Showing 43 of 43 total issues
Method __construct
has 10 arguments (exceeds 4 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
public string $name,
public string $title, // TODO: should be an string OR array of languages
public ?string $description = null, // TODO: should be an string OR array of languages
public ?string $home = null,
public mixed $image = null,
Method make
has 10 arguments (exceeds 4 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
string $name,
string $title,
?string $description = null,
?string $home = null,
mixed $image = null,
Method make
has 8 arguments (exceeds 4 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
string $title,
mixed $image = null,
mixed $accept = null,
mixed $options = null,
array $tabs = [],
Method __construct
has 8 arguments (exceeds 4 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
public string $title, // TODO: should be an string OR array of languages
public mixed $image = null,
public mixed $accept = null,
public mixed $options = null,
public array $tabs = [],
Method __construct
has 7 arguments (exceeds 4 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
public bool|array $access = true,
public bool|array $files = true,
public bool|array $pages = true,
public bool|array $site = true,
public bool|array $user = true,
Method make
has 7 arguments (exceeds 4 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
bool|array $access = true,
bool|array $files = true,
bool|array $pages = true,
bool|array $site = true,
bool|array $user = true,
Method permissions
has 7 arguments (exceeds 4 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
bool|array $access = true,
bool|array $files = true,
bool|array $pages = true,
bool|array $site = true,
bool|array $user = true,
Method options
has 6 arguments (exceeds 4 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
bool|array $changeName = true,
bool|array $replace = true,
bool|array $delete = true,
bool|array $read = true,
bool|array $update = true,
Method __construct
has 6 arguments (exceeds 4 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
mixed $type = null,
public ?string $id = null,
public string|array|null $label = null,
public array $properties = [],
public string|float|null $width = null,
Method make
has 6 arguments (exceeds 4 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
bool|array $changeName = true,
bool|array $replace = true,
bool|array $delete = true,
bool|array $read = true,
bool|array $update = true,
Method __construct
has 6 arguments (exceeds 4 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
public string|array $label = '',
public ?Icon $icon = null,
public ?string $id = null,
public array $columns = [],
public array $sections = [],
Method make
has 6 arguments (exceeds 4 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
string $title,
mixed $options = null,
array $tabs = [],
array $columns = [],
array $sections = [],
Method make
has 6 arguments (exceeds 4 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
array|string $label,
?Icon $icon = null,
?string $id = null,
array $columns = [],
array $sections = [],
Method __construct
has 6 arguments (exceeds 4 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
public string $title, // TODO: should be an string OR array of languages
public mixed $options = null,
public array $tabs = [],
public array $columns = [],
public array $sections = [],
Method __construct
has 6 arguments (exceeds 4 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
public bool|array $changeName = true,
public bool|array $replace = true,
public bool|array $delete = true,
public bool|array $read = true,
public bool|array $update = true,
Function exists
has a Cognitive Complexity of 8 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
public static function exists(string $key, ?int $expire = null): bool
{
$file = static::cacheFile($key);
if (! $file) {
return false;
- Read upRead up
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
Method make
has 5 arguments (exceeds 4 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
string|float|null $width = null,
bool $sticky = false,
?string $id = null,
array $sections = [],
array $fields = [],
Method __construct
has 5 arguments (exceeds 4 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
public string|float|null $width = null,
public bool $sticky = false,
public ?string $id = null,
public array $sections = [],
public array $fields = [],
Similar blocks of code found in 3 locations. Consider refactoring. Open
public function __construct(
public bool|array $access = true,
public bool|array $files = true,
public bool|array $pages = true,
public bool|array $site = true,
- 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 92.
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
Similar blocks of code found in 3 locations. Consider refactoring. Open
public function permissions(
bool|array $access = true,
bool|array $files = true,
bool|array $pages = true,
bool|array $site = true,
- 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 92.
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