Method button
has a Cognitive Complexity of 53 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def button
@edit = session[:edit] # Restore @edit for adv search box
params[:display] = @display if %w[vms storages].include?(@display) # Were we displaying vms/storages
if params[:pressed].starts_with?("vm_", # Handle buttons from sub-items screen
- 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 is too high. [51/11] Open
def button
@edit = session[:edit] # Restore @edit for adv search box
params[:display] = @display if %w[vms storages].include?(@display) # Were we displaying vms/storages
if params[:pressed].starts_with?("vm_", # Handle buttons from sub-items screen
- 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
has 96 lines of code (exceeds 25 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def button
@edit = session[:edit] # Restore @edit for adv search box
params[:display] = @display if %w[vms storages].include?(@display) # Were we displaying vms/storages
if params[:pressed].starts_with?("vm_", # Handle buttons from sub-items screen
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
Class HostController
has 27 methods (exceeds 20 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
class HostController < ApplicationController
before_action :check_privileges
before_action :get_session_data
after_action :cleanup_action
after_action :set_session_data
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
Method edit
has a Cognitive Complexity of 12 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def edit
assert_privileges("host_edit")
if session[:host_items].nil?
@host = find_record_with_rbac(Host, params[: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 edit
has 35 lines of code (exceeds 25 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def edit
assert_privileges("host_edit")
if session[:host_items].nil?
@host = find_record_with_rbac(Host, params[:id])
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
Method host_form_fields
has a Cognitive Complexity of 9 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def host_form_fields
assert_privileges("host_edit")
host = find_record_with_rbac(Host, params[:id])
validate_against = if session.fetch_path(:edit, :validate_against) && params[:button] != "reset"
session.fetch_path(:edit, :validate_against)
- 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
if flash_errors?
javascript_flash
else
javascript_redirect(:controller => @redirect_controller,
:action => @refresh_partial,
- 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 2 locations. Consider refactoring. Open
if @flash_array.nil? && !@refresh_partial # if no button handler ran, show not implemented msg
add_flash(_("Button not yet implemented"), :error)
@refresh_partial = "layouts/flash_msg"
@refresh_div = "flash_msg_div"
elsif @flash_array && @lastaction == "show"
- 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 32.
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
Wrap expressions with varying precedence with parentheses to avoid ambiguity. Open
["#{pfx}_clone", 'vm_rename'].include?(params[:pressed]) && @flash_array.nil?
- Read upRead up
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
- Exclude checks
Looks for expressions containing multiple binary operators
where precedence is ambiguous due to lack of parentheses. For example,
in 1 + 2 * 3
, the multiplication will happen before the addition, but
lexically it appears that the addition will happen first.
The cop does not consider unary operators (ie. !a
or -b
) or comparison
operators (ie. a =~ b
) because those are not ambiguous.
NOTE: Ranges are handled by Lint/AmbiguousRange
.
Example:
# bad
a + b * c
a || b && c
a ** b + c
# good (different precedence)
a + (b * c)
a || (b && c)
(a ** b) + c
# good (same precedence)
a + b + c
a * b / c % d
Duplicate branch body detected. Open
when 'host_edit' then edit_record
- Read upRead up
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
- Exclude checks
Checks that there are no repeated bodies
within if/unless
, case-when
, case-in
and rescue
constructs.
With IgnoreLiteralBranches: true
, branches are not registered
as offenses if they return a basic literal value (string, symbol,
integer, float, rational, complex, true
, false
, or nil
), or
return an array, hash, regexp or range that only contains one of
the above basic literal values.
With IgnoreConstantBranches: true
, branches are not registered
as offenses if they return a constant value.
Example:
# bad
if foo
do_foo
do_something_else
elsif bar
do_foo
do_something_else
end
# good
if foo || bar
do_foo
do_something_else
end
# bad
case x
when foo
do_foo
when bar
do_foo
else
do_something_else
end
# good
case x
when foo, bar
do_foo
else
do_something_else
end
# bad
begin
do_something
rescue FooError
handle_error
rescue BarError
handle_error
end
# good
begin
do_something
rescue FooError, BarError
handle_error
end
Example: IgnoreLiteralBranches: true
# good
case size
when "small" then 100
when "medium" then 250
when "large" then 1000
else 250
end
Example: IgnoreConstantBranches: true
# good
case size
when "small" then SMALL_SIZE
when "medium" then MEDIUM_SIZE
when "large" then LARGE_SIZE
else MEDIUM_SIZE
end