Method has too many lines. [35/10] Open
def create
member_type = cookies[:member_type]
current_service = AuthService.find_by(provider: omnihash[:provider],
uid: omnihash[:uid])
- Read upRead up
- Exclude checks
Checks if the length of a method exceeds some maximum value. Comment lines can optionally be allowed. The maximum allowed length is configurable.
You can set constructs you want to fold with CountAsOne
.
Available are: 'array', 'hash', 'heredoc', and 'method_call'. Each construct
will be counted as one line regardless of its actual size.
NOTE: The ExcludedMethods
and IgnoredMethods
configuration is
deprecated and only kept for backwards compatibility.
Please use AllowedMethods
and AllowedPatterns
instead.
By default, there are no methods to allowed.
Example: CountAsOne: ['array', 'heredoc', 'method_call']
def m
array = [ # +1
1,
2
]
hash = { # +3
key: 'value'
}
<<~HEREDOC # +1
Heredoc
content.
HEREDOC
foo( # +1
1,
2
)
end # 6 points
Perceived complexity for create is too high. [18/8] Open
def create
member_type = cookies[:member_type]
current_service = AuthService.find_by(provider: omnihash[:provider],
uid: omnihash[:uid])
- Read upRead up
- Exclude checks
Tries to produce a complexity score that's a measure of the
complexity the reader experiences when looking at a method. For that
reason it considers when
nodes as something that doesn't add as much
complexity as an if
or a &&
. Except if it's one of those special
case
/when
constructs where there's no expression after case
. Then
the cop treats it as an if
/elsif
/elsif
... and lets all the when
nodes count. In contrast to the CyclomaticComplexity cop, this cop
considers else
nodes as adding complexity.
Example:
def my_method # 1
if cond # 1
case var # 2 (0.8 + 4 * 0.2, rounded)
when 1 then func_one
when 2 then func_two
when 3 then func_three
when 4..10 then func_other
end
else # 1
do_something until a && b # 2
end # ===
end # 7 complexity points
Cyclomatic complexity for create is too high. [16/7] Open
def create
member_type = cookies[:member_type]
current_service = AuthService.find_by(provider: omnihash[:provider],
uid: omnihash[:uid])
- Read upRead up
- Exclude checks
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. Blocks that are calls to builtin iteration methods (e.g. `ary.map{...}) also add one, others are ignored.
def each_child_node(*types) # count begins: 1
unless block_given? # unless: +1
return to_enum(__method__, *types)
children.each do |child| # each{}: +1
next unless child.is_a?(Node) # unless: +1
yield child if types.empty? || # if: +1, ||: +1
types.include?(child.type)
end
self
end # total: 6
Method create
has 35 lines of code (exceeds 25 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def create
member_type = cookies[:member_type]
current_service = AuthService.find_by(provider: omnihash[:provider],
uid: omnihash[:uid])
Method create
has a Cognitive Complexity of 10 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def create
member_type = cookies[:member_type]
current_service = AuthService.find_by(provider: omnihash[:provider],
uid: omnihash[:uid])
- 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
Assignment Branch Condition size for create is too high. [<19, 86, 17> 89.7/17] Open
def create
member_type = cookies[:member_type]
current_service = AuthService.find_by(provider: omnihash[:provider],
uid: omnihash[:uid])
- Read upRead up
- Exclude checks
Checks that the ABC size of methods is not higher than the configured maximum. The ABC size is based on assignments, branches (method calls), and conditions. See http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?AbcMetric and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ABC_Software_Metric.
Interpreting ABC size:
- <= 17 satisfactory
- 18..30 unsatisfactory
- > 30 dangerous
You can have repeated "attributes" calls count as a single "branch".
For this purpose, attributes are any method with no argument; no attempt
is meant to distinguish actual attr_reader
from other methods.
Example: CountRepeatedAttributes: false (default is true)
# `model` and `current_user`, referenced 3 times each,
# are each counted as only 1 branch each if
# `CountRepeatedAttributes` is set to 'false'
def search
@posts = model.active.visible_by(current_user)
.search(params[:q])
@posts = model.some_process(@posts, current_user)
@posts = model.another_process(@posts, current_user)
render 'pages/search/page'
end
This cop also takes into account AllowedMethods
(defaults to []
)
And AllowedPatterns
(defaults to []
)
Avoid using toggle!
because it skips validations. Open
member.toggle!(:can_log_in)
- Read upRead up
- Exclude checks
This cop checks for the use of methods which skip validations which are listed in https://guides.rubyonrails.org/active_record_validations.html#skipping-validations
Methods may be ignored from this rule by configuring a Whitelist
.
Example:
# bad
Article.first.decrement!(:view_count)
DiscussionBoard.decrement_counter(:post_count, 5)
Article.first.increment!(:view_count)
DiscussionBoard.increment_counter(:post_count, 5)
person.toggle :active
product.touch
Billing.update_all("category = 'authorized', author = 'David'")
user.update_attribute(:website, 'example.com')
user.update_columns(last_request_at: Time.current)
Post.update_counters 5, comment_count: -1, action_count: 1
# good
user.update(website: 'example.com')
FileUtils.touch('file')
Example: Whitelist: ["touch"]
# bad
DiscussionBoard.decrement_counter(:post_count, 5)
DiscussionBoard.increment_counter(:post_count, 5)
person.toggle :active
# good
user.touch
Convert if
nested inside else
to elsif
. Open
if current_service
- Read upRead up
- Exclude checks
If the else
branch of a conditional consists solely of an if
node,
it can be combined with the else
to become an elsif
.
This helps to keep the nesting level from getting too deep.
Example:
# bad
if condition_a
action_a
else
if condition_b
action_b
else
action_c
end
end
# good
if condition_a
action_a
elsif condition_b
action_b
else
action_c
end
Example: AllowIfModifier: false (default)
# bad
if condition_a
action_a
else
action_b if condition_b
end
# good
if condition_a
action_a
elsif condition_b
action_b
end
Example: AllowIfModifier: true
# good
if condition_a
action_a
else
action_b if condition_b
end
# good
if condition_a
action_a
elsif condition_b
action_b
end
Omit the hash value. Open
redirect_to edit_member_details_path(member_type: member_type)
- Read upRead up
- Exclude checks
Checks hash literal syntax.
It can enforce either the use of the class hash rocket syntax or the use of the newer Ruby 1.9 syntax (when applicable).
A separate offense is registered for each problematic pair.
The supported styles are:
- ruby19 - forces use of the 1.9 syntax (e.g.
{a: 1}
) when hashes have all symbols for keys - hash_rockets - forces use of hash rockets for all hashes
- nomixedkeys - simply checks for hashes with mixed syntaxes
- ruby19nomixed_keys - forces use of ruby 1.9 syntax and forbids mixed syntax hashes
This cop has EnforcedShorthandSyntax
option.
It can enforce either the use of the explicit hash value syntax or
the use of Ruby 3.1's hash value shorthand syntax.
The supported styles are:
- always - forces use of the 3.1 syntax (e.g. {foo:})
- never - forces use of explicit hash literal value
- either - accepts both shorthand and explicit use of hash literal value
- consistent - forces use of the 3.1 syntax only if all values can be omitted in the hash
Example: EnforcedStyle: ruby19 (default)
# bad
{:a => 2}
{b: 1, :c => 2}
# good
{a: 2, b: 1}
{:c => 2, 'd' => 2} # acceptable since 'd' isn't a symbol
{d: 1, 'e' => 2} # technically not forbidden
Example: EnforcedStyle: hash_rockets
# bad
{a: 1, b: 2}
{c: 1, 'd' => 5}
# good
{:a => 1, :b => 2}
Example: EnforcedStyle: nomixedkeys
# bad
{:a => 1, b: 2}
{c: 1, 'd' => 2}
# good
{:a => 1, :b => 2}
{c: 1, d: 2}
Example: EnforcedStyle: ruby19nomixed_keys
# bad
{:a => 1, :b => 2}
{c: 2, 'd' => 3} # should just use hash rockets
# good
{a: 1, b: 2}
{:c => 3, 'd' => 4}
Example: EnforcedShorthandSyntax: always (default)
# bad
{foo: foo, bar: bar}
# good
{foo:, bar:}
Example: EnforcedShorthandSyntax: never
# bad
{foo:, bar:}
# good
{foo: foo, bar: bar}
Example: EnforcedShorthandSyntax: either
# good
{foo: foo, bar: bar}
# good
{foo: foo, bar:}
# good
{foo:, bar:}
Example: EnforcedShorthandSyntax: consistent
# bad - `foo` and `bar` values can be omitted
{foo: foo, bar: bar}
# bad - `bar` value can be omitted
{foo:, bar: bar}
# bad - mixed syntaxes
{foo:, bar: baz}
# good
{foo:, bar:}
# good - can't omit `baz`
{foo: foo, bar: baz}