appbot/kms_rails

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

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.

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.

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.

This cop checks that the cyclomatic complexity of methods is not higher than the configured maximum. The cyclomatic complexity is the number of linearly independent paths through a method. The algorithm counts decision points and adds one.

An if statement (or unless or ?:) increases the complexity by one. An else branch does not, since it doesn't add a decision point. The && operator (or keyword and) can be converted to a nested if statement, and ||/or is shorthand for a sequence of ifs, so they also add one. Loops can be said to have an exit condition, so they add one.

Boolean Parameter is a special case of Control Couple, where a method parameter is defaulted to true or false. A Boolean Parameter effectively permits a method's caller to decide which execution path to take. This is a case of bad cohesion. You're creating a dependency between methods that is not really necessary, thus increasing coupling.

Example

Given

class Dummy
  def hit_the_switch(switch = true)
    if switch
      puts 'Hitting the switch'
      # do other things...
    else
      puts 'Not hitting the switch'
      # do other things...
    end
  end
end

Reek would emit the following warning:

test.rb -- 3 warnings:
  [1]:Dummy#hit_the_switch has boolean parameter 'switch' (BooleanParameter)
  [2]:Dummy#hit_the_switch is controlled by argument switch (ControlParameter)

Note that both smells are reported, Boolean Parameter and Control Parameter.

Getting rid of the smell

This is highly dependent on your exact architecture, but looking at the example above what you could do is:

• Move everything in the if branch into a separate method
• Move everything in the else branch into a separate method
• Get rid of the hit_the_switch method alltogether
• Make the decision what method to call in the initial caller of hit_the_switch

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.

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.)

Repeated Conditional is a special case of Simulated Polymorphism. Basically it means you are checking the same value throughout a single class and take decisions based on this.

Example

Given

class RepeatedConditionals
  attr_accessor :switch

  def repeat_1
    puts "Repeat 1!" if switch
  end

  def repeat_2
    puts "Repeat 2!" if switch
  end

  def repeat_3
    puts "Repeat 3!" if switch
  end
end

Reek would emit the following warning:

test.rb -- 4 warnings:
  [5, 9, 13]:RepeatedConditionals tests switch at least 3 times (RepeatedConditional)

If you get this warning then you are probably not using the right abstraction or even more probable, missing an additional abstraction.

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.

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.

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

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.

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)

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)

A Utility Function is any instance method that has no dependency on the state of the instance.

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)

A Utility Function is any instance method that has no dependency on the state of the instance.

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)

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)

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)

A Utility Function is any instance method that has no dependency on the state of the instance.

An Uncommunicative Variable Name is a variable name that doesn't communicate its intent well enough.

Poor names make it hard for the reader to build a mental picture of what's going on in the code. They can also be mis-interpreted; and they hurt the flow of reading, because the reader must slow down to interpret the names.

An Uncommunicative Method Name is a method name that doesn't communicate its intent well enough.

Poor names make it hard for the reader to build a mental picture of what's going on in the code. They can also be mis-interpreted; and they hurt the flow of reading, because the reader must slow down to interpret the names.

An Uncommunicative Method Name is a method name that doesn't communicate its intent well enough.

Poor names make it hard for the reader to build a mental picture of what's going on in the code. They can also be mis-interpreted; and they hurt the flow of reading, because the reader must slow down to interpret the names.

An Uncommunicative Variable Name is a variable name that doesn't communicate its intent well enough.

Poor names make it hard for the reader to build a mental picture of what's going on in the code. They can also be mis-interpreted; and they hurt the flow of reading, because the reader must slow down to interpret the names.

An Uncommunicative Method Name is a method name that doesn't communicate its intent well enough.

Poor names make it hard for the reader to build a mental picture of what's going on in the code. They can also be mis-interpreted; and they hurt the flow of reading, because the reader must slow down to interpret the names.

An Uncommunicative Variable Name is a variable name that doesn't communicate its intent well enough.

Poor names make it hard for the reader to build a mental picture of what's going on in the code. They can also be mis-interpreted; and they hurt the flow of reading, because the reader must slow down to interpret the names.

An Uncommunicative Method Name is a method name that doesn't communicate its intent well enough.

Poor names make it hard for the reader to build a mental picture of what's going on in the code. They can also be mis-interpreted; and they hurt the flow of reading, because the reader must slow down to interpret the names.

An Uncommunicative Variable Name is a variable name that doesn't communicate its intent well enough.

Poor names make it hard for the reader to build a mental picture of what's going on in the code. They can also be mis-interpreted; and they hurt the flow of reading, because the reader must slow down to interpret the names.

Checks for comma (,) not followed by some kind of space.

Example:

# bad
[1,2]
{ foo:bar,}

# good
[1, 2]
{ foo:bar, }

Checks that braces used for hash literals have or don't have surrounding space depending on configuration.

Example: EnforcedStyle: space

# The `space` style enforces that hash literals have
# surrounding space.

# bad
h = {a: 1, b: 2}

# good
h = { a: 1, b: 2 }

Example: EnforcedStyle: no_space

# The `no_space` style enforces that hash literals have
# no surrounding space.

# bad
h = { a: 1, b: 2 }

# good
h = {a: 1, b: 2}

Example: EnforcedStyle: compact

# The `compact` style normally requires a space inside
# hash braces, with the exception that successive left
# braces or right braces are collapsed together in nested hashes.

# bad
h = { a: { b: 2 } }

# good
h = { a: { b: 2 }}

This cop checks for RuntimeError as the argument of raise/fail.

It checks for code like this:

Example:

# Bad
raise RuntimeError, 'message'

# Bad
raise RuntimeError.new('message')

# Good
raise 'message'

Checks that braces used for hash literals have or don't have surrounding space depending on configuration.

Example: EnforcedStyle: space

# The `space` style enforces that hash literals have
# surrounding space.

# bad
h = {a: 1, b: 2}

# good
h = { a: 1, b: 2 }

Example: EnforcedStyle: no_space

# The `no_space` style enforces that hash literals have
# no surrounding space.

# bad
h = { a: 1, b: 2 }

# good
h = {a: 1, b: 2}

Example: EnforcedStyle: compact

# The `compact` style normally requires a space inside
# hash braces, with the exception that successive left
# braces or right braces are collapsed together in nested hashes.

# bad
h = { a: { b: 2 } }

# good
h = { a: { b: 2 }}

This cop checks for missing top-level documentation of classes and modules. Classes with no body are exempt from the check and so are namespace modules - modules that have nothing in their bodies except classes, other modules, or constant definitions.

The documentation requirement is annulled if the class or module has a "#:nodoc:" comment next to it. Likewise, "#:nodoc: all" does the same for all its children.

Example:

# bad
class Person
  # ...
end

# good
# Description/Explanation of Person class
class Person
  # ...
end

Checks for if and unless statements that would fit on one line if written as a modifier if/unless. The maximum line length is configured in the Metrics/LineLength cop.

Example:

# bad
if condition
  do_stuff(bar)
end

unless qux.empty?
  Foo.do_something
end

# good
do_stuff(bar) if condition
Foo.do_something unless qux.empty?

Checks that braces used for hash literals have or don't have surrounding space depending on configuration.

Example: EnforcedStyle: space

# The `space` style enforces that hash literals have
# surrounding space.

# bad
h = {a: 1, b: 2}

# good
h = { a: 1, b: 2 }

Example: EnforcedStyle: no_space

# The `no_space` style enforces that hash literals have
# no surrounding space.

# bad
h = { a: 1, b: 2 }

# good
h = {a: 1, b: 2}

Example: EnforcedStyle: compact

# The `compact` style normally requires a space inside
# hash braces, with the exception that successive left
# braces or right braces are collapsed together in nested hashes.

# bad
h = { a: { b: 2 } }

# good
h = { a: { b: 2 }}

Checks for if and unless statements that would fit on one line if written as a modifier if/unless. The maximum line length is configured in the Metrics/LineLength cop.

Example:

# bad
if condition
  do_stuff(bar)
end

unless qux.empty?
  Foo.do_something
end

# good
do_stuff(bar) if condition
Foo.do_something unless qux.empty?

Checks that braces used for hash literals have or don't have surrounding space depending on configuration.

Example: EnforcedStyle: space

# The `space` style enforces that hash literals have
# surrounding space.

# bad
h = {a: 1, b: 2}

# good
h = { a: 1, b: 2 }

Example: EnforcedStyle: no_space

# The `no_space` style enforces that hash literals have
# no surrounding space.

# bad
h = { a: 1, b: 2 }

# good
h = {a: 1, b: 2}

Example: EnforcedStyle: compact

# The `compact` style normally requires a space inside
# hash braces, with the exception that successive left
# braces or right braces are collapsed together in nested hashes.

# bad
h = { a: { b: 2 } }

# good
h = { a: { b: 2 }}

Checks that braces used for hash literals have or don't have surrounding space depending on configuration.

Example: EnforcedStyle: space

# The `space` style enforces that hash literals have
# surrounding space.

# bad
h = {a: 1, b: 2}

# good
h = { a: 1, b: 2 }

Example: EnforcedStyle: no_space

# The `no_space` style enforces that hash literals have
# no surrounding space.

# bad
h = { a: 1, b: 2 }

# good
h = {a: 1, b: 2}

Example: EnforcedStyle: compact

# The `compact` style normally requires a space inside
# hash braces, with the exception that successive left
# braces or right braces are collapsed together in nested hashes.

# bad
h = { a: { b: 2 } }

# good
h = { a: { b: 2 }}

Checks for spaces inside ordinary round parentheses.

Example:

# bad
f( 3)
g = (a + 3 )

# good
f(3)
g = (a + 3)

Checks that braces used for hash literals have or don't have surrounding space depending on configuration.

Example: EnforcedStyle: space

# The `space` style enforces that hash literals have
# surrounding space.

# bad
h = {a: 1, b: 2}

# good
h = { a: 1, b: 2 }

Example: EnforcedStyle: no_space

# The `no_space` style enforces that hash literals have
# no surrounding space.

# bad
h = { a: 1, b: 2 }

# good
h = {a: 1, b: 2}

Example: EnforcedStyle: compact

# The `compact` style normally requires a space inside
# hash braces, with the exception that successive left
# braces or right braces are collapsed together in nested hashes.

# bad
h = { a: { b: 2 } }

# good
h = { a: { b: 2 }}

Checks for comma (,) not followed by some kind of space.

Example:

# bad
[1,2]
{ foo:bar,}

# good
[1, 2]
{ foo:bar, }

Checks that braces used for hash literals have or don't have surrounding space depending on configuration.

Example: EnforcedStyle: space

# The `space` style enforces that hash literals have
# surrounding space.

# bad
h = {a: 1, b: 2}

# good
h = { a: 1, b: 2 }

Example: EnforcedStyle: no_space

# The `no_space` style enforces that hash literals have
# no surrounding space.

# bad
h = { a: 1, b: 2 }

# good
h = {a: 1, b: 2}

Example: EnforcedStyle: compact

# The `compact` style normally requires a space inside
# hash braces, with the exception that successive left
# braces or right braces are collapsed together in nested hashes.

# bad
h = { a: { b: 2 } }

# good
h = { a: { b: 2 }}

Checks that braces used for hash literals have or don't have surrounding space depending on configuration.

Example: EnforcedStyle: space

# The `space` style enforces that hash literals have
# surrounding space.

# bad
h = {a: 1, b: 2}

# good
h = { a: 1, b: 2 }

Example: EnforcedStyle: no_space

# The `no_space` style enforces that hash literals have
# no surrounding space.

# bad
h = { a: 1, b: 2 }

# good
h = {a: 1, b: 2}

Example: EnforcedStyle: compact

# The `compact` style normally requires a space inside
# hash braces, with the exception that successive left
# braces or right braces are collapsed together in nested hashes.

# bad
h = { a: { b: 2 } }

# good
h = { a: { b: 2 }}

Checks for spaces inside ordinary round parentheses.

Example:

# bad
f( 3)
g = (a + 3 )

# good
f(3)
g = (a + 3)