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

• Cognitive Complexity docs
• Cognitive Complexity: A new way of measuring understandability

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

• Cognitive Complexity docs
• Cognitive Complexity: A new way of measuring understandability

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

• Cognitive Complexity docs
• Cognitive Complexity: A new way of measuring understandability

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

• Cognitive Complexity docs
• Cognitive Complexity: A new way of measuring understandability

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

• Cognitive Complexity docs
• Cognitive Complexity: A new way of measuring understandability

Using such generic exceptions as Error, RuntimeException, Throwable, and Exception prevents calling methods from handling true, system-generated exceptions differently than application-generated errors.

Noncompliant Code Example

public void foo(String bar) throws Throwable {  // Noncompliant
  throw new RuntimeException("My Message");     // Noncompliant
}

Compliant Solution

public void foo(String bar) {
  throw new MyOwnRuntimeException("My Message");
}

Exceptions

Generic exceptions in the signatures of overriding methods are ignored, because overriding method has to follow signature of the throw declaration in the superclass. The issue will be raised on superclass declaration of the method (or won't be raised at all if superclass is not part of the analysis).

@Override
public void myMethod() throws Exception {...}

Generic exceptions are also ignored in the signatures of methods that make calls to methods that throw generic exceptions.

public void myOtherMethod throws Exception {
  doTheThing();  // this method throws Exception
}

See

• MITRE, CWE-397 - Declaration of Throws for Generic Exception
• CERT, ERR07-J. - Do not throw RuntimeException, Exception, or Throwable

Utility classes, which are collections of static members, are not meant to be instantiated. Even abstract utility classes, which can be extended, should not have public constructors.

Java adds an implicit public constructor to every class which does not define at least one explicitly. Hence, at least one non-public constructor should be defined.

Noncompliant Code Example

class StringUtils { // Noncompliant

  public static String concatenate(String s1, String s2) {
    return s1 + s2;
  }

}

Compliant Solution

class StringUtils { // Compliant

  private StringUtils() {
    throw new IllegalStateException("Utility class");
  }

  public static String concatenate(String s1, String s2) {
    return s1 + s2;
  }

}

Exceptions

When class contains public static void main(String[] args) method it is not considered as utility class and will be ignored by this rule.

Even if it is technically possible, Restricted Identifiers should not be used as identifiers. This is only possible for compatibility reasons, using it in Java code is confusing and should be avoided.

Note that this applies to any version of Java, including the one where these identifiers are not yet restricted, to avoid future confusion.

This rule reports an issue when restricted identifiers:

• var
• yield
• record

are used as identifiers.

Noncompliant Code Example

var var = "var"; // Noncompliant: compiles but this code is confusing
var = "what is this?";

int yield(int i) { // Noncompliant
  return switch (i) {
    case 1: yield(0); // This is a yield from switch expression, not a recursive call.
    default: yield(i-1);
  };
}

String record = "record"; // Noncompliant

Compliant Solution

var myVariable = "var";

int minusOne(int i) {
  return switch (i) {
    case 1: yield(0);
    default: yield(i-1);
  };
}

String myRecord = "record";

See

• JLS16, 3.8: Identifiers

Using such generic exceptions as Error, RuntimeException, Throwable, and Exception prevents calling methods from handling true, system-generated exceptions differently than application-generated errors.

Noncompliant Code Example

public void foo(String bar) throws Throwable {  // Noncompliant
  throw new RuntimeException("My Message");     // Noncompliant
}

Compliant Solution

public void foo(String bar) {
  throw new MyOwnRuntimeException("My Message");
}

Exceptions

Generic exceptions in the signatures of overriding methods are ignored, because overriding method has to follow signature of the throw declaration in the superclass. The issue will be raised on superclass declaration of the method (or won't be raised at all if superclass is not part of the analysis).

@Override
public void myMethod() throws Exception {...}

Generic exceptions are also ignored in the signatures of methods that make calls to methods that throw generic exceptions.

public void myOtherMethod throws Exception {
  doTheThing();  // this method throws Exception
}

See

• MITRE, CWE-397 - Declaration of Throws for Generic Exception
• CERT, ERR07-J. - Do not throw RuntimeException, Exception, or Throwable

Passing message arguments that require further evaluation into a Guava com.google.common.base.Preconditions check can result in a performance penalty. That's because whether or not they're needed, each argument must be resolved before the method is actually called.

Similarly, passing concatenated strings into a logging method can also incur a needless performance hit because the concatenation will be performed every time the method is called, whether or not the log level is low enough to show the message.

Instead, you should structure your code to pass static or pre-computed values into Preconditions conditions check and logging calls.

Specifically, the built-in string formatting should be used instead of string concatenation, and if the message is the result of a method call, then Preconditions should be skipped altogether, and the relevant exception should be conditionally thrown instead.

Noncompliant Code Example

logger.log(Level.DEBUG, "Something went wrong: " + message);  // Noncompliant; string concatenation performed even when log level too high to show DEBUG messages

logger.fine("An exception occurred with message: " + message); // Noncompliant

LOG.error("Unable to open file " + csvPath, e);  // Noncompliant

Preconditions.checkState(a > 0, "Arg must be positive, but got " + a);  // Noncompliant. String concatenation performed even when a > 0

Preconditions.checkState(condition, formatMessage());  // Noncompliant. formatMessage() invoked regardless of condition

Preconditions.checkState(condition, "message: %s", formatMessage());  // Noncompliant

Compliant Solution

logger.log(Level.SEVERE, "Something went wrong: {0} ", message);  // String formatting only applied if needed

logger.fine("An exception occurred with message: {}", message);  // SLF4J, Log4j

logger.log(Level.SEVERE, () -> "Something went wrong: " + message); // since Java 8, we can use Supplier , which will be evaluated lazily

LOG.error("Unable to open file {0}", csvPath, e);

if (LOG.isDebugEnabled() {
  LOG.debug("Unable to open file " + csvPath, e);  // this is compliant, because it will not evaluate if log level is above debug.
}

Preconditions.checkState(arg > 0, "Arg must be positive, but got %d", a);  // String formatting only applied if needed

if (!condition) {
  throw new IllegalStateException(formatMessage());  // formatMessage() only invoked conditionally
}

if (!condition) {
  throw new IllegalStateException("message: " + formatMessage());
}

Exceptions

catch blocks are ignored, because the performance penalty is unimportant on exceptional paths (catch block should not be a part of standard program flow). Getters are ignored as well as methods called on annotations which can be considered as getters. This rule accounts for explicit test-level testing with SLF4J methods isXXXEnabled and ignores the bodies of such if statements.

Passing message arguments that require further evaluation into a Guava com.google.common.base.Preconditions check can result in a performance penalty. That's because whether or not they're needed, each argument must be resolved before the method is actually called.

Similarly, passing concatenated strings into a logging method can also incur a needless performance hit because the concatenation will be performed every time the method is called, whether or not the log level is low enough to show the message.

Instead, you should structure your code to pass static or pre-computed values into Preconditions conditions check and logging calls.

Specifically, the built-in string formatting should be used instead of string concatenation, and if the message is the result of a method call, then Preconditions should be skipped altogether, and the relevant exception should be conditionally thrown instead.

Noncompliant Code Example

logger.log(Level.DEBUG, "Something went wrong: " + message);  // Noncompliant; string concatenation performed even when log level too high to show DEBUG messages

logger.fine("An exception occurred with message: " + message); // Noncompliant

LOG.error("Unable to open file " + csvPath, e);  // Noncompliant

Preconditions.checkState(a > 0, "Arg must be positive, but got " + a);  // Noncompliant. String concatenation performed even when a > 0

Preconditions.checkState(condition, formatMessage());  // Noncompliant. formatMessage() invoked regardless of condition

Preconditions.checkState(condition, "message: %s", formatMessage());  // Noncompliant

Compliant Solution

logger.log(Level.SEVERE, "Something went wrong: {0} ", message);  // String formatting only applied if needed

logger.fine("An exception occurred with message: {}", message);  // SLF4J, Log4j

logger.log(Level.SEVERE, () -> "Something went wrong: " + message); // since Java 8, we can use Supplier , which will be evaluated lazily

LOG.error("Unable to open file {0}", csvPath, e);

if (LOG.isDebugEnabled() {
  LOG.debug("Unable to open file " + csvPath, e);  // this is compliant, because it will not evaluate if log level is above debug.
}

Preconditions.checkState(arg > 0, "Arg must be positive, but got %d", a);  // String formatting only applied if needed

if (!condition) {
  throw new IllegalStateException(formatMessage());  // formatMessage() only invoked conditionally
}

if (!condition) {
  throw new IllegalStateException("message: " + formatMessage());
}

Exceptions

catch blocks are ignored, because the performance penalty is unimportant on exceptional paths (catch block should not be a part of standard program flow). Getters are ignored as well as methods called on annotations which can be considered as getters. This rule accounts for explicit test-level testing with SLF4J methods isXXXEnabled and ignores the bodies of such if statements.