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

Checks that the cyclomatic complexity of methods is not higher than the configured maximum. The cyclomatic complexity is the number of linearly independent paths through a method. The algorithm counts decision points and adds one.

An if statement (or unless or ?:) increases the complexity by one. An else branch does not, since it doesn't add a decision point. The && operator (or keyword and) can be converted to a nested if statement, and ||/or is shorthand for a sequence of ifs, so they also add one. Loops can be said to have an exit condition, so they add one. Blocks that are calls to builtin iteration methods (e.g. `ary.map{...}) also add one, others are ignored.

def each_child_node(*types)               # count begins: 1
  unless block_given?                     # unless: +1
    return to_enum(__method__, *types)

  children.each do |child|                # each{}: +1
    next unless child.is_a?(Node)         # unless: +1

    yield child if types.empty? ||        # if: +1, ||: +1
                   types.include?(child.type)
  end

  self
end                                       # total: 6

Checks that the cyclomatic complexity of methods is not higher than the configured maximum. The cyclomatic complexity is the number of linearly independent paths through a method. The algorithm counts decision points and adds one.

An if statement (or unless or ?:) increases the complexity by one. An else branch does not, since it doesn't add a decision point. The && operator (or keyword and) can be converted to a nested if statement, and ||/or is shorthand for a sequence of ifs, so they also add one. Loops can be said to have an exit condition, so they add one. Blocks that are calls to builtin iteration methods (e.g. `ary.map{...}) also add one, others are ignored.

def each_child_node(*types)               # count begins: 1
  unless block_given?                     # unless: +1
    return to_enum(__method__, *types)

  children.each do |child|                # each{}: +1
    next unless child.is_a?(Node)         # unless: +1

    yield child if types.empty? ||        # if: +1, ||: +1
                   types.include?(child.type)
  end

  self
end                                       # total: 6

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

Checks for methods with too many parameters.

The maximum number of parameters is configurable. Keyword arguments can optionally be excluded from the total count, as they add less complexity than positional or optional parameters.

Any number of arguments for initialize method inside a block of Struct.new and Data.define like this is always allowed:

Struct.new(:one, :two, :three, :four, :five, keyword_init: true) do
  def initialize(one:, two:, three:, four:, five:)
  end
end

This is because checking the number of arguments of the initialize method does not make sense.

NOTE: Explicit block argument &block is not counted to prevent erroneous change that is avoided by making block argument implicit.

Example: Max: 3

# good
def foo(a, b, c = 1)
end

Example: Max: 2

# bad
def foo(a, b, c = 1)
end

Example: CountKeywordArgs: true (default)

# counts keyword args towards the maximum

# bad (assuming Max is 3)
def foo(a, b, c, d: 1)
end

# good (assuming Max is 3)
def foo(a, b, c: 1)
end

Example: CountKeywordArgs: false

# don't count keyword args towards the maximum

# good (assuming Max is 3)
def foo(a, b, c, d: 1)
end

This cop also checks for the maximum number of optional parameters. This can be configured using the MaxOptionalParameters config option.

Example: MaxOptionalParameters: 3 (default)

# good
def foo(a = 1, b = 2, c = 3)
end

Example: MaxOptionalParameters: 2

# bad
def foo(a = 1, b = 2, c = 3)
end

In Ruby 2.4, String#match?, Regexp#match? and Symbol#match? have been added. The methods are faster than match. Because the methods avoid creating a MatchData object or saving backref. So, when MatchData is not used, use match? instead of match.

Example:

# bad
def foo
  if x =~ /re/
    do_something
  end
end

# bad
def foo
  if x.match(/re/)
    do_something
  end
end

# bad
def foo
  if /re/ === x
    do_something
  end
end

# good
def foo
  if x.match?(/re/)
    do_something
  end
end

# good
def foo
  if x =~ /re/
    do_something(Regexp.last_match)
  end
end

# good
def foo
  if x.match(/re/)
    do_something($~)
  end
end

# good
def foo
  if /re/ === x
    do_something($~)
  end
end

In Ruby 2.4, String#match?, Regexp#match? and Symbol#match? have been added. The methods are faster than match. Because the methods avoid creating a MatchData object or saving backref. So, when MatchData is not used, use match? instead of match.

Example:

# bad
def foo
  if x =~ /re/
    do_something
  end
end

# bad
def foo
  if x.match(/re/)
    do_something
  end
end

# bad
def foo
  if /re/ === x
    do_something
  end
end

# good
def foo
  if x.match?(/re/)
    do_something
  end
end

# good
def foo
  if x =~ /re/
    do_something(Regexp.last_match)
  end
end

# good
def foo
  if x.match(/re/)
    do_something($~)
  end
end

# good
def foo
  if /re/ === x
    do_something($~)
  end
end

Requires a gemspec to have rubygems_mfa_required metadata set.

This setting tells RubyGems that MFA (Multi-Factor Authentication) is required for accounts to be able perform privileged operations, such as (see RubyGems' documentation for the full list of privileged operations):

• gem push
• gem yank
• gem owner --add/remove
• adding or removing owners using gem ownership page

This helps make your gem more secure, as users can be more confident that gem updates were pushed by maintainers.

Example:

# bad
Gem::Specification.new do |spec|
  # no `rubygems_mfa_required` metadata specified
end

# good
Gem::Specification.new do |spec|
  spec.metadata = {
    'rubygems_mfa_required' => 'true'
  }
end

# good
Gem::Specification.new do |spec|
  spec.metadata['rubygems_mfa_required'] = 'true'
end

# bad
Gem::Specification.new do |spec|
  spec.metadata = {
    'rubygems_mfa_required' => 'false'
  }
end

# good
Gem::Specification.new do |spec|
  spec.metadata = {
    'rubygems_mfa_required' => 'true'
  }
end

# bad
Gem::Specification.new do |spec|
  spec.metadata['rubygems_mfa_required'] = 'false'
end

# good
Gem::Specification.new do |spec|
  spec.metadata['rubygems_mfa_required'] = 'true'
end

Checks for the use of local variable names from an outer scope in block arguments or block-local variables. This mirrors the warning given by ruby -cw prior to Ruby 2.6: "shadowing outer local variable - foo".

NOTE: Shadowing of variables in block passed to Ractor.new is allowed because Ractor should not access outer variables. eg. following style is encouraged:

```ruby
worker_id, pipe = env
Ractor.new(worker_id, pipe) do |worker_id, pipe|
end
```

Example:

# bad

def some_method
  foo = 1

  2.times do |foo| # shadowing outer `foo`
    do_something(foo)
  end
end

Example:

# good

def some_method
  foo = 1

  2.times do |bar|
    do_something(bar)
  end
end

Checks for the first argument to IO.read, IO.binread, IO.write, IO.binwrite, IO.foreach, and IO.readlines.

If argument starts with a pipe character ('|') and the receiver is the IO class, a subprocess is created in the same way as Kernel#open, and its output is returned. Kernel#open may allow unintentional command injection, which is the reason these IO methods are a security risk. Consider to use File.read to disable the behavior of subprocess invocation.

Safety:

This cop is unsafe because false positive will occur if the variable passed as the first argument is a command that is not a file path.

Example:

# bad
IO.read(path)
IO.read('path')

# good
File.read(path)
File.read('path')
IO.read('| command') # Allow intentional command invocation.

In Ruby 2.4, String#match?, Regexp#match? and Symbol#match? have been added. The methods are faster than match. Because the methods avoid creating a MatchData object or saving backref. So, when MatchData is not used, use match? instead of match.

Example:

# bad
def foo
  if x =~ /re/
    do_something
  end
end

# bad
def foo
  if x.match(/re/)
    do_something
  end
end

# bad
def foo
  if /re/ === x
    do_something
  end
end

# good
def foo
  if x.match?(/re/)
    do_something
  end
end

# good
def foo
  if x =~ /re/
    do_something(Regexp.last_match)
  end
end

# good
def foo
  if x.match(/re/)
    do_something($~)
  end
end

# good
def foo
  if /re/ === x
    do_something($~)
  end
end