Sign upLogin

SpeciesFileGroup/taxonworks

View on GitHub
Star
app/controllers/controlled_vocabulary_terms_controller.rb

Summary

Maintainability
B
4 hrs
Test Coverage

Class ControlledVocabularyTermsController has 21 methods (exceeds 20 allowed). Consider refactoring.
Open

class ControlledVocabularyTermsController < ApplicationController
  include DataControllerConfiguration::ProjectDataControllerConfiguration

  before_action :set_controlled_vocabulary_term, only: [:show, :edit, :update, :destroy, :depictions, :citations, :confidences, :api_show]
Severity: Minor
Found in app/controllers/controlled_vocabulary_terms_controller.rb - About 2 hrs to fix

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

        @controlled_vocabulary_term.destroy
    Severity: Minor
    Found in app/controllers/controlled_vocabulary_terms_controller.rb by rubocop

    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

    Similar blocks of code found in 16 locations. Consider refactoring.
    Open

      def destroy
    @controlled_vocabulary_term.destroy
    respond_to do |format|
      if @controlled_vocabulary_term.destroyed?
        format.html { destroy_redirect @controlled_vocabulary_term, notice: 'OTU was successfully destroyed.' }
    Severity: Major
    Found in app/controllers/controlled_vocabulary_terms_controller.rb and 15 other locations - About 1 hr to fix
    app/controllers/citations_controller.rb on lines 86..94
    app/controllers/collecting_events_controller.rb on lines 82..90
    app/controllers/containers_controller.rb on lines 71..79
    app/controllers/contents_controller.rb on lines 67..75
    app/controllers/descriptors_controller.rb on lines 84..92
    app/controllers/downloads_controller.rb on lines 36..44
    app/controllers/georeferences_controller.rb on lines 123..131
    app/controllers/observations_controller.rb on lines 92..100
    app/controllers/otus_controller.rb on lines 101..109
    app/controllers/people_controller.rb on lines 71..79
    app/controllers/sequence_relationships_controller.rb on lines 66..74
    app/controllers/tags_controller.rb on lines 91..99
    app/controllers/taxon_name_classifications_controller.rb on lines 92..100
    app/controllers/taxon_name_relationships_controller.rb on lines 73..81
    app/controllers/taxon_names_controller.rb on lines 73..81

    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 2 locations. Consider refactoring.
    Open

      def index
    respond_to do |format|
      format.html do
        @recent_objects = ControlledVocabularyTerm.recent_from_project_id(sessions_current_project_id).order(updated_at: :desc).limit(10)
        render '/shared/data/all/index'
    Severity: Minor
    Found in app/controllers/controlled_vocabulary_terms_controller.rb and 1 other location - About 25 mins to fix
    app/controllers/biological_relationships_controller.rb on lines 8..15

    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 3 locations. Consider refactoring.
    Open

      def update
    respond_to do |format|
      if @controlled_vocabulary_term.update(controlled_vocabulary_term_params)
        format.json { render :show, status: :ok, location: @controlled_vocabulary_term.metamorphosize }
      else
    Severity: Minor
    Found in app/controllers/controlled_vocabulary_terms_controller.rb and 2 other locations - About 25 mins to fix
    app/controllers/observation_matrix_column_items_controller.rb on lines 48..53
    app/controllers/observation_matrix_row_items_controller.rb on lines 49..54

    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 30.

    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 4 locations. Consider refactoring.
    Open

      def api_index
    @controlled_vocabulary_terms = Queries::ControlledVocabularyTerm::Filter.new(params.merge!(api: true)).all
      .where(project_id: sessions_current_project_id)
      .page(params[:page])
      .per(params[:per])
    Severity: Minor
    Found in app/controllers/controlled_vocabulary_terms_controller.rb and 3 other locations - About 20 mins to fix
    app/controllers/data_attributes_controller.rb on lines 46..51
    app/controllers/images_controller.rb on lines 39..43
    app/controllers/observation_matrices_controller.rb on lines 239..244

    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

    There are no issues that match your filters.

    Category
    Status