SpeciesFileGroup/taxonworks

View on GitHub
app/controllers/collection_objects_controller.rb

Summary

Maintainability
F
3 days
Test Coverage

File collection_objects_controller.rb has 461 lines of code (exceeds 250 allowed). Consider refactoring.
Open

class CollectionObjectsController < ApplicationController
  include DataControllerConfiguration::ProjectDataControllerConfiguration

  before_action :set_collection_object, only: [
    :show, :edit, :update, :destroy, :navigation, :containerize,
Severity: Minor
Found in app/controllers/collection_objects_controller.rb - About 7 hrs to fix

    Method has too many lines. [67/25]
    Open

      def filter_params
        a = params.permit(
          :recent,
          Queries::CollectingEvent::Filter::ATTRIBUTES,
          :ancestor_id,

    This cop checks if the length of a method exceeds some maximum value. Comment lines can optionally be ignored. The maximum allowed length is configurable.

    Method has too many lines. [67/25]
    Open

      def api_params
        a = params.permit(
          :recent,
          Queries::CollectingEvent::Filter::ATTRIBUTES,
          :ancestor_id,

    This cop checks if the length of a method exceeds some maximum value. Comment lines can optionally be ignored. The maximum allowed length is configurable.

    Class CollectionObjectsController has 46 methods (exceeds 20 allowed). Consider refactoring.
    Open

    class CollectionObjectsController < ApplicationController
      include DataControllerConfiguration::ProjectDataControllerConfiguration
    
      before_action :set_collection_object, only: [
        :show, :edit, :update, :destroy, :navigation, :containerize,
    Severity: Minor
    Found in app/controllers/collection_objects_controller.rb - About 6 hrs to fix

      Method filter_params has 67 lines of code (exceeds 25 allowed). Consider refactoring.
      Open

        def filter_params
          a = params.permit(
            :recent,
            Queries::CollectingEvent::Filter::ATTRIBUTES,
            :ancestor_id,
      Severity: Major
      Found in app/controllers/collection_objects_controller.rb - About 2 hrs to fix

        Method api_params has 67 lines of code (exceeds 25 allowed). Consider refactoring.
        Open

          def api_params
            a = params.permit(
              :recent,
              Queries::CollectingEvent::Filter::ATTRIBUTES,
              :ancestor_id,
        Severity: Major
        Found in app/controllers/collection_objects_controller.rb - About 2 hrs to fix

          Method create_simple_batch_load has a Cognitive Complexity of 7 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring.
          Open

            def create_simple_batch_load
              if params[:file] && digested_cookie_exists?(
                  params[:file].tempfile,
                  :batch_collection_objects_md5)
                @result = BatchLoad::Import::CollectionObjects.new(batch_params.merge(user_map))
          Severity: Minor
          Found in app/controllers/collection_objects_controller.rb - About 35 mins to fix

          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 create_castor_batch_load has a Cognitive Complexity of 6 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring.
          Open

            def create_castor_batch_load
              if params[:file] && digested_cookie_exists?(params[:file].tempfile, :Castor_collection_objects_md5)
                @result = BatchLoad::Import::CollectionObjects::CastorInterpreter.new(**batch_params)
                if @result.create
                  flash[:notice] = "Successfully proccessed file, #{@result.total_records_created} items were created."
          Severity: Minor
          Found in app/controllers/collection_objects_controller.rb - About 25 mins to fix

          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 create_buffered_batch_load has a Cognitive Complexity of 6 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring.
          Open

            def create_buffered_batch_load
              if params[:file] && digested_cookie_exists?(params[:file].tempfile, :Buffered_collection_objects_md5)
                @result = BatchLoad::Import::CollectionObjects::BufferedInterpreter.new(**batch_params)
                if @result.create
                  flash[:notice] = "Successfully proccessed file, #{@result.total_records_created} items were created."
          Severity: Minor
          Found in app/controllers/collection_objects_controller.rb - About 25 mins to fix

          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

          create returns a model which is always truthy.
          Open

                if @result.create

          This cop identifies possible cases where Active Record save! or related should be used instead of save because the model might have failed to save and an exception is better than unhandled failure.

          This will allow: - update or save calls, assigned to a variable, or used as a condition in an if/unless/case statement. - create calls, assigned to a variable that then has a call to persisted?. - calls if the result is explicitly returned from methods and blocks, or provided as arguments. - calls whose signature doesn't look like an ActiveRecord persistence method.

          By default it will also allow implicit returns from methods and blocks. that behavior can be turned off with AllowImplicitReturn: false.

          You can permit receivers that are giving false positives with AllowedReceivers: []

          Example:

          # bad
          user.save
          user.update(name: 'Joe')
          user.find_or_create_by(name: 'Joe')
          user.destroy
          
          # good
          unless user.save
            # ...
          end
          user.save!
          user.update!(name: 'Joe')
          user.find_or_create_by!(name: 'Joe')
          user.destroy!
          
          user = User.find_or_create_by(name: 'Joe')
          unless user.persisted?
            # ...
          end
          
          def save_user
            return user.save
          end

          Example: AllowImplicitReturn: true (default)

          # good
          users.each { |u| u.save }
          
          def save_user
            user.save
          end

          Example: AllowImplicitReturn: false

          # bad
          users.each { |u| u.save }
          def save_user
            user.save
          end
          
          # good
          users.each { |u| u.save! }
          
          def save_user
            user.save!
          end
          
          def save_user
            return user.save
          end

          Example: AllowedReceivers: ['merchant.customers', 'Service::Mailer']

          # bad
          merchant.create
          customers.builder.save
          Mailer.create
          
          module Service::Mailer
            self.create
          end
          
          # good
          merchant.customers.create
          MerchantService.merchant.customers.destroy
          Service::Mailer.update(message: 'Message')
          ::Service::Mailer.update
          Services::Service::Mailer.update(message: 'Message')
          Service::Mailer::update

          create returns a model which is always truthy.
          Open

                if @result.create

          This cop identifies possible cases where Active Record save! or related should be used instead of save because the model might have failed to save and an exception is better than unhandled failure.

          This will allow: - update or save calls, assigned to a variable, or used as a condition in an if/unless/case statement. - create calls, assigned to a variable that then has a call to persisted?. - calls if the result is explicitly returned from methods and blocks, or provided as arguments. - calls whose signature doesn't look like an ActiveRecord persistence method.

          By default it will also allow implicit returns from methods and blocks. that behavior can be turned off with AllowImplicitReturn: false.

          You can permit receivers that are giving false positives with AllowedReceivers: []

          Example:

          # bad
          user.save
          user.update(name: 'Joe')
          user.find_or_create_by(name: 'Joe')
          user.destroy
          
          # good
          unless user.save
            # ...
          end
          user.save!
          user.update!(name: 'Joe')
          user.find_or_create_by!(name: 'Joe')
          user.destroy!
          
          user = User.find_or_create_by(name: 'Joe')
          unless user.persisted?
            # ...
          end
          
          def save_user
            return user.save
          end

          Example: AllowImplicitReturn: true (default)

          # good
          users.each { |u| u.save }
          
          def save_user
            user.save
          end

          Example: AllowImplicitReturn: false

          # bad
          users.each { |u| u.save }
          def save_user
            user.save
          end
          
          # good
          users.each { |u| u.save! }
          
          def save_user
            user.save!
          end
          
          def save_user
            return user.save
          end

          Example: AllowedReceivers: ['merchant.customers', 'Service::Mailer']

          # bad
          merchant.create
          customers.builder.save
          Mailer.create
          
          module Service::Mailer
            self.create
          end
          
          # good
          merchant.customers.create
          MerchantService.merchant.customers.destroy
          Service::Mailer.update(message: 'Message')
          ::Service::Mailer.update
          Services::Service::Mailer.update(message: 'Message')
          Service::Mailer::update

          Use destroy! instead of destroy if the return value is not checked.
          Open

              @collection_object.destroy

          This cop identifies possible cases where Active Record save! or related should be used instead of save because the model might have failed to save and an exception is better than unhandled failure.

          This will allow: - update or save calls, assigned to a variable, or used as a condition in an if/unless/case statement. - create calls, assigned to a variable that then has a call to persisted?. - calls if the result is explicitly returned from methods and blocks, or provided as arguments. - calls whose signature doesn't look like an ActiveRecord persistence method.

          By default it will also allow implicit returns from methods and blocks. that behavior can be turned off with AllowImplicitReturn: false.

          You can permit receivers that are giving false positives with AllowedReceivers: []

          Example:

          # bad
          user.save
          user.update(name: 'Joe')
          user.find_or_create_by(name: 'Joe')
          user.destroy
          
          # good
          unless user.save
            # ...
          end
          user.save!
          user.update!(name: 'Joe')
          user.find_or_create_by!(name: 'Joe')
          user.destroy!
          
          user = User.find_or_create_by(name: 'Joe')
          unless user.persisted?
            # ...
          end
          
          def save_user
            return user.save
          end

          Example: AllowImplicitReturn: true (default)

          # good
          users.each { |u| u.save }
          
          def save_user
            user.save
          end

          Example: AllowImplicitReturn: false

          # bad
          users.each { |u| u.save }
          def save_user
            user.save
          end
          
          # good
          users.each { |u| u.save! }
          
          def save_user
            user.save!
          end
          
          def save_user
            return user.save
          end

          Example: AllowedReceivers: ['merchant.customers', 'Service::Mailer']

          # bad
          merchant.create
          customers.builder.save
          Mailer.create
          
          module Service::Mailer
            self.create
          end
          
          # good
          merchant.customers.create
          MerchantService.merchant.customers.destroy
          Service::Mailer.update(message: 'Message')
          ::Service::Mailer.update
          Services::Service::Mailer.update(message: 'Message')
          Service::Mailer::update

          create returns a model which is always truthy.
          Open

                if @result.create

          This cop identifies possible cases where Active Record save! or related should be used instead of save because the model might have failed to save and an exception is better than unhandled failure.

          This will allow: - update or save calls, assigned to a variable, or used as a condition in an if/unless/case statement. - create calls, assigned to a variable that then has a call to persisted?. - calls if the result is explicitly returned from methods and blocks, or provided as arguments. - calls whose signature doesn't look like an ActiveRecord persistence method.

          By default it will also allow implicit returns from methods and blocks. that behavior can be turned off with AllowImplicitReturn: false.

          You can permit receivers that are giving false positives with AllowedReceivers: []

          Example:

          # bad
          user.save
          user.update(name: 'Joe')
          user.find_or_create_by(name: 'Joe')
          user.destroy
          
          # good
          unless user.save
            # ...
          end
          user.save!
          user.update!(name: 'Joe')
          user.find_or_create_by!(name: 'Joe')
          user.destroy!
          
          user = User.find_or_create_by(name: 'Joe')
          unless user.persisted?
            # ...
          end
          
          def save_user
            return user.save
          end

          Example: AllowImplicitReturn: true (default)

          # good
          users.each { |u| u.save }
          
          def save_user
            user.save
          end

          Example: AllowImplicitReturn: false

          # bad
          users.each { |u| u.save }
          def save_user
            user.save
          end
          
          # good
          users.each { |u| u.save! }
          
          def save_user
            user.save!
          end
          
          def save_user
            return user.save
          end

          Example: AllowedReceivers: ['merchant.customers', 'Service::Mailer']

          # bad
          merchant.create
          customers.builder.save
          Mailer.create
          
          module Service::Mailer
            self.create
          end
          
          # good
          merchant.customers.create
          MerchantService.merchant.customers.destroy
          Service::Mailer.update(message: 'Message')
          ::Service::Mailer.update
          Services::Service::Mailer.update(message: 'Message')
          Service::Mailer::update

          TODO found
          Open

            # TODO: remove for filter

          TODO found
          Open

            # TODO: not used?

          TODO found
          Open

              # TODO: check user_id: []

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

            def api_params
              a = params.permit(
                :recent,
                Queries::CollectingEvent::Filter::ATTRIBUTES,
                :ancestor_id,
          Severity: Major
          Found in app/controllers/collection_objects_controller.rb and 1 other location - About 2 hrs to fix
          app/controllers/collection_objects_controller.rb on lines 411..486

          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 100.

          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

            def filter_params
              a = params.permit(
                :recent,
                Queries::CollectingEvent::Filter::ATTRIBUTES,
                :ancestor_id,
          Severity: Major
          Found in app/controllers/collection_objects_controller.rb and 1 other location - About 2 hrs to fix
          app/controllers/collection_objects_controller.rb on lines 489..562

          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 100.

          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

            def create
              @collection_object = CollectionObject.new(collection_object_params)
          
              respond_to do |format|
                if @collection_object.save
          Severity: Major
          Found in app/controllers/collection_objects_controller.rb and 1 other location - About 1 hr to fix
          app/controllers/taxon_name_relationships_controller.rb on lines 39..49

          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 53.

          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 9 locations. Consider refactoring.
          Open

            def create_castor_batch_load
              if params[:file] && digested_cookie_exists?(params[:file].tempfile, :Castor_collection_objects_md5)
                @result = BatchLoad::Import::CollectionObjects::CastorInterpreter.new(**batch_params)
                if @result.create
                  flash[:notice] = "Successfully proccessed file, #{@result.total_records_created} items were created."
          Severity: Major
          Found in app/controllers/collection_objects_controller.rb and 8 other locations - About 1 hr to fix
          app/controllers/collecting_events_controller.rb on lines 192..205
          app/controllers/collecting_events_controller.rb on lines 219..232
          app/controllers/collection_objects_controller.rb on lines 287..300
          app/controllers/namespaces_controller.rb on lines 107..120
          app/controllers/otus_controller.rb on lines 215..228
          app/controllers/sequences_controller.rb on lines 136..149
          app/controllers/sequences_controller.rb on lines 162..175
          app/controllers/taxon_names_controller.rb on lines 191..204

          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 49.

          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 9 locations. Consider refactoring.
          Open

            def create_buffered_batch_load
              if params[:file] && digested_cookie_exists?(params[:file].tempfile, :Buffered_collection_objects_md5)
                @result = BatchLoad::Import::CollectionObjects::BufferedInterpreter.new(**batch_params)
                if @result.create
                  flash[:notice] = "Successfully proccessed file, #{@result.total_records_created} items were created."
          Severity: Major
          Found in app/controllers/collection_objects_controller.rb and 8 other locations - About 1 hr to fix
          app/controllers/collecting_events_controller.rb on lines 192..205
          app/controllers/collecting_events_controller.rb on lines 219..232
          app/controllers/collection_objects_controller.rb on lines 261..274
          app/controllers/namespaces_controller.rb on lines 107..120
          app/controllers/otus_controller.rb on lines 215..228
          app/controllers/sequences_controller.rb on lines 136..149
          app/controllers/sequences_controller.rb on lines 162..175
          app/controllers/taxon_names_controller.rb on lines 191..204

          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 49.

          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 12 locations. Consider refactoring.
          Open

            def preview_castor_batch_load
              if params[:file]
                @result = BatchLoad::Import::CollectionObjects::CastorInterpreter.new(**batch_params)
                digest_cookie(params[:file].tempfile, :Castor_collection_objects_md5)
                render 'collection_objects/batch_load/castor/preview'
          Severity: Major
          Found in app/controllers/collection_objects_controller.rb and 11 other locations - About 30 mins to fix
          app/controllers/collecting_events_controller.rb on lines 181..189
          app/controllers/collecting_events_controller.rb on lines 207..216
          app/controllers/collection_objects_controller.rb on lines 276..284
          app/controllers/descriptors_controller.rb on lines 107..115
          app/controllers/namespaces_controller.rb on lines 96..104
          app/controllers/otus_controller.rb on lines 151..159
          app/controllers/otus_controller.rb on lines 203..211
          app/controllers/sequence_relationships_controller.rb on lines 87..95
          app/controllers/sequences_controller.rb on lines 125..133
          app/controllers/sequences_controller.rb on lines 151..159
          app/controllers/taxon_names_controller.rb on lines 180..188

          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 33.

          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 12 locations. Consider refactoring.
          Open

            def preview_buffered_batch_load
              if params[:file]
                @result = BatchLoad::Import::CollectionObjects::BufferedInterpreter.new(**batch_params)
                digest_cookie(params[:file].tempfile, :Buffered_collection_objects_md5)
                render 'collection_objects/batch_load/buffered/preview'
          Severity: Major
          Found in app/controllers/collection_objects_controller.rb and 11 other locations - About 30 mins to fix
          app/controllers/collecting_events_controller.rb on lines 181..189
          app/controllers/collecting_events_controller.rb on lines 207..216
          app/controllers/collection_objects_controller.rb on lines 250..258
          app/controllers/descriptors_controller.rb on lines 107..115
          app/controllers/namespaces_controller.rb on lines 96..104
          app/controllers/otus_controller.rb on lines 151..159
          app/controllers/otus_controller.rb on lines 203..211
          app/controllers/sequence_relationships_controller.rb on lines 87..95
          app/controllers/sequences_controller.rb on lines 125..133
          app/controllers/sequences_controller.rb on lines 151..159
          app/controllers/taxon_names_controller.rb on lines 180..188

          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 33.

          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

            def preview_simple_batch_load
              if params[:file]
                @result = BatchLoad::Import::CollectionObjects.new(batch_params.merge(user_map))
                digest_cookie(params[:file].tempfile, :batch_collection_objects_md5)
                render 'collection_objects/batch_load/simple/preview'
          Severity: Minor
          Found in app/controllers/collection_objects_controller.rb and 1 other location - About 30 mins to fix
          app/controllers/otus_controller.rb on lines 127..135

          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

          Further Reading

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

            def dwc_verbose
              o = nil
              ActiveRecord::Base.connection_pool.with_connection do
                o = CollectionObject.find(params[:id])
          
          
          Severity: Minor
          Found in app/controllers/collection_objects_controller.rb and 1 other location - About 25 mins to fix
          app/controllers/collection_objects_controller.rb on lines 58..70

          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 31.

          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

            def dwc
              o = nil
              ActiveRecord::Base.connection_pool.with_connection do
                o = CollectionObject.find(params[:id])
                if params[:rebuild] == 'true'
          Severity: Minor
          Found in app/controllers/collection_objects_controller.rb and 1 other location - About 25 mins to fix
          app/controllers/collection_objects_controller.rb on lines 73..86

          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 31.

          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

            def api_autocomplete
              render json: {} and return if params[:term].blank?
              @collection_objects = Queries::CollectionObject::Autocomplete.new(params[:term], project_id: sessions_current_project_id).autocomplete
              render '/collection_objects/api/v1/autocomplete'
          Severity: Minor
          Found in app/controllers/collection_objects_controller.rb and 1 other location - About 20 mins to fix
          app/controllers/collecting_events_controller.rb on lines 252..255

          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 27.

          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 5 locations. Consider refactoring.
          Open

            def api_index
              @collection_objects = Queries::CollectionObject::Filter.new(api_params).all.where(project_id: sessions_current_project_id)
                .order('collection_objects.id')
                .page(params[:page]).per(params[:per])
              render '/collection_objects/api/v1/index'
          Severity: Minor
          Found in app/controllers/collection_objects_controller.rb and 4 other locations - About 15 mins to fix
          app/controllers/biological_associations_controller.rb on lines 94..100
          app/controllers/collecting_events_controller.rb on lines 239..244
          app/controllers/otus_controller.rb on lines 249..254
          app/controllers/taxon_names_controller.rb on lines 220..225

          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 25.

          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

          Prefer symbols instead of strings as hash keys.
          Open

                  'end_month'   => 'end_date_month',

          This cop checks for the use of strings as keys in hashes. The use of symbols is preferred instead.

          Example:

          # bad
          { 'one' => 1, 'two' => 2, 'three' => 3 }
          
          # good
          { one: 1, two: 2, three: 3 }

          Prefer symbols instead of strings as hash keys.
          Open

                  'end_year'    => 'end_date_year'}

          This cop checks for the use of strings as keys in hashes. The use of symbols is preferred instead.

          Example:

          # bad
          { 'one' => 1, 'two' => 2, 'three' => 3 }
          
          # good
          { one: 1, two: 2, three: 3 }

          Prefer symbols instead of strings as hash keys.
          Open

                  'start_year'  => 'start_date_year',

          This cop checks for the use of strings as keys in hashes. The use of symbols is preferred instead.

          Example:

          # bad
          { 'one' => 1, 'two' => 2, 'three' => 3 }
          
          # good
          { one: 1, two: 2, three: 3 }

          Prefer symbols instead of strings as hash keys.
          Open

                  'start_day'   => 'start_date_day',

          This cop checks for the use of strings as keys in hashes. The use of symbols is preferred instead.

          Example:

          # bad
          { 'one' => 1, 'two' => 2, 'three' => 3 }
          
          # good
          { one: 1, two: 2, three: 3 }

          Prefer symbols instead of strings as hash keys.
          Open

                  'start_month' => 'start_date_month',

          This cop checks for the use of strings as keys in hashes. The use of symbols is preferred instead.

          Example:

          # bad
          { 'one' => 1, 'two' => 2, 'three' => 3 }
          
          # good
          { one: 1, two: 2, three: 3 }

          Prefer symbols instead of strings as hash keys.
          Open

                  'end_day'     => 'end_date_day',

          This cop checks for the use of strings as keys in hashes. The use of symbols is preferred instead.

          Example:

          # bad
          { 'one' => 1, 'two' => 2, 'three' => 3 }
          
          # good
          { one: 1, two: 2, three: 3 }

          Prefer symbols instead of strings as hash keys.
          Open

                  'otu'         => 'otu_name',

          This cop checks for the use of strings as keys in hashes. The use of symbols is preferred instead.

          Example:

          # bad
          { 'one' => 1, 'two' => 2, 'three' => 3 }
          
          # good
          { one: 1, two: 2, three: 3 }

          There are no issues that match your filters.

          Category
          Status