Function validate
has a Cognitive Complexity of 133 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
exports.validate = function (xmlData, options) {
options = Object.assign({}, defaultOptions, options);
//xmlData = xmlData.replace(/(\r\n|\n|\r)/gm,"");//make it single line
//xmlData = xmlData.replace(/(^\s*<\?xml.*?\?>)/g,"");//Remove XML starting tag
- Read upRead up
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
Function validate
has 139 lines of code (exceeds 25 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
exports.validate = function (xmlData, options) {
options = Object.assign({}, defaultOptions, options);
//xmlData = xmlData.replace(/(\r\n|\n|\r)/gm,"");//make it single line
//xmlData = xmlData.replace(/(^\s*<\?xml.*?\?>)/g,"");//Remove XML starting tag
File validator.js
has 327 lines of code (exceeds 250 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
'use strict';
const util = require('./util');
const defaultOptions = {
Function readCommentAndCDATA
has a Cognitive Complexity of 23 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
function readCommentAndCDATA(xmlData, i) {
if (xmlData.length > i + 5 && xmlData[i + 1] === '-' && xmlData[i + 2] === '-') {
//comment
for (i += 3; i < xmlData.length; i++) {
if (xmlData[i] === '-' && xmlData[i + 1] === '-' && xmlData[i + 2] === '>') {
- Read upRead up
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
Function readCommentAndCDATA
has 46 lines of code (exceeds 25 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
function readCommentAndCDATA(xmlData, i) {
if (xmlData.length > i + 5 && xmlData[i + 1] === '-' && xmlData[i + 2] === '-') {
//comment
for (i += 3; i < xmlData.length; i++) {
if (xmlData[i] === '-' && xmlData[i + 1] === '-' && xmlData[i + 2] === '>') {
Function readAttributeStr
has a Cognitive Complexity of 14 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
function readAttributeStr(xmlData, i) {
let attrStr = '';
let startChar = '';
let tagClosed = false;
for (; i < xmlData.length; i++) {
- Read upRead up
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
Consider simplifying this complex logical expression. Open
} else if (
xmlData.length > i + 9 &&
xmlData[i + 1] === '[' &&
xmlData[i + 2] === 'C' &&
xmlData[i + 3] === 'D' &&
Consider simplifying this complex logical expression. Open
} else if (
xmlData.length > i + 8 &&
xmlData[i + 1] === 'D' &&
xmlData[i + 2] === 'O' &&
xmlData[i + 3] === 'C' &&
Function validateAttributeString
has a Cognitive Complexity of 11 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
function validateAttributeString(attrStr, options) {
//console.log("start:"+attrStr+":end");
//if(attrStr.trim().length === 0) return true; //empty string
- Read upRead up
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
Function readAttributeStr
has 27 lines of code (exceeds 25 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
function readAttributeStr(xmlData, i) {
let attrStr = '';
let startChar = '';
let tagClosed = false;
for (; i < xmlData.length; i++) {
Function readPI
has a Cognitive Complexity of 9 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
function readPI(xmlData, i) {
const start = i;
for (; i < xmlData.length; i++) {
if (xmlData[i] == '?' || xmlData[i] == ' ') {
//tagname
- Read upRead up
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
if (!validateTagName(tagName)) {
let msg;
if (tagName.trim().length === 0) {
msg = "Invalid space after '<'.";
} else {
Avoid deeply nested control flow statements. Open
if (xmlData[i] === '/') {
//closing tag
closingTag = true;
i++;
}
Avoid deeply nested control flow statements. Open
for (i++; i < xmlData.length; i++) {
if (xmlData[i] === '<') {
if (xmlData[i + 1] === '!') {
//comment or CADATA
i++;
Avoid deeply nested control flow statements. Open
if (result === false) {
return getErrorObject('InvalidAttr', "Attributes for '"+tagName+"' have open quote.", getLineNumberForPosition(xmlData, i));
}
Avoid deeply nested control flow statements. Open
for (; i < xmlData.length &&
xmlData[i] !== '>' &&
xmlData[i] !== ' ' &&
xmlData[i] !== '\t' &&
xmlData[i] !== '\n' &&
Avoid deeply nested control flow statements. Open
if (tagName[tagName.length - 1] === '/') {
//self closing tag without attributes
tagName = tagName.substring(0, tagName.length - 1);
//continue;
i--;
Avoid deeply nested control flow statements. Open
if (xmlData[i] === '<') {
i--;
}
Avoid deeply nested control flow statements. Open
if (attrStr[attrStr.length - 1] === '/') {
//self closing tag
const attrStrStart = i - attrStr.length;
attrStr = attrStr.substring(0, attrStr.length - 1);
const isValid = validateAttributeString(attrStr, options);
Avoid deeply nested control flow statements. Open
if (angleBracketsCount === 0) {
break;
}
Avoid deeply nested control flow statements. Open
if (xmlData[i] === ']' && xmlData[i + 1] === ']' && xmlData[i + 2] === '>') {
i += 2;
break;
}
Consider simplifying this complex logical expression. Open
if (xmlData[i] === '!') {
i = readCommentAndCDATA(xmlData, i);
continue;
} else {
let closingTag = false;
Function validateAmpersand
has a Cognitive Complexity of 7 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
function validateAmpersand(xmlData, i) {
// https://www.w3.org/TR/xml/#dt-charref
i++;
if (xmlData[i] === ';')
return -1;
- Read upRead up
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 too many return
statements within this function. Open
return getErrorObject('InvalidXml', "Extra text at the end", getLineNumberForPosition(xmlData, i));
Avoid too many return
statements within this function. Open
return getErrorObject('InvalidChar', "char '&' is not expected.", getLineNumberForPosition(xmlData, i));
Avoid too many return
statements within this function. Open
return getErrorObject('InvalidXml', "Invalid '"+
JSON.stringify(tags.map(t => t.tagName), null, 4).replace(/\r?\n/g, '')+
"' found.", {line: 1, col: 1});
Avoid too many return
statements within this function. Open
return getErrorObject('InvalidTag', "Closing tag '"+tagName+"' has not been opened.", getLineNumberForPosition(xmlData, tagStartPos));
Avoid too many return
statements within this function. Open
return getErrorObject(isValid.err.code, isValid.err.msg, getLineNumberForPosition(xmlData, i - attrStr.length + isValid.err.line));
Avoid too many return
statements within this function. Open
return getErrorObject('InvalidXml', 'Multiple possible root nodes found.', getLineNumberForPosition(xmlData, i));
Avoid too many return
statements within this function. Open
return getErrorObject('InvalidTag', "Closing tag '"+tagName+"' doesn't have proper closing.", getLineNumberForPosition(xmlData, i));
Avoid too many return
statements within this function. Open
return getErrorObject('InvalidAttr', "Attribute '"+attrName+"' is repeated.", getPositionFromMatch(matches[i]));
Avoid too many return
statements within this function. Open
return getErrorObject('InvalidTag', "Unclosed tag '"+tags[0].tagName+"'.", getLineNumberForPosition(xmlData, tags[0].tagStartPos));
Avoid too many return
statements within this function. Open
return getErrorObject('InvalidChar', "char '"+xmlData[i]+"' is not expected.", getLineNumberForPosition(xmlData, i));
Avoid too many return
statements within this function. Open
return getErrorObject('InvalidTag', "Closing tag '"+tagName+"' can't have attributes or invalid starting.", getLineNumberForPosition(xmlData, tagStartPos));
Avoid too many return
statements within this function. Open
if (i.err) return i;
Avoid too many return
statements within this function. Open
return true;
Avoid too many return
statements within this function. Open
return getErrorObject('InvalidTag',
"Expected closing tag '"+otg.tagName+"' (opened in line "+openPos.line+", col "+openPos.col+") instead of closing tag '"+tagName+"'.",
getLineNumberForPosition(xmlData, tagStartPos));
Avoid too many return
statements within this function. Open
return getErrorObject('InvalidXml', 'Start tag expected.', 1);
Avoid too many return
statements within this function. Open
return true;
Function validateNumberAmpersand
has a Cognitive Complexity of 6 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
function validateNumberAmpersand(xmlData, i) {
let re = /\d/;
if (xmlData[i] === 'x') {
i++;
re = /[\da-fA-F]/;
- Read upRead up
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
Similar blocks of code found in 2 locations. Consider refactoring. Open
} else if (
xmlData.length > i + 8 &&
xmlData[i + 1] === 'D' &&
xmlData[i + 2] === 'O' &&
xmlData[i + 3] === 'C' &&
- Read upRead up
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 126.
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
} else if (
xmlData.length > i + 9 &&
xmlData[i + 1] === '[' &&
xmlData[i + 2] === 'C' &&
xmlData[i + 3] === 'D' &&
- Read upRead up
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 126.
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
for (i += 8; i < xmlData.length; i++) {
if (xmlData[i] === ']' && xmlData[i + 1] === ']' && xmlData[i + 2] === '>') {
i += 2;
break;
}
- Read upRead up
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 59.
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
for (i += 3; i < xmlData.length; i++) {
if (xmlData[i] === '-' && xmlData[i + 1] === '-' && xmlData[i + 2] === '>') {
i += 2;
break;
}
- Read upRead up
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 59.
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