Prefer self[:attr] = val
over write_attribute(:attr, val)
. Open
write_attribute(:biological_association_subject_type, o.metamorphosize.class.name)
- Read upRead up
- Exclude checks
This cop checks for the use of the read_attribute
or write_attribute
methods and recommends square brackets instead.
If an attribute is missing from the instance (for example, when
initialized by a partial select
) then read_attribute
will return nil, but square brackets will raise
an ActiveModel::MissingAttributeError
.
Explicitly raising an error in this situation is preferable, and that is why rubocop recommends using square brackets.
Example:
# bad
x = read_attribute(:attr)
write_attribute(:attr, val)
# good
x = self[:attr]
self[:attr] = val
Prefer self[:attr] = val
over write_attribute(:attr, val)
. Open
write_attribute(:biological_association_object_id, o.id)
- Read upRead up
- Exclude checks
This cop checks for the use of the read_attribute
or write_attribute
methods and recommends square brackets instead.
If an attribute is missing from the instance (for example, when
initialized by a partial select
) then read_attribute
will return nil, but square brackets will raise
an ActiveModel::MissingAttributeError
.
Explicitly raising an error in this situation is preferable, and that is why rubocop recommends using square brackets.
Example:
# bad
x = read_attribute(:attr)
write_attribute(:attr, val)
# good
x = self[:attr]
self[:attr] = val
Prefer self[:attr] = val
over write_attribute(:attr, val)
. Open
write_attribute(:biological_association_subject_id, o.id)
- Read upRead up
- Exclude checks
This cop checks for the use of the read_attribute
or write_attribute
methods and recommends square brackets instead.
If an attribute is missing from the instance (for example, when
initialized by a partial select
) then read_attribute
will return nil, but square brackets will raise
an ActiveModel::MissingAttributeError
.
Explicitly raising an error in this situation is preferable, and that is why rubocop recommends using square brackets.
Example:
# bad
x = read_attribute(:attr)
write_attribute(:attr, val)
# good
x = self[:attr]
self[:attr] = val
Prefer self[:attr] = val
over write_attribute(:attr, val)
. Open
write_attribute(:biological_association_object_type, o.metamorphosize.class.name)
- Read upRead up
- Exclude checks
This cop checks for the use of the read_attribute
or write_attribute
methods and recommends square brackets instead.
If an attribute is missing from the instance (for example, when
initialized by a partial select
) then read_attribute
will return nil, but square brackets will raise
an ActiveModel::MissingAttributeError
.
Explicitly raising an error in this situation is preferable, and that is why rubocop recommends using square brackets.
Example:
# bad
x = read_attribute(:attr)
write_attribute(:attr, val)
# good
x = self[:attr]
self[:attr] = val
TODO found Open
attr_accessor :object_global_id # TODO: this is badly named
- Exclude checks
TODO found Open
# TODO: Why?! this is just biological_association.biological_association_subject_type
- Exclude checks
TODO found Open
# TODO: Why?! this is just biological_association.biological_association_object_type
- Exclude checks
Identical blocks of code found in 2 locations. Consider refactoring. Open
j = a.join(b).on(a["biological_association_#{target}_type".to_sym].eq(target_class.name).and(a["biological_assoication_#{target}_id".to_sym].eq(b[:id])))
- 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 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
- 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
Identical blocks of code found in 2 locations. Consider refactoring. Open
j = a.join(b).on(a["biological_association_#{target}_type".to_sym].eq(target_class.name).and(a["biological_assoication_#{target}_id".to_sym].eq(b[:id])))
- 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 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
- 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
Prefer the new style validations validates :column, uniqueness: value
over validates_uniqueness_of
. Open
validates_uniqueness_of :biological_association_subject_id, scope: [:biological_association_subject_type, :biological_association_object_id, :biological_association_object_type, :biological_relationship_id]
- Read upRead up
- Exclude checks
This cop checks for the use of old-style attribute validation macros.
Example:
# bad
validates_acceptance_of :foo
validates_confirmation_of :foo
validates_exclusion_of :foo
validates_format_of :foo
validates_inclusion_of :foo
validates_length_of :foo
validates_numericality_of :foo
validates_presence_of :foo
validates_absence_of :foo
validates_size_of :foo
validates_uniqueness_of :foo
# good
validates :foo, acceptance: true
validates :foo, confirmation: true
validates :foo, exclusion: true
validates :foo, format: true
validates :foo, inclusion: true
validates :foo, length: true
validates :foo, numericality: true
validates :foo, presence: true
validates :foo, absence: true
validates :foo, size: true
validates :foo, uniqueness: true