Cyclomatic complexity for consistent? is too high. [8/6] Open
def consistent?
(manifest_files|tagmanifest_files).each do |mf|
# get the algorithm implementation
readAlgo = /manifest-(.+).txt$/.match(File.basename(mf))[1]
algo = case readAlgo
- Read upRead up
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
- Exclude checks
This cop checks that the cyclomatic complexity of methods is not higher than the configured maximum. The cyclomatic complexity is the number of linearly independent paths through a method. The algorithm counts decision points and adds one.
An if statement (or unless or ?:) increases the complexity by one. An else branch does not, since it doesn't add a decision point. The && operator (or keyword and) can be converted to a nested if statement, and ||/or is shorthand for a sequence of ifs, so they also add one. Loops can be said to have an exit condition, so they add one.
Method has too many lines. [31/30] Open
def consistent?
(manifest_files|tagmanifest_files).each do |mf|
# get the algorithm implementation
readAlgo = /manifest-(.+).txt$/.match(File.basename(mf))[1]
algo = case readAlgo
- Read upRead up
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
- Exclude checks
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.
Method consistent?
has a Cognitive Complexity of 11 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def consistent?
(manifest_files|tagmanifest_files).each do |mf|
# get the algorithm implementation
readAlgo = /manifest-(.+).txt$/.match(File.basename(mf))[1]
algo = case readAlgo
- Read upRead up
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
Cognitive Complexity
Cognitive Complexity is a measure of how difficult a unit of code is to intuitively understand. Unlike Cyclomatic Complexity, which determines how difficult your code will be to test, Cognitive Complexity tells you how difficult your code will be to read and comprehend.
A method's cognitive complexity is based on a few simple rules:
- Code is not considered more complex when it uses shorthand that the language provides for collapsing multiple statements into one
- Code is considered more complex for each "break in the linear flow of the code"
- Code is considered more complex when "flow breaking structures are nested"
Further reading
Method consistent?
has 31 lines of code (exceeds 25 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def consistent?
(manifest_files|tagmanifest_files).each do |mf|
# get the algorithm implementation
readAlgo = /manifest-(.+).txt$/.match(File.basename(mf))[1]
algo = case readAlgo
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
end
at 23, 7 is not aligned with case
at 9, 11. Open
end
- Read upRead up
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
- Exclude checks
This cop checks whether the end keywords are aligned properly.
Three modes are supported through the EnforcedStyleAlignWith
configuration parameter:
If it's set to keyword
(which is the default), the end
shall be aligned with the start of the keyword (if, class, etc.).
If it's set to variable
the end
shall be aligned with the
left-hand-side of the variable assignment, if there is one.
If it's set to start_of_line
, the end
shall be aligned with the
start of the line where the matching keyword appears.
Example: EnforcedStyleAlignWith: keyword (default)
# bad
variable = if true
end
# good
variable = if true
end
Example: EnforcedStyleAlignWith: variable
# bad
variable = if true
end
# good
variable = if true
end
Example: EnforcedStyleAlignWith: startofline
# bad
variable = if true
end
# good
puts(if true
end)