Function constructor
has 41 lines of code (exceeds 25 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
constructor() {
const self = this
this.accessor = {
nodes() {
return [...self.nodes]
Function selectItemsInRectangle
has 36 lines of code (exceeds 25 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
selectItemsInRectangle(selectionRectangle, props, findit = findDOMNode, mouse = mouseMath) {
if (!this.transaction.previousSelection) {
// fail-safe
this.begin([])
}
Function addItem
has a Cognitive Complexity of 11 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
addItem(idx, selectedIndices = this.selectedIndices) {
if (!this.transaction.firstNode) {
this.transaction.firstNode = this.nodes[idx]
}
const si = selectedIndices
- 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
Function addItem
has 28 lines of code (exceeds 25 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
addItem(idx, selectedIndices = this.selectedIndices) {
if (!this.transaction.firstNode) {
this.transaction.firstNode = this.nodes[idx]
}
const si = selectedIndices
Function selectItemsInRectangle
has a Cognitive Complexity of 8 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
selectItemsInRectangle(selectionRectangle, props, findit = findDOMNode, mouse = mouseMath) {
if (!this.transaction.previousSelection) {
// fail-safe
this.begin([])
}
- 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
Function selectItem
has a Cognitive Complexity of 8 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
selectItem(idx) {
// first check to see if this index is the same type as the first node selected
const node = this.nodes[idx]
if (!node.selectable) return
if (this.props.hasOwnProperty('acceptedTypes')) {
- 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
Function testNodes
has a Cognitive Complexity of 6 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
testNodes({ selectionRectangle, props, findit, mouse }, node, idx) {
let bounds
if (node.bounds) {
bounds = node.bounds
} else {
- 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
Similar blocks of code found in 2 locations. Consider refactoring. Open
this.removed.map(idx => (this.nodes[idx].callback ? this.nodes[idx].callback(false) : null))
- 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 53.
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 2 locations. Consider refactoring. Open
this.added.map(idx => (this.nodes[idx].callback ? this.nodes[idx].callback(true) : null))
- 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 53.
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
Arrow function used ambiguously with a conditional expression. Open
newSelected.forEach(idx => prevSelected.indexOf(idx) === -1 ?
- Read upRead up
- Exclude checks
Disallow arrow functions where they could be confused with comparisons (no-confusing-arrow)
Arrow functions (=>
) are similar in syntax to some comparison operators (>
, <
, <=
, and >=
). This rule warns against using the arrow function syntax in places where it could be confused with a comparison operator. Even if the arguments of the arrow function are wrapped with parens, this rule still warns about it unless allowParens
is set to true
.
Here's an example where the usage of =>
could be confusing:
// The intent is not clear
var x = a => 1 ? 2 : 3;
// Did the author mean this
var x = function (a) { return 1 ? 2 : 3 };
// Or this
var x = a <= 1 ? 2 : 3;
Rule Details
The following patterns are considered warnings:
/*eslint no-confusing-arrow: "error"*/
/*eslint-env es6*/
var x = a => 1 ? 2 : 3;
var x = (a) => 1 ? 2 : 3;
var x = (a) => (1 ? 2 : 3);
The following patterns are not considered warnings:
/*eslint no-confusing-arrow: "error"*/
/*eslint-env es6*/
var x = a => { return 1 ? 2 : 3; };
var x = (a) => { return 1 ? 2 : 3; };
Options
This rule accepts a single options argument with the following defaults:
{
"rules": {
"no-confusing-arrow": ["error", {"allowParens": false}]
}
}
allowParens
is a boolean setting that can be true
or false
:
-
true
relaxes the rule and accepts parenthesis as a valid "confusion-preventing" syntax. -
false
warns even if the expression is wrapped in parenthesis
When allowParens
is set to true
following patterns are no longer considered as warnings:
/*eslint no-confusing-arrow: ["error", {allowParens: true}]*/
/*eslint-env es6*/
var x = a => (1 ? 2 : 3);
var x = (a) => (1 ? 2 : 3);
Related Rules
- [no-constant-condition](no-constant-condition.md)
- [arrow-parens](arrow-parens.md) Source: http://eslint.org/docs/rules/
Unable to resolve path to module 'react-dom'. Open
import { findDOMNode } from 'react-dom'
- Read upRead up
- Exclude checks
For more information visit Source: http://eslint.org/docs/rules/