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

Limit Cyclomatic Complexity (complexity)

Cyclomatic complexity measures the number of linearly independent paths through a program's source code. This rule allows setting a cyclomatic complexity threshold.

function a(x) {
    if (true) {
        return x; // 1st path
    } else if (false) {
        return x+1; // 2nd path
    } else {
        return 4; // 3rd path
    }
}

Rule Details

This rule is aimed at reducing code complexity by capping the amount of cyclomatic complexity allowed in a program. As such, it will warn when the cyclomatic complexity crosses the configured threshold (default is 20).

Examples of incorrect code for a maximum of 2:

/*eslint complexity: ["error", 2]*/

function a(x) {
    if (true) {
        return x;
    } else if (false) {
        return x+1;
    } else {
        return 4; // 3rd path
    }
}

Examples of correct code for a maximum of 2:

/*eslint complexity: ["error", 2]*/

function a(x) {
    if (true) {
        return x;
    } else {
        return 4;
    }
}

Options

Optionally, you may specify a max object property:

"complexity": ["error", 2]

is equivalent to

"complexity": ["error", { "max": 2 }]

Deprecated: the object property maximum is deprecated. Please use the property max instead.

When Not To Use It

If you can't determine an appropriate complexity limit for your code, then it's best to disable this rule.

Further Reading

• About Complexity
• Complexity Analysis of JavaScript Code

Related Rules

• [max-depth](max-depth.md)
• [max-len](max-len.md)
• [max-nested-callbacks](max-nested-callbacks.md)
• [max-params](max-params.md)
• [max-statements](max-statements.md) Source: http://eslint.org/docs/rules/

Limit Cyclomatic Complexity (complexity)

Cyclomatic complexity measures the number of linearly independent paths through a program's source code. This rule allows setting a cyclomatic complexity threshold.

function a(x) {
    if (true) {
        return x; // 1st path
    } else if (false) {
        return x+1; // 2nd path
    } else {
        return 4; // 3rd path
    }
}

Rule Details

This rule is aimed at reducing code complexity by capping the amount of cyclomatic complexity allowed in a program. As such, it will warn when the cyclomatic complexity crosses the configured threshold (default is 20).

Examples of incorrect code for a maximum of 2:

/*eslint complexity: ["error", 2]*/

function a(x) {
    if (true) {
        return x;
    } else if (false) {
        return x+1;
    } else {
        return 4; // 3rd path
    }
}

Examples of correct code for a maximum of 2:

/*eslint complexity: ["error", 2]*/

function a(x) {
    if (true) {
        return x;
    } else {
        return 4;
    }
}

Options

Optionally, you may specify a max object property:

"complexity": ["error", 2]

is equivalent to

"complexity": ["error", { "max": 2 }]

Deprecated: the object property maximum is deprecated. Please use the property max instead.

When Not To Use It

If you can't determine an appropriate complexity limit for your code, then it's best to disable this rule.

Further Reading

• About Complexity
• Complexity Analysis of JavaScript Code

Related Rules

• [max-depth](max-depth.md)
• [max-len](max-len.md)
• [max-nested-callbacks](max-nested-callbacks.md)
• [max-params](max-params.md)
• [max-statements](max-statements.md) Source: http://eslint.org/docs/rules/

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

Disallow Functions in Loops (no-loop-func)

Writing functions within loops tends to result in errors due to the way the function creates a closure around the loop. For example:

for (var i = 0; i < 10; i++) {
    funcs[i] = function() {
        return i;
    };
}

In this case, you would expect each function created within the loop to return a different number. In reality, each function returns 10, because that was the last value of i in the scope.

let or const mitigate this problem.

/*eslint-env es6*/

for (let i = 0; i < 10; i++) {
    funcs[i] = function() {
        return i;
    };
}

In this case, each function created within the loop returns a different number as expected.

Rule Details

This error is raised to highlight a piece of code that may not work as you expect it to and could also indicate a misunderstanding of how the language works. Your code may run without any problems if you do not fix this error, but in some situations it could behave unexpectedly.

Examples of incorrect code for this rule:

/*eslint no-loop-func: "error"*/
/*eslint-env es6*/

for (var i=10; i; i--) {
    (function() { return i; })();
}

while(i) {
    var a = function() { return i; };
    a();
}

do {
    function a() { return i; };
    a();
} while (i);

let foo = 0;
for (let i=10; i; i--) {
    // Bad, function is referencing block scoped variable in the outer scope.
    var a = function() { return foo; };
    a();
}

Examples of correct code for this rule:

/*eslint no-loop-func: "error"*/
/*eslint-env es6*/

var a = function() {};

for (var i=10; i; i--) {
    a();
}

for (var i=10; i; i--) {
    var a = function() {}; // OK, no references to variables in the outer scopes.
    a();
}

for (let i=10; i; i--) {
    var a = function() { return i; }; // OK, all references are referring to block scoped variables in the loop.
    a();
}

var foo = 100;
for (let i=10; i; i--) {
    var a = function() { return foo; }; // OK, all references are referring to never modified variables.
    a();
}
//... no modifications of foo after this loop ...

Source: http://eslint.org/docs/rules/

Disallow Functions in Loops (no-loop-func)

Writing functions within loops tends to result in errors due to the way the function creates a closure around the loop. For example:

for (var i = 0; i < 10; i++) {
    funcs[i] = function() {
        return i;
    };
}

In this case, you would expect each function created within the loop to return a different number. In reality, each function returns 10, because that was the last value of i in the scope.

let or const mitigate this problem.

/*eslint-env es6*/

for (let i = 0; i < 10; i++) {
    funcs[i] = function() {
        return i;
    };
}

In this case, each function created within the loop returns a different number as expected.

Rule Details

This error is raised to highlight a piece of code that may not work as you expect it to and could also indicate a misunderstanding of how the language works. Your code may run without any problems if you do not fix this error, but in some situations it could behave unexpectedly.

Examples of incorrect code for this rule:

/*eslint no-loop-func: "error"*/
/*eslint-env es6*/

for (var i=10; i; i--) {
    (function() { return i; })();
}

while(i) {
    var a = function() { return i; };
    a();
}

do {
    function a() { return i; };
    a();
} while (i);

let foo = 0;
for (let i=10; i; i--) {
    // Bad, function is referencing block scoped variable in the outer scope.
    var a = function() { return foo; };
    a();
}

Examples of correct code for this rule:

/*eslint no-loop-func: "error"*/
/*eslint-env es6*/

var a = function() {};

for (var i=10; i; i--) {
    a();
}

for (var i=10; i; i--) {
    var a = function() {}; // OK, no references to variables in the outer scopes.
    a();
}

for (let i=10; i; i--) {
    var a = function() { return i; }; // OK, all references are referring to block scoped variables in the loop.
    a();
}

var foo = 100;
for (let i=10; i; i--) {
    var a = function() { return foo; }; // OK, all references are referring to never modified variables.
    a();
}
//... no modifications of foo after this loop ...

Source: http://eslint.org/docs/rules/

Require Guarding for-in (guard-for-in)

Looping over objects with a for in loop will include properties that are inherited through the prototype chain. This behavior can lead to unexpected items in your for loop.

for (key in foo) {
    doSomething(key);
}

Note that simply checking foo.hasOwnProperty(key) is likely to cause an error in some cases; see [no-prototype-builtins](no-prototype-builtins.md).

Rule Details

This rule is aimed at preventing unexpected behavior that could arise from using a for in loop without filtering the results in the loop. As such, it will warn when for in loops do not filter their results with an if statement.

Examples of incorrect code for this rule:

/*eslint guard-for-in: "error"*/

for (key in foo) {
    doSomething(key);
}

Examples of correct code for this rule:

/*eslint guard-for-in: "error"*/

for (key in foo) {
    if (Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty.call(foo, key)) {
        doSomething(key);
    }
    if ({}.hasOwnProperty.call(foo, key)) {
        doSomething(key);
    }
}

Related Rules

• [no-prototype-builtins](no-prototype-builtins.md)

Further Reading

• Exploring JavaScript for-in loops
• The pitfalls of using objects as maps in JavaScript Source: http://eslint.org/docs/rules/

Require Guarding for-in (guard-for-in)

Looping over objects with a for in loop will include properties that are inherited through the prototype chain. This behavior can lead to unexpected items in your for loop.

for (key in foo) {
    doSomething(key);
}

Note that simply checking foo.hasOwnProperty(key) is likely to cause an error in some cases; see [no-prototype-builtins](no-prototype-builtins.md).

Rule Details

This rule is aimed at preventing unexpected behavior that could arise from using a for in loop without filtering the results in the loop. As such, it will warn when for in loops do not filter their results with an if statement.

Examples of incorrect code for this rule:

/*eslint guard-for-in: "error"*/

for (key in foo) {
    doSomething(key);
}

Examples of correct code for this rule:

/*eslint guard-for-in: "error"*/

for (key in foo) {
    if (Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty.call(foo, key)) {
        doSomething(key);
    }
    if ({}.hasOwnProperty.call(foo, key)) {
        doSomething(key);
    }
}

Related Rules

• [no-prototype-builtins](no-prototype-builtins.md)

Further Reading

• Exploring JavaScript for-in loops
• The pitfalls of using objects as maps in JavaScript Source: http://eslint.org/docs/rules/