SiLeBAT/FSK-Lab

View on GitHub
de.bund.bfr.knime.fsklab.metadata.model.tests/src/de/bund/bfr/knime/fsklab/rakip/RakipUtilTest.java

Summary

Maintainability
D
2 days
Test Coverage

File RakipUtilTest.java has 442 lines of code (exceeds 250 allowed). Consider refactoring.
Open

package de.bund.bfr.knime.fsklab.rakip;

import static org.junit.Assert.assertEquals;
import static org.junit.Assert.assertFalse;
import static org.junit.Assert.assertNotNull;

Method testConvertParameter has 40 lines of code (exceeds 25 allowed). Consider refactoring.
Open

    @Test
    public void testConvertParameter() {

        Parameter param;
        {

Method testConvertStudy has 37 lines of code (exceeds 25 allowed). Consider refactoring.
Open

    @Test
    public void testConvertStudy() {

        Study study;
        {

Method testConvertHazard has 33 lines of code (exceeds 25 allowed). Consider refactoring.
Open

    @Test
    public void testConvertHazard() {

        Hazard hazard;
        {

Method testConvertPopulationGroup has 31 lines of code (exceeds 25 allowed). Consider refactoring.
Open

    @Test
    public void testConvertPopulationGroup() {

        PopulationGroup populationGroup;
        {

Method testConvertProduct has 27 lines of code (exceeds 25 allowed). Consider refactoring.
Open

    @Test
    public void testConvertProduct() {

        Product product;
        {

Define a constant instead of duplicating this literal "description" 8 times.
Open

            deprecated.populationDescription.add("description");

Duplicated string literals make the process of refactoring error-prone, since you must be sure to update all occurrences.

On the other hand, constants can be referenced from many places, but only need to be updated in a single place.

Noncompliant Code Example

With the default threshold of 3:

public void run() {
  prepare("action1");                              // Noncompliant - "action1" is duplicated 3 times
  execute("action1");
  release("action1");
}

@SuppressWarning("all")                            // Compliant - annotations are excluded
private void method1() { /* ... */ }
@SuppressWarning("all")
private void method2() { /* ... */ }

public String method3(String a) {
  System.out.println("'" + a + "'");               // Compliant - literal "'" has less than 5 characters and is excluded
  return "";                                       // Compliant - literal "" has less than 5 characters and is excluded
}

Compliant Solution

private static final String ACTION_1 = "action1";  // Compliant

public void run() {
  prepare(ACTION_1);                               // Compliant
  execute(ACTION_1);
  release(ACTION_1);
}

Exceptions

To prevent generating some false-positives, literals having less than 5 characters are excluded.

Define a constant instead of duplicating this literal "country" 5 times.
Open

            deprecated.country.add("country");

Duplicated string literals make the process of refactoring error-prone, since you must be sure to update all occurrences.

On the other hand, constants can be referenced from many places, but only need to be updated in a single place.

Noncompliant Code Example

With the default threshold of 3:

public void run() {
  prepare("action1");                              // Noncompliant - "action1" is duplicated 3 times
  execute("action1");
  release("action1");
}

@SuppressWarning("all")                            // Compliant - annotations are excluded
private void method1() { /* ... */ }
@SuppressWarning("all")
private void method2() { /* ... */ }

public String method3(String a) {
  System.out.println("'" + a + "'");               // Compliant - literal "'" has less than 5 characters and is excluded
  return "";                                       // Compliant - literal "" has less than 5 characters and is excluded
}

Compliant Solution

private static final String ACTION_1 = "action1";  // Compliant

public void run() {
  prepare(ACTION_1);                               // Compliant
  execute(ACTION_1);
  release(ACTION_1);
}

Exceptions

To prevent generating some false-positives, literals having less than 5 characters are excluded.

Define a constant instead of duplicating this literal "region" 3 times.
Open

            deprecated.region.add("region");

Duplicated string literals make the process of refactoring error-prone, since you must be sure to update all occurrences.

On the other hand, constants can be referenced from many places, but only need to be updated in a single place.

Noncompliant Code Example

With the default threshold of 3:

public void run() {
  prepare("action1");                              // Noncompliant - "action1" is duplicated 3 times
  execute("action1");
  release("action1");
}

@SuppressWarning("all")                            // Compliant - annotations are excluded
private void method1() { /* ... */ }
@SuppressWarning("all")
private void method2() { /* ... */ }

public String method3(String a) {
  System.out.println("'" + a + "'");               // Compliant - literal "'" has less than 5 characters and is excluded
  return "";                                       // Compliant - literal "" has less than 5 characters and is excluded
}

Compliant Solution

private static final String ACTION_1 = "action1";  // Compliant

public void run() {
  prepare(ACTION_1);                               // Compliant
  execute(ACTION_1);
  release(ACTION_1);
}

Exceptions

To prevent generating some false-positives, literals having less than 5 characters are excluded.

Similar blocks of code found in 2 locations. Consider refactoring.
Open

        {
            final de.bund.bfr.knime.fsklab.rakip.StudySample deprecated = new de.bund.bfr.knime.fsklab.rakip.StudySample();
            deprecated.sample = "sample";
            deprecated.collectionProtocol = "collectionProtocol";
            deprecated.samplingStrategy = "samplingStrategy";
de.bund.bfr.knime.fsklab.metadata.model.tests/src/de/bund/bfr/knime/fsklab/rakip/RakipUtilTest.java on lines 369..382

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 112.

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

Further Reading

Similar blocks of code found in 2 locations. Consider refactoring.
Open

        {
            final de.bund.bfr.knime.fsklab.rakip.Assay deprecated = new de.bund.bfr.knime.fsklab.rakip.Assay();
            deprecated.name = "name";
            deprecated.description = "description";
            deprecated.moisturePercentage = "moisturePercentage";
de.bund.bfr.knime.fsklab.metadata.model.tests/src/de/bund/bfr/knime/fsklab/rakip/RakipUtilTest.java on lines 296..309

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 112.

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

Further Reading

There are no issues that match your filters.

Category
Status