Method validate
has a Cognitive Complexity of 60 (exceeds 11 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def validate(values)
# => Input - A hash keyed by field name with entered values
# => Output - true || false
#
# Update @dialogs adding error keys to fields that don't validate
- 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 init_from_dialog
has a Cognitive Complexity of 35 (exceeds 11 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def init_from_dialog(init_values)
@dialogs[:dialogs].keys.each do |dialog_name|
get_all_fields(dialog_name).each_pair do |field_name, field_values|
next unless init_values[field_name].nil?
next if field_values[:display] == :ignore
- 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 allowed_tags
has a Cognitive Complexity of 34 (exceeds 11 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def allowed_tags(options = {})
return @tags unless @tags.nil?
region_number = options.delete(:region_number)
- 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 allowed_tags is too high. [16/11] Open
def allowed_tags(options = {})
return @tags unless @tags.nil?
region_number = options.delete(:region_number)
- Read upRead up
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
- Exclude checks
This cop 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.
Cyclomatic complexity for validate is too high. [15/11] Open
def validate(values)
# => Input - A hash keyed by field name with entered values
# => Output - true || false
#
# Update @dialogs adding error keys to fields that don't validate
- Read upRead up
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
- Exclude checks
This cop 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.
Method get_field
has a Cognitive Complexity of 22 (exceeds 11 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def get_field(field_name, dialog_name = nil, refresh_values = true)
field_name = field_name.to_sym
dialog_name = find_dialog_from_field_name(field_name) if dialog_name.nil?
field = @dialogs.fetch_path(:dialogs, dialog_name.to_sym, :fields, field_name)
return {} unless field
- 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 dialog_name_from_automate
has a Cognitive Complexity of 20 (exceeds 11 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def dialog_name_from_automate(message = 'get_dialog_name', input_fields = [:request_type], extra_attrs = {})
return nil if self.class.automate_dialog_request.nil?
_log.info("Querying Automate Profile for dialog name")
attrs = {'request' => self.class.automate_dialog_request, 'message' => message}
- 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 get_ems_folders
has a Cognitive Complexity of 19 (exceeds 11 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def get_ems_folders(folder, dh = {}, full_path = "")
path = full_path
if folder.evm_object_class == :EmsFolder
if folder.hidden
return dh if folder.name != 'vm'
- 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 set_or_default_field_values
has a Cognitive Complexity of 19 (exceeds 11 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def set_or_default_field_values(values)
field_names = values.keys
fields do |fn, f, _dn, _d|
if field_names.include?(fn)
if f.key?(:values)
- 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 set_ws_field_value_by_display_name
has a Cognitive Complexity of 15 (exceeds 11 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def set_ws_field_value_by_display_name(values, key, data, dialog_name, dlg_fields, obj_key = :name)
value = data.delete(key)
dlg_field = dlg_fields[key]
data_type = dlg_field[:data_type]
- 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 allowed_customization_templates
has a Cognitive Complexity of 14 (exceeds 11 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def allowed_customization_templates(_options = {})
result = []
customization_template_id = get_value(@values[:customization_template_id])
@values[:customization_template_script] = nil if customization_template_id.nil?
prov_typ = "vm"
- 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 set_ws_field_value
has a Cognitive Complexity of 13 (exceeds 11 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def set_ws_field_value(values, key, data, dialog_name, dlg_fields)
value = data.delete(key)
dlg_field = dlg_fields[key]
data_type = dlg_field[:data_type]
- 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 validate_data_types
has a Cognitive Complexity of 13 (exceeds 11 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def validate_data_types(value, fld, msg, valid)
case fld[:data_type]
when :integer
unless is_integer?(value)
fld[:error] = msg
- 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 set_value_from_list
has a Cognitive Complexity of 13 (exceeds 11 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def set_value_from_list(fn, f, value, values = nil, partial_key = false)
@values[fn] = [nil, nil]
values = f[:values] if values.nil?
unless value.nil?
@values[fn] = values.to_a.detect do |v|
- 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 parameter lists longer than 5 parameters. [7/5] Open
def set_ws_field_value_by_id_or_name(values, dlg_field, data, dialog_name, dlg_fields, data_key = nil, id_klass = nil)
- Read upRead up
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
- Exclude checks
This cop checks for methods with too many parameters. The maximum number of parameters is configurable. Keyword arguments can optionally be excluded from the total count.
Method parse_ws_string
has a Cognitive Complexity of 12 (exceeds 11 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def self.parse_ws_string(text_input, options = {})
return parse_request_parameter_hash(text_input, options) if text_input.kind_of?(Hash)
return {} unless text_input.kind_of?(String)
deprecated_warn = "method: parse_ws_string, arg Type => String"
- 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 parameter lists longer than 5 parameters. [6/5] Open
def set_ws_field_value_by_display_name(values, key, data, dialog_name, dlg_fields, obj_key = :name)
- Read upRead up
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
- Exclude checks
This cop checks for methods with too many parameters. The maximum number of parameters is configurable. Keyword arguments can optionally be excluded from the total count.
Avoid more than 3 levels of block nesting. Open
[found.id, found.send(obj_key)] if found
- Read upRead up
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
- Exclude checks
This cop 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.
Avoid more than 3 levels of block nesting. Open
unless field[:auto_select_single] == false
@values[field_name] = field[:values].to_a.first
end
- Read upRead up
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
- Exclude checks
This cop 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.
Avoid more than 3 levels of block nesting. Open
unless currently_selected.nil? || field[:values].key?(currently_selected)
@values[field_name] = [nil, nil]
end
- Read upRead up
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
- Exclude checks
This cop 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.
Avoid more than 3 levels of block nesting. Open
unless fld[:error].nil?
valid = false
next
end
- Read upRead up
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
- Exclude checks
This cop 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.
Avoid more than 3 levels of block nesting. Open
[found.id, found.name] if found
- Read upRead up
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
- Exclude checks
This cop 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.
Avoid more than 3 levels of block nesting. Open
if value.blank?
fld[:error] = "#{required_description(dlg, fld)} is required"
valid = false
next
end
- Read upRead up
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
- Exclude checks
This cop 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.
Avoid more than 3 levels of block nesting. Open
[set_value, field_values[set_value]] if field_values.key?(set_value)
- Read upRead up
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
- Exclude checks
This cop 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.
Avoid more than 3 levels of block nesting. Open
unless f[:values].blank?
sorted_values = f[:values].sort
selected_key = sorted_values.first.first
end
- Read upRead up
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
- Exclude checks
This cop 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.
Use match?
instead of =~
when MatchData
is not used. Open
tag[:children] = if tag[:children].first.last[:name] =~ /^\d/
- Read upRead up
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
- Exclude checks
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
Use match?
instead of =~
when MatchData
is not used. Open
value = fld[:data_type] =~ /array_/ ? values[f] : get_value(values[f])
- Read upRead up
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
- Exclude checks
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
Similar blocks of code found in 2 locations. Consider refactoring. Open
def allowed_clusters(_options = {})
all_clusters = EmsCluster.where(:ems_id => get_source_and_targets[:ems].try(:id))
filtered_targets = process_filter(:cluster_filter, EmsCluster, all_clusters)
allowed_ci(:cluster, [:respool, :host, :folder], filtered_targets.collect(&:id))
- 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 29.
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 allowed_respools(_options = {})
all_resource_pools = ResourcePool.where(:ems_id => get_source_and_targets[:ems].try(:id))
filtered_targets = process_filter(:rp_filter, ResourcePool, all_resource_pools)
allowed_ci(:respool, [:cluster, :host, :folder], filtered_targets.collect(&:id))
- 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 29.
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
Avoid when
branches without a body. Open
when :boolean
- Read upRead up
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
- Exclude checks
This cop checks for the presence of when
branches without a body.
Example:
# bad
case foo
when bar then 1
when baz then # nothing
end
Example:
# good
case foo
when bar then 1
when baz then 2
end
Avoid when
branches without a body. Open
when :button
- Read upRead up
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
- Exclude checks
This cop checks for the presence of when
branches without a body.
Example:
# bad
case foo
when bar then 1
when baz then # nothing
end
Example:
# good
case foo
when bar then 1
when baz then 2
end