Assignment Branch Condition size for flash_msg is too high. [32.26/15] Open
def flash_msg
flash[:error] = if current_role && current_role.name.try(:downcase).start_with?('a', 'e', 'i', 'o', 'u')
if params[:action] == 'new'
"An #{current_role_name.try(:downcase)} is not allowed to create this/these #{params[:controller]}"
else
- Read upRead up
- Exclude checks
This cop 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
Perceived complexity for flash_msg is too high. [8/7] Open
def flash_msg
flash[:error] = if current_role && current_role.name.try(:downcase).start_with?('a', 'e', 'i', 'o', 'u')
if params[:action] == 'new'
"An #{current_role_name.try(:downcase)} is not allowed to create this/these #{params[:controller]}"
else
- Read upRead up
- Exclude checks
This cop 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
Method flash_msg
has a Cognitive Complexity of 7 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def flash_msg
flash[:error] = if current_role && current_role.name.try(:downcase).start_with?('a', 'e', 'i', 'o', 'u')
if params[:action] == 'new'
"An #{current_role_name.try(:downcase)} is not allowed to create this/these #{params[:controller]}"
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
if params[:action] == 'new'
"An #{current_role_name.try(:downcase)} is not allowed to create this/these #{params[:controller]}"
else
"An #{current_role_name.try(:downcase)} is not allowed to #{params[:action]} this/these #{params[:controller]}"
- 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 31.
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
if params[:action] == 'new'
"A #{current_role_name.try(:downcase)} is not allowed to create this/these #{params[:controller]}"
else
"A #{current_role_name.try(:downcase)} is not allowed to #{params[:action]} this/these #{params[:controller]}"
- 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 31.
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
Use a guard clause instead of wrapping the code inside a conditional expression. Open
unless all_actions_allowed?
- Read upRead up
- Exclude checks
Use a guard clause instead of wrapping the code inside a conditional expression
Example:
# bad
def test
if something
work
end
end
# good
def test
return unless something
work
end
# also good
def test
work if something
end
# bad
if something
raise 'exception'
else
ok
end
# good
raise 'exception' if something
ok
end
at 21, 38 is not aligned with if
at 17, 22. Open
end
- Read upRead up
- 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)
Convert if
nested inside else
to elsif
. Open
if params[:action] == 'new'
- 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
end
at 15, 38 is not aligned with if
at 11, 22. Open
end
- Read upRead up
- 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)