File buttons.rb
has 985 lines of code (exceeds 400 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
module ApplicationController::Buttons
extend ActiveSupport::Concern
included do
include Mixins::PlaybookOptions
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
Method button_set_form_vars
has a Cognitive Complexity of 50 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def button_set_form_vars
@sb[:buttons_node] = true
@edit = {}
if session[:resolve] && session[:resolve][:instance_name]
@resolve = session[:resolve]
- Read upRead up
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
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
Method buttons_get_node_info
has a Cognitive Complexity of 42 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def buttons_get_node_info(node)
nodetype = node.split("_")
# initializing variables to hold data for selected node
@custom_button = nil
@sb[:button_groups] = nil
- Read upRead up
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
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
Method automate_button_field_changed
has a Cognitive Complexity of 41 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def automate_button_field_changed
assert_privileges(feature_by_action)
unless params[:target_class]
@edit = session[:edit]
- Read upRead up
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
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
Method ab_button_add
has a Cognitive Complexity of 39 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def ab_button_add
assert_privileges("ab_button_new")
@sb[:active_tab] = "ab_options_tab"
@resolve = session[:resolve]
name = @edit[:new][:instance_name].presence || @edit[:new][:other_name]
- Read upRead up
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
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
Cyclomatic complexity for button_set_form_vars is too high. [32/11] Open
def button_set_form_vars
@sb[:buttons_node] = true
@edit = {}
if session[:resolve] && session[:resolve][:instance_name]
@resolve = session[:resolve]
- Read upRead up
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
- Exclude checks
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
Method ab_group_reorder
has a Cognitive Complexity of 24 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def ab_group_reorder
assert_privileges("ab_group_reorder")
case params[:button]
when "cancel"
add_flash(_("Button Group Reorder cancelled"))
- Read upRead up
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
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
Cyclomatic complexity for buttons_get_node_info is too high. [26/11] Open
def buttons_get_node_info(node)
nodetype = node.split("_")
# initializing variables to hold data for selected node
@custom_button = nil
@sb[:button_groups] = nil
- Read upRead up
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
- Exclude checks
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
Cyclomatic complexity for ab_button_add is too high. [25/11] Open
def ab_button_add
assert_privileges("ab_button_new")
@sb[:active_tab] = "ab_options_tab"
@resolve = session[:resolve]
name = @edit[:new][:instance_name].presence || @edit[:new][:other_name]
- Read upRead up
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
- Exclude checks
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
Method button_set_form_vars
has 82 lines of code (exceeds 25 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def button_set_form_vars
@sb[:buttons_node] = true
@edit = {}
if session[:resolve] && session[:resolve][:instance_name]
@resolve = session[:resolve]
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
Method ab_button_save
has a Cognitive Complexity of 23 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def ab_button_save
assert_privileges("ab_button_edit")
@resolve = session[:resolve]
attrs = {}
@sb[:active_tab] = "ab_options_tab"
- Read upRead up
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
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
Method custom_buttons
has a Cognitive Complexity of 21 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def custom_buttons(ids = nil, display_options = {})
button = CustomButton.find(params[:button_id])
cls = custom_button_class_model(button.applies_to_class)
@explorer = true if BASE_MODEL_EXPLORER_CLASSES.include?(cls)
ids ||= params[:id] unless relationship_table_screen? && @record.nil?
- Read upRead up
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
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
Cyclomatic complexity for automate_button_field_changed is too high. [21/11] Open
def automate_button_field_changed
assert_privileges(feature_by_action)
unless params[:target_class]
@edit = session[:edit]
- Read upRead up
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
- Exclude checks
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
Cyclomatic complexity for group_set_form_vars is too high. [21/11] Open
def group_set_form_vars
@sb[:buttons_node] = true
if session[:resolve]
@resolve = session[:resolve]
else
- Read upRead up
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
- Exclude checks
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
Method group_reorder_field_changed
has a Cognitive Complexity of 20 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def group_reorder_field_changed
assert_privileges("ab_group_reorder")
if params['selected_fields']
return unless load_edit("group_reorder", "replace_cell__explorer")
- Read upRead up
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
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
Method group_reorder_set_form_vars
has a Cognitive Complexity of 20 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def group_reorder_set_form_vars
@edit = {}
@edit[:new] = {}
@edit[:current] = {}
@edit[:key] = "group_reorder"
- Read upRead up
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
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
Method group_set_form_vars
has a Cognitive Complexity of 19 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def group_set_form_vars
@sb[:buttons_node] = true
if session[:resolve]
@resolve = session[:resolve]
else
- Read upRead up
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
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
Method ab_button_add
has 62 lines of code (exceeds 25 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def ab_button_add
assert_privileges("ab_button_new")
@sb[:active_tab] = "ab_options_tab"
@resolve = session[:resolve]
name = @edit[:new][:instance_name].presence || @edit[:new][:other_name]
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
Cyclomatic complexity for button_valid? is too high. [17/11] Open
def button_valid?(button_hash = @edit[:new])
add_flash(_("Button Name is required"), :error) if button_hash[:name].blank? || button_hash[:name].strip.blank?
if button_hash[:button_icon].blank?
add_flash(_("Button Icon must be selected"), :error)
- Read upRead up
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
- Exclude checks
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
Cyclomatic complexity for custom_buttons is too high. [17/11] Open
def custom_buttons(ids = nil, display_options = {})
button = CustomButton.find(params[:button_id])
cls = custom_button_class_model(button.applies_to_class)
@explorer = true if BASE_MODEL_EXPLORER_CLASSES.include?(cls)
ids ||= params[:id] unless relationship_table_screen? && @record.nil?
- Read upRead up
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
- Exclude checks
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
Cyclomatic complexity for build_resolve_screen is too high. [16/11] Open
def build_resolve_screen
@resolve ||= {}
@resolve[:new] ||= {}
@resolve[:new][:starting_object] ||= "SYSTEM/PROCESS"
@resolve[:new][:readonly] = false unless @resolve[:new][:readonly]
- Read upRead up
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
- Exclude checks
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
Method build_resolve_screen
has a Cognitive Complexity of 16 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def build_resolve_screen
@resolve ||= {}
@resolve[:new] ||= {}
@resolve[:new][:starting_object] ||= "SYSTEM/PROCESS"
@resolve[:new][:readonly] = false unless @resolve[:new][:readonly]
- Read upRead up
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
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
Method buttons_get_node_info
has 52 lines of code (exceeds 25 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def buttons_get_node_info(node)
nodetype = node.split("_")
# initializing variables to hold data for selected node
@custom_button = nil
@sb[:button_groups] = nil
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
Method button_valid?
has a Cognitive Complexity of 15 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def button_valid?(button_hash = @edit[:new])
add_flash(_("Button Name is required"), :error) if button_hash[:name].blank? || button_hash[:name].strip.blank?
if button_hash[:button_icon].blank?
add_flash(_("Button Icon must be selected"), :error)
- Read upRead up
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
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
Cyclomatic complexity for ab_group_reorder is too high. [13/11] Open
def ab_group_reorder
assert_privileges("ab_group_reorder")
case params[:button]
when "cancel"
add_flash(_("Button Group Reorder cancelled"))
- Read upRead up
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
- Exclude checks
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
Method custom_buttons
has 46 lines of code (exceeds 25 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def custom_buttons(ids = nil, display_options = {})
button = CustomButton.find(params[:button_id])
cls = custom_button_class_model(button.applies_to_class)
@explorer = true if BASE_MODEL_EXPLORER_CLASSES.include?(cls)
ids ||= params[:id] unless relationship_table_screen? && @record.nil?
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
Method automate_button_field_changed
has 46 lines of code (exceeds 25 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def automate_button_field_changed
assert_privileges(feature_by_action)
unless params[:target_class]
@edit = session[:edit]
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
Cyclomatic complexity for ab_button_save is too high. [12/11] Open
def ab_button_save
assert_privileges("ab_button_edit")
@resolve = session[:resolve]
attrs = {}
@sb[:active_tab] = "ab_options_tab"
- Read upRead up
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
- Exclude checks
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
Method ab_button_save
has 44 lines of code (exceeds 25 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def ab_button_save
assert_privileges("ab_button_edit")
@resolve = session[:resolve]
attrs = {}
@sb[:active_tab] = "ab_options_tab"
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
Method button_set_record_vars
has a Cognitive Complexity of 14 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def button_set_record_vars(button)
button.name = @edit[:new][:name]
button.description = @edit[:new][:description]
button.applies_to_class = x_active_tree == :ab_tree ? @resolve[:target_class] : "ServiceTemplate"
button.applies_to_id = x_active_tree == :ab_tree ? nil : @sb[:applies_to_id]
- Read upRead up
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
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
Method ab_group_reorder
has 40 lines of code (exceeds 25 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def ab_group_reorder
assert_privileges("ab_group_reorder")
case params[:button]
when "cancel"
add_flash(_("Button Group Reorder cancelled"))
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
Method group_set_form_vars
has 38 lines of code (exceeds 25 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def group_set_form_vars
@sb[:buttons_node] = true
if session[:resolve]
@resolve = session[:resolve]
else
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
Method button_set_record_vars
has 33 lines of code (exceeds 25 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def button_set_record_vars(button)
button.name = @edit[:new][:name]
button.description = @edit[:new][:description]
button.applies_to_class = x_active_tree == :ab_tree ? @resolve[:target_class] : "ServiceTemplate"
button.applies_to_id = x_active_tree == :ab_tree ? nil : @sb[:applies_to_id]
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
Method group_button_add_save
has a Cognitive Complexity of 10 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def group_button_add_save(typ)
assert_privileges(params[:button] == "add" ? "ab_group_new" : "ab_group_edit")
if typ == "update"
update_page_content("saved")
else
- Read upRead up
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
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
Method group_reorder_set_form_vars
has 27 lines of code (exceeds 25 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def group_reorder_set_form_vars
@edit = {}
@edit[:new] = {}
@edit[:current] = {}
@edit[:key] = "group_reorder"
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
Method move_cols_down
has a Cognitive Complexity of 9 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def move_cols_down
if params[:selected_fields].blank? || params[:selected_fields][0] == ""
add_flash(_("No fields were selected to move down"), :error)
return
end
- Read upRead up
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
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
Method group_new_edit
has a Cognitive Complexity of 8 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def group_new_edit(typ)
@record = @custom_button_set = typ == "new" ? CustomButtonSet.new : CustomButtonSet.find(params[:id])
if typ == "edit" && x_node.split('_').last == "ub"
add_flash(_("'Unassigned Button Group' can not be edited"), :error)
get_node_info
- Read upRead up
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
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
Avoid deeply nested control flow statements. Open
@resolve[:new][:attrs].push(attr) unless @resolve[:new][:attrs].include?(attr)
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
Method button_set_playbook_form_vars
has a Cognitive Complexity of 7 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def button_set_playbook_form_vars
@edit[:ansible_playbooks] = ServiceTemplateAnsiblePlaybook.order(:name).pluck(:name, :id) || []
service_template = ServiceTemplate.find_by(:name => @custom_button.uri_attributes[:service_template_name])
@edit[:new][:service_template_id] = service_template.try(:id)
- Read upRead up
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
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
Method move_cols_top
has a Cognitive Complexity of 6 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def move_cols_top
if params[:selected_fields].blank? || params[:selected_fields][0] == ""
add_flash(_("No fields were selected to move top"), :error)
return
end
- Read upRead up
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
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
Method button_new_edit
has a Cognitive Complexity of 6 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def button_new_edit(typ)
@record = @custom_button = typ == "new" ? CustomButton.new : CustomButton.find(params[:id])
@sb[:active_tab] = "ab_options_tab"
button_set_form_vars
@in_a_form = true
- Read upRead up
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
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
Method move_cols_bottom
has a Cognitive Complexity of 6 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def move_cols_bottom
if params[:selected_fields].blank? || params[:selected_fields][0] == ""
add_flash(_("No fields were selected to move bottom"), :error)
return
end
- Read upRead up
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
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
Method move_cols_up
has a Cognitive Complexity of 6 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def move_cols_up
if params[:selected_fields].blank? || params[:selected_fields][0] == ""
add_flash(_("No fields were selected to move up"), :error)
return
end
- Read upRead up
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
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
Avoid more than 3 levels of block nesting. Open
@resolve[:new][:attrs].push(attr) unless @resolve[:new][:attrs].include?(attr)
- Read upRead up
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
- Exclude checks
Checks for excessive nesting of conditional and looping constructs.
You can configure if blocks are considered using the CountBlocks
option. When set to false
(the default) blocks are not counted
towards the nesting level. Set to true
to count blocks as well.
The maximum level of nesting allowed is configurable.
Similar blocks of code found in 3 locations. Consider refactoring. Open
if !consecutive
add_flash(_("Select only one or consecutive fields to move down"), :error)
else
if last_idx < @edit[:new][:fields].length - 1
insert_idx = last_idx + 1 # Insert before the element after the last one
- Read upRead up
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
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 70.
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
Similar blocks of code found in 3 locations. Consider refactoring. Open
ApplicationController::AE_MAX_RESOLUTION_FIELDS.times do |i|
f = ("attribute_" + (i + 1).to_s)
v = ("value_" + (i + 1).to_s)
@edit[:new][:attrs][i][0] = params[f] if params[f.to_sym]
@edit[:new][:attrs][i][1] = params[v] if params[v.to_sym]
- Read upRead up
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
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
Identical blocks of code found in 2 locations. Consider refactoring. Open
button_order&.each do |bidx| # show assigned buttons in order they were saved
@record.members.each do |b|
next if bidx != b.id
button = {
- Read upRead up
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
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 48.
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
Similar blocks of code found in 3 locations. Consider refactoring. Open
if !consecutive
add_flash(_("Select only one or consecutive fields to move up"), :error)
else
if first_idx.positive?
@edit[:new][:fields][first_idx..last_idx].reverse_each do |field|
- Read upRead up
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
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 46.
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
Identical blocks of code found in 2 locations. Consider refactoring. Open
@breadcrumbs = []
drop_breadcrumb(:name => _("Edit of Button"), :url => "/miq_ae_customization/button_edit")
@lastaction = "automate_button"
@layout = "miq_ae_automate_button"
if @switch_tab
- Read upRead up
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
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 43.
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
Identical blocks of code found in 2 locations. Consider refactoring. Open
@breadcrumbs = []
drop_breadcrumb(:name => _("Edit of Button"), :url => "/miq_ae_customization/button_edit")
@lastaction = "automate_button"
@layout = "miq_ae_automate_button"
if @switch_tab
- Read upRead up
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
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 43.
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
Identical blocks of code found in 2 locations. Consider refactoring. Open
if @custom_button.visibility && @custom_button.visibility[:roles] && @custom_button.visibility[:roles][0] != "_ALL_"
MiqUserRole.all.sort_by(&:name).each do |r|
@sb[:user_roles].push(r.name) if @custom_button.visibility[:roles].include?(r.name)
end
end
- Read upRead up
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
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 39.
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
Similar blocks of code found in 2 locations. Consider refactoring. Open
def ab_button_cancel(typ)
if typ == "update"
add_flash(_("Edit of Custom Button \"%{name}\" was cancelled by the user") % {:name => @edit[:current][:name]})
else
add_flash(_("Add of new Custom Button was cancelled by the user"))
- Read upRead up
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
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 35.
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
Similar blocks of code found in 2 locations. Consider refactoring. Open
def group_button_cancel(typ)
if typ == "update"
add_flash(_("Edit of Button Group \"%{name}\" was cancelled by the user") % {:name => @edit[:current][:name]})
else
add_flash(_("Add of new Button Group was cancelled by the user"))
- Read upRead up
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
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 35.
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