TracksApp/tracks

View on GitHub
app/models/recurring_todos/daily_recurrence_pattern.rb

Summary

Maintainability
A
0 mins
Test Coverage

RecurringTodos::DailyRecurrencePattern#get_next_date refers to 'start' more than self (maybe move it to another class?)
Open

        return start + 2.day if start.wday == 6 # saturday
        return start + 1.day if start.wday == 0 # sunday
        return start
      else
        # if there was no previous todo, do not add n: the first todo starts on

Feature Envy occurs when a code fragment references another object more often than it references itself, or when several clients do the same series of manipulations on a particular type of object.

Feature Envy reduces the code's ability to communicate intent: code that "belongs" on one class but which is located in another can be hard to find, and may upset the "System of Names" in the host class.

Feature Envy also affects the design's flexibility: A code fragment that is in the wrong class creates couplings that may not be natural within the application's domain, and creates a loss of cohesion in the unwilling host class.

Feature Envy often arises because it must manipulate other objects (usually its arguments) to get them into a useful form, and one force preventing them (the arguments) doing this themselves is that the common knowledge lives outside the arguments, or the arguments are of too basic a type to justify extending that type. Therefore there must be something which 'knows' about the contents or purposes of the arguments. That thing would have to be more than just a basic type, because the basic types are either containers which don't know about their contents, or they are single objects which can't capture their relationship with their fellows of the same type. So, this thing with the extra knowledge should be reified into a class, and the utility method will most likely belong there.

Example

Running Reek on:

class Warehouse
  def sale_price(item)
    (item.price - item.rebate) * @vat
  end
end

would report:

Warehouse#total_price refers to item more than self (FeatureEnvy)

since this:

(item.price - item.rebate)

belongs to the Item class, not the Warehouse.

RecurringTodos::DailyRecurrencePattern#get_next_date has approx 6 statements
Open

    def get_next_date(previous)

A method with Too Many Statements is any method that has a large number of lines.

Too Many Statements warns about any method that has more than 5 statements. Reek's smell detector for Too Many Statements counts +1 for every simple statement in a method and +1 for every statement within a control structure (if, else, case, when, for, while, until, begin, rescue) but it doesn't count the control structure itself.

So the following method would score +6 in Reek's statement-counting algorithm:

def parse(arg, argv, &error)
  if !(val = arg) and (argv.empty? or /\A-/ =~ (val = argv[0]))
    return nil, block, nil                                         # +1
  end
  opt = (val = parse_arg(val, &error))[1]                          # +2
  val = conv_arg(*val)                                             # +3
  if opt and !arg
    argv.shift                                                     # +4
  else
    val[0] = nil                                                   # +5
  end
  val                                                              # +6
end

(You might argue that the two assigments within the first @if@ should count as statements, and that perhaps the nested assignment should count as +2.)

Complex method RecurringTodos::DailyRecurrencePattern#get_next_date (24.9)
Open

    def get_next_date(previous)
      # previous is the due date of the previous todo or it is the completed_at
      # date when the completed_at date is after due_date (i.e. you did not make
      # the due date in time)

Flog calculates the ABC score for methods. The ABC score is based on assignments, branches (method calls), and conditions.

You can read more about ABC metrics or the flog tool

RecurringTodos::DailyRecurrencePattern#get_next_date calls '1.day' 3 times
Open

      start = determine_start(previous, 1.day)

      if only_work_days?
        # jump over weekend if necessary
        return start + 2.day if start.wday == 6 # saturday

Duplication occurs when two fragments of code look nearly identical, or when two fragments of code have nearly identical effects at some conceptual level.

Reek implements a check for Duplicate Method Call.

Example

Here's a very much simplified and contrived example. The following method will report a warning:

def double_thing()
  @other.thing + @other.thing
end

One quick approach to silence Reek would be to refactor the code thus:

def double_thing()
  thing = @other.thing
  thing + thing
end

A slightly different approach would be to replace all calls of double_thing by calls to @other.double_thing:

class Other
  def double_thing()
    thing + thing
  end
end

The approach you take will depend on balancing other factors in your code.

RecurringTodos::DailyRecurrencePattern#get_next_date calls 'start.wday' 2 times
Open

        return start + 2.day if start.wday == 6 # saturday
        return start + 1.day if start.wday == 0 # sunday

Duplication occurs when two fragments of code look nearly identical, or when two fragments of code have nearly identical effects at some conceptual level.

Reek implements a check for Duplicate Method Call.

Example

Here's a very much simplified and contrived example. The following method will report a warning:

def double_thing()
  @other.thing + @other.thing
end

One quick approach to silence Reek would be to refactor the code thus:

def double_thing()
  thing = @other.thing
  thing + thing
end

A slightly different approach would be to replace all calls of double_thing by calls to @other.double_thing:

class Other
  def double_thing()
    thing + thing
  end
end

The approach you take will depend on balancing other factors in your code.

RecurringTodos::DailyRecurrencePattern has no descriptive comment
Open

  class DailyRecurrencePattern < AbstractRecurrencePattern

Classes and modules are the units of reuse and release. It is therefore considered good practice to annotate every class and module with a brief comment outlining its responsibilities.

Example

Given

class Dummy
  # Do things...
end

Reek would emit the following warning:

test.rb -- 1 warning:
  [1]:Dummy has no descriptive comment (IrresponsibleModule)

Fixing this is simple - just an explaining comment:

# The Dummy class is responsible for ...
class Dummy
  # Do things...
end

RecurringTodos::DailyRecurrencePattern#get_next_date performs a nil-check
Open

        return previous == nil ? start : start + every_x_days.day - 1.day

A NilCheck is a type check. Failures of NilCheck violate the "tell, don't ask" principle.

Additionally, type checks often mask bigger problems in your source code like not using OOP and / or polymorphism when you should.

Example

Given

class Klass
  def nil_checker(argument)
    if argument.nil?
      puts "argument isn't nil!"
    end
  end
end

Reek would emit the following warning:

test.rb -- 1 warning:
  [3]:Klass#nil_checker performs a nil-check. (NilCheck)

Prefer 2.days.
Open

        return start + 2.day if start.wday == 6 # saturday

This cop checks for correct grammar when using ActiveSupport's core extensions to the numeric classes.

Example:

# bad
3.day.ago
1.months.ago

# good
3.days.ago
1.month.ago

Missing magic comment # frozen_string_literal: true.
Open

module RecurringTodos

This cop is designed to help upgrade to Ruby 3.0. It will add the comment # frozen_string_literal: true to the top of files to enable frozen string literals. Frozen string literals may be default in Ruby 3.0. The comment will be added below a shebang and encoding comment. The frozen string literal comment is only valid in Ruby 2.3+.

Example: EnforcedStyle: when_needed (default)

# The `when_needed` style will add the frozen string literal comment
# to files only when the `TargetRubyVersion` is set to 2.3+.
# bad
module Foo
  # ...
end

# good
# frozen_string_literal: true

module Foo
  # ...
end

Example: EnforcedStyle: always

# The `always` style will always add the frozen string literal comment
# to a file, regardless of the Ruby version or if `freeze` or `<<` are
# called on a string literal.
# bad
module Bar
  # ...
end

# good
# frozen_string_literal: true

module Bar
  # ...
end

Example: EnforcedStyle: never

# The `never` will enforce that the frozen string literal comment does
# not exist in a file.
# bad
# frozen_string_literal: true

module Baz
  # ...
end

# good
module Baz
  # ...
end

Prefer the use of the nil? predicate.
Open

        return previous == nil ? start : start + every_x_days.day - 1.day

This cop checks for comparison of something with nil using ==.

Example:

# bad
if x == nil
end

# good
if x.nil?
end

Use a guard clause instead of wrapping the code inside a conditional expression.
Open

      if only_work_days?

Use a guard clause instead of wrapping the code inside a conditional expression

Example:

# bad
def test
  if something
    work
  end
end

# good
def test
  return unless something
  work
end

# also good
def test
  work if something
end

# bad
if something
  raise 'exception'
else
  ok
end

# good
raise 'exception' if something
ok

Don't use parentheses around an unary operation.
Open

      errors[:base] << "Every other nth day may not be empty for this daily recurrence setting" if (!only_work_days?) && every_x_days.blank?

This cop checks for redundant parentheses.

Example:

# bad
(x) if ((y.z).nil?)

# good
x if y.z.nil?

Line is too long. [140/120]
Open

      errors[:base] << "Every other nth day may not be empty for this daily recurrence setting" if (!only_work_days?) && every_x_days.blank?

Use start.wday.zero? instead of start.wday == 0.
Open

        return start + 1.day if start.wday == 0 # sunday

This cop checks for usage of comparison operators (==, >, <) to test numbers as zero, positive, or negative. These can be replaced by their respective predicate methods. The cop can also be configured to do the reverse.

The cop disregards #nonzero? as it its value is truthy or falsey, but not true and false, and thus not always interchangeable with != 0.

The cop ignores comparisons to global variables, since they are often populated with objects which can be compared with integers, but are not themselves Interger polymorphic.

Example: EnforcedStyle: predicate (default)

# bad

foo == 0
0 > foo
bar.baz > 0

# good

foo.zero?
foo.negative?
bar.baz.positive?

Example: EnforcedStyle: comparison

# bad

foo.zero?
foo.negative?
bar.baz.positive?

# good

foo == 0
0 > foo
bar.baz > 0

There are no issues that match your filters.

Category
Status