallow unreachable code after return, throw, continue, and break statements (no-unreachable)

Because the return, throw, break, and continue statements unconditionally exit a block of code, any statements after them cannot be executed. Unreachable statements are usually a mistake.

function fn() {
    x = 1;
    return x;
    x = 3; // this will never execute
}

Rule Details

This rule disallows unreachable code after return, throw, continue, and break statements.

Examples of incorrect code for this rule:

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

function foo() {
    return true;
    console.log("done");
}

function bar() {
    throw new Error("Oops!");
    console.log("done");
}

while(value) {
    break;
    console.log("done");
}

throw new Error("Oops!");
console.log("done");

function baz() {
    if (Math.random() < 0.5) {
        return;
    } else {
        throw new Error();
    }
    console.log("done");
}

for (;;) {}
console.log("done");

Examples of correct code for this rule, because of JavaScript function and variable hoisting:

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

function foo() {
    return bar();
    function bar() {
        return 1;
    }
}

function bar() {
    return x;
    var x;
}

switch (foo) {
    case 1:
        break;
        var x;
}

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

disallow variable redeclaration (no-redeclare)

In JavaScript, it's possible to redeclare the same variable name using var. This can lead to confusion as to where the variable is actually declared and initialized.

Rule Details

This rule is aimed at eliminating variables that have multiple declarations in the same scope.

Examples of incorrect code for this rule:

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

var a = 3;
var a = 10;

Examples of correct code for this rule:

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

var a = 3;
// ...
a = 10;

Options

This rule takes one optional argument, an object with a boolean property "builtinGlobals". It defaults to false. If set to true, this rule also checks redeclaration of built-in globals, such as Object, Array, Number...

builtinGlobals

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

/*eslint no-redeclare: ["error", { "builtinGlobals": true }]*/

var Object = 0;

Examples of incorrect code for the { "builtinGlobals": true } option and the browser environment:

/*eslint no-redeclare: ["error", { "builtinGlobals": true }]*/
/*eslint-env browser*/

var top = 0;

The browser environment has many built-in global variables (for example, top). Some of built-in global variables cannot be redeclared. Source: http://eslint.org/docs/rules/

Disallow unnecessary concatenation of strings (no-useless-concat)

It's unnecessary to concatenate two strings together, such as:

var foo = "a" + "b";

This code is likely the result of refactoring where a variable was removed from the concatenation (such as "a" + b + "b"). In such a case, the concatenation isn't important and the code can be rewritten as:

var foo = "ab";

Rule Details

This rule aims to flag the concatenation of 2 literals when they could be combined into a single literal. Literals can be strings or template literals.

Examples of incorrect code for this rule:

/*eslint no-useless-concat: "error"*/
/*eslint-env es6*/

// these are the same as "10"
var a = `some` + `string`;
var a = '1' + '0';
var a = '1' + `0`;
var a = `1` + '0';
var a = `1` + `0`;

Examples of correct code for this rule:

/*eslint no-useless-concat: "error"*/

// when a non string is included
var c = a + b;
var c = '1' + a;
var a = 1 + '1';
var c = 1 - 2;
// when the string concatenation is multiline
var c = "foo" +
    "bar";

When Not To Use It

If you don't want to be notified about unnecessary string concatenation, you can safely disable this rule. Source: http://eslint.org/docs/rules/

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 335.

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

• Extract Method
• Extract Class
• Form Template Method
• Introduce Null Object
• Pull Up Method
• Pull Up Field
• Substitute Algorithm

Further Reading

• Don't Repeat Yourself on the C2 Wiki
• Duplicated Code on SourceMaking
• Refactoring: Improving the Design of Existing Code by Martin Fowler. Duplicated Code, p76

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 335.

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

• Extract Method
• Extract Class
• Form Template Method
• Introduce Null Object
• Pull Up Method
• Pull Up Field
• Substitute Algorithm

Further Reading

• Don't Repeat Yourself on the C2 Wiki
• Duplicated Code on SourceMaking
• Refactoring: Improving the Design of Existing Code by Martin Fowler. Duplicated Code, p76

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 69.

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

• Extract Method
• Extract Class
• Form Template Method
• Introduce Null Object
• Pull Up Method
• Pull Up Field
• Substitute Algorithm

Further Reading

• Don't Repeat Yourself on the C2 Wiki
• Duplicated Code on SourceMaking
• Refactoring: Improving the Design of Existing Code by Martin Fowler. Duplicated Code, p76

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 69.

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

• Extract Method
• Extract Class
• Form Template Method
• Introduce Null Object
• Pull Up Method
• Pull Up Field
• Substitute Algorithm

Further Reading

• Don't Repeat Yourself on the C2 Wiki
• Duplicated Code on SourceMaking
• Refactoring: Improving the Design of Existing Code by Martin Fowler. Duplicated Code, p76

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 68.

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

• Extract Method
• Extract Class
• Form Template Method
• Introduce Null Object
• Pull Up Method
• Pull Up Field
• Substitute Algorithm

Further Reading

• Don't Repeat Yourself on the C2 Wiki
• Duplicated Code on SourceMaking
• Refactoring: Improving the Design of Existing Code by Martin Fowler. Duplicated Code, p76

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 68.

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

• Extract Method
• Extract Class
• Form Template Method
• Introduce Null Object
• Pull Up Method
• Pull Up Field
• Substitute Algorithm

Further Reading

• Don't Repeat Yourself on the C2 Wiki
• Duplicated Code on SourceMaking
• Refactoring: Improving the Design of Existing Code by Martin Fowler. Duplicated Code, p76

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 67.

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

• Extract Method
• Extract Class
• Form Template Method
• Introduce Null Object
• Pull Up Method
• Pull Up Field
• Substitute Algorithm

Further Reading

• Don't Repeat Yourself on the C2 Wiki
• Duplicated Code on SourceMaking
• Refactoring: Improving the Design of Existing Code by Martin Fowler. Duplicated Code, p76

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 54.

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

• Extract Method
• Extract Class
• Form Template Method
• Introduce Null Object
• Pull Up Method
• Pull Up Field
• Substitute Algorithm

Further Reading

• Don't Repeat Yourself on the C2 Wiki
• Duplicated Code on SourceMaking
• Refactoring: Improving the Design of Existing Code by Martin Fowler. Duplicated Code, p76

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 51.

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

• Extract Method
• Extract Class
• Form Template Method
• Introduce Null Object
• Pull Up Method
• Pull Up Field
• Substitute Algorithm

Further Reading

• Don't Repeat Yourself on the C2 Wiki
• Duplicated Code on SourceMaking
• Refactoring: Improving the Design of Existing Code by Martin Fowler. Duplicated Code, p76