Class has too many lines. [370/100] Open
class AssignmentForm
attr_accessor :assignment,
:assignment_questionnaires,
:due_dates,
:tag_prompt_deployments,
- Read upRead up
- Exclude checks
This cop checks if the length a class exceeds some maximum value. Comment lines can optionally be ignored. The maximum allowed length is configurable.
Assignment Branch Condition size for assignment_questionnaire is too high. [60.32/15] Open
def assignment_questionnaire(questionnaire_type, round_number, topic_id, duty_id = nil)
round_number = nil if round_number.blank?
topic_id = nil if topic_id.blank?
# Default value of duty_id is nil, and when duty_id is not nil, then it means that the function call
- 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
Method has too many lines. [45/10] Open
def assignment_questionnaire(questionnaire_type, round_number, topic_id, duty_id = nil)
round_number = nil if round_number.blank?
topic_id = nil if topic_id.blank?
# Default value of duty_id is nil, and when duty_id is not nil, then it means that the function call
- Read upRead up
- 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.
File assignment_form.rb
has 373 lines of code (exceeds 250 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
require 'active_support/time_with_zone'
class AssignmentForm
attr_accessor :assignment,
:assignment_questionnaires,
Method update_tag_prompt_deployments
has a Cognitive Complexity of 29 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def update_tag_prompt_deployments(attributes)
unless attributes.nil?
attributes.each do |key, value|
if @assignment.vary_by_topic?
@assignment.questionnaires.uniq.each do |questionnaire|
- 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
Class AssignmentForm
has 33 methods (exceeds 20 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
class AssignmentForm
attr_accessor :assignment,
:assignment_questionnaires,
:due_dates,
:tag_prompt_deployments,
Method update_assignment_questionnaires
has a Cognitive Complexity of 28 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def update_assignment_questionnaires(attributes)
return if attributes.nil? || attributes.empty?
if attributes[0].key?(:questionnaire_weight)
validate_assignment_questionnaires_weights(attributes)
- 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 update_due_dates is too high. [33.32/15] Open
def update_due_dates(attributes, user)
return false unless attributes
attributes.each do |due_date|
next if due_date[:due_at].blank?
- 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
Assignment Branch Condition size for copy is too high. [32.08/15] Open
def self.copy(assignment_id, user)
Assignment.record_timestamps = false
old_assign = Assignment.find(assignment_id)
new_assign = old_assign.dup
user.set_instructor(new_assign)
- 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
Method assignment_questionnaire
has a Cognitive Complexity of 25 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def assignment_questionnaire(questionnaire_type, round_number, topic_id, duty_id = nil)
round_number = nil if round_number.blank?
topic_id = nil if topic_id.blank?
# Default value of duty_id is nil, and when duty_id is not nil, then it means that the function call
- 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
Method has too many lines. [26/10] Open
def update_assignment_questionnaires(attributes)
return if attributes.nil? || attributes.empty?
if attributes[0].key?(:questionnaire_weight)
validate_assignment_questionnaires_weights(attributes)
- Read upRead up
- 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.
Assignment Branch Condition size for update_assignment_questionnaires is too high. [30.48/15] Open
def update_assignment_questionnaires(attributes)
return if attributes.nil? || attributes.empty?
if attributes[0].key?(:questionnaire_weight)
validate_assignment_questionnaires_weights(attributes)
- 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
Assignment Branch Condition size for update is too high. [30.63/15] Open
def update(attributes, user, _vary_by_topic_desired = false)
@has_errors = false
has_late_policy = false
if attributes[:assignment][:late_policy_id].to_i > 0
has_late_policy = true
- 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 assignment_questionnaire is too high. [22/7] Open
def assignment_questionnaire(questionnaire_type, round_number, topic_id, duty_id = nil)
round_number = nil if round_number.blank?
topic_id = nil if topic_id.blank?
# Default value of duty_id is nil, and when duty_id is not nil, then it means that the function call
- 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
Cyclomatic complexity for assignment_questionnaire is too high. [20/6] Open
def assignment_questionnaire(questionnaire_type, round_number, topic_id, duty_id = nil)
round_number = nil if round_number.blank?
topic_id = nil if topic_id.blank?
# Default value of duty_id is nil, and when duty_id is not nil, then it means that the function call
- Read upRead up
- 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. [23/10] Open
def self.copy(assignment_id, user)
Assignment.record_timestamps = false
old_assign = Assignment.find(assignment_id)
new_assign = old_assign.dup
user.set_instructor(new_assign)
- Read upRead up
- 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.
Assignment Branch Condition size for create_or_update_tag_prompt_deployments is too high. [27.46/15] Open
def create_or_update_tag_prompt_deployments(questionnaire_id, value)
(0..value['tag_prompt'].count - 1).each do |i|
tag_dep = nil
tag_params = {
assignment_id: @assignment.id,
- 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
Method has too many lines. [21/10] Open
def update_due_dates(attributes, user)
return false unless attributes
attributes.each do |due_date|
next if due_date[:due_at].blank?
- Read upRead up
- 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 has too many lines. [19/10] Open
def update(attributes, user, _vary_by_topic_desired = false)
@has_errors = false
has_late_policy = false
if attributes[:assignment][:late_policy_id].to_i > 0
has_late_policy = true
- Read upRead up
- 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 has too many lines. [18/10] Open
def create_or_update_tag_prompt_deployments(questionnaire_id, value)
(0..value['tag_prompt'].count - 1).each do |i|
tag_dep = nil
tag_params = {
assignment_id: @assignment.id,
- Read upRead up
- 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.
Assignment Branch Condition size for update_tag_prompt_deployments is too high. [23.09/15] Open
def update_tag_prompt_deployments(attributes)
unless attributes.nil?
attributes.each do |key, value|
if @assignment.vary_by_topic?
@assignment.questionnaires.uniq.each do |questionnaire|
- 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
Method update_due_dates
has a Cognitive Complexity of 19 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def update_due_dates(attributes, user)
return false unless attributes
attributes.each do |due_date|
next if due_date[:due_at].blank?
- 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
Cyclomatic complexity for update_assignment_questionnaires is too high. [11/6] Open
def update_assignment_questionnaires(attributes)
return if attributes.nil? || attributes.empty?
if attributes[0].key?(:questionnaire_weight)
validate_assignment_questionnaires_weights(attributes)
- Read upRead up
- 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. [15/10] Open
def update_tag_prompt_deployments(attributes)
unless attributes.nil?
attributes.each do |key, value|
if @assignment.vary_by_topic?
@assignment.questionnaires.uniq.each do |questionnaire|
- Read upRead up
- 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.
Perceived complexity for update_assignment_questionnaires is too high. [11/7] Open
def update_assignment_questionnaires(attributes)
return if attributes.nil? || attributes.empty?
if attributes[0].key?(:questionnaire_weight)
validate_assignment_questionnaires_weights(attributes)
- 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
Cyclomatic complexity for update is too high. [10/6] Open
def update(attributes, user, _vary_by_topic_desired = false)
@has_errors = false
has_late_policy = false
if attributes[:assignment][:late_policy_id].to_i > 0
has_late_policy = true
- Read upRead up
- 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.
Perceived complexity for update is too high. [11/7] Open
def update(attributes, user, _vary_by_topic_desired = false)
@has_errors = false
has_late_policy = false
if attributes[:assignment][:late_policy_id].to_i > 0
has_late_policy = true
- 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 has too many lines. [13/10] Open
def rubric_weight_error(attributes)
error = false
attributes[:assignment_questionnaire].each do |assignment_questionnaire|
# Check rubrics to make sure weight is 0 if there are no Scored Questions
scored_questionnaire = false
- Read upRead up
- 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.
Perceived complexity for update_tag_prompt_deployments is too high. [9/7] Open
def update_tag_prompt_deployments(attributes)
unless attributes.nil?
attributes.each do |key, value|
if @assignment.vary_by_topic?
@assignment.questionnaires.uniq.each do |questionnaire|
- 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
Cyclomatic complexity for update_due_dates is too high. [8/6] Open
def update_due_dates(attributes, user)
return false unless attributes
attributes.each do |due_date|
next if due_date[:due_at].blank?
- Read upRead up
- 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. [12/10] Open
def self.copy_assignment_questionnaire(old_assign, new_assign, user)
old_assign.assignment_questionnaires.each do |aq|
AssignmentQuestionnaire.create(
assignment_id: new_assign.id,
questionnaire_id: aq.questionnaire_id,
- Read upRead up
- 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.
Cyclomatic complexity for update_tag_prompt_deployments is too high. [8/6] Open
def update_tag_prompt_deployments(attributes)
unless attributes.nil?
attributes.each do |key, value|
if @assignment.vary_by_topic?
@assignment.questionnaires.uniq.each do |questionnaire|
- Read upRead up
- 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.
Perceived complexity for update_due_dates is too high. [9/7] Open
def update_due_dates(attributes, user)
return false unless attributes
attributes.each do |due_date|
next if due_date[:due_at].blank?
- 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 assignment_questionnaire
has 45 lines of code (exceeds 25 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def assignment_questionnaire(questionnaire_type, round_number, topic_id, duty_id = nil)
round_number = nil if round_number.blank?
topic_id = nil if topic_id.blank?
# Default value of duty_id is nil, and when duty_id is not nil, then it means that the function call
Method has too many lines. [11/10] Open
def add_to_delayed_queue
duedates = AssignmentDueDate.where(parent_id: @assignment.id)
duedates.each do |due_date|
deadline_type = DeadlineType.find(due_date.deadline_type_id).name
diff_btw_time_left_and_threshold, min_left = get_time_diff_btw_due_date_and_now(due_date)
- Read upRead up
- 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.
Assignment Branch Condition size for initialize is too high. [16.82/15] Open
def initialize(args = {})
@assignment = Assignment.new(args[:assignment])
if args[:assignment].nil?
@assignment.course = Course.find(args[:parent_id]) if args[:parent_id]
@assignment.instructor = @assignment.course.instructor if @assignment.course
- 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
Assignment Branch Condition size for add_to_delayed_queue is too high. [16.64/15] Open
def add_to_delayed_queue
duedates = AssignmentDueDate.where(parent_id: @assignment.id)
duedates.each do |due_date|
deadline_type = DeadlineType.find(due_date.deadline_type_id).name
diff_btw_time_left_and_threshold, min_left = get_time_diff_btw_due_date_and_now(due_date)
- 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
Method update
has a Cognitive Complexity of 13 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def update(attributes, user, _vary_by_topic_desired = false)
@has_errors = false
has_late_policy = false
if attributes[:assignment][:late_policy_id].to_i > 0
has_late_policy = true
- 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
Method add_to_delayed_queue
has a Cognitive Complexity of 11 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def add_to_delayed_queue
duedates = AssignmentDueDate.where(parent_id: @assignment.id)
duedates.each do |due_date|
deadline_type = DeadlineType.find(due_date.deadline_type_id).name
diff_btw_time_left_and_threshold, min_left = get_time_diff_btw_due_date_and_now(due_date)
- 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
Method update_assignment_questionnaires
has 26 lines of code (exceeds 25 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def update_assignment_questionnaires(attributes)
return if attributes.nil? || attributes.empty?
if attributes[0].key?(:questionnaire_weight)
validate_assignment_questionnaires_weights(attributes)
Avoid deeply nested control flow statements. Open
return aq if aq.questionnaire_id && Questionnaire.find(aq.questionnaire_id).type == questionnaire_type
Avoid deeply nested control flow statements. Open
return aq if aq.questionnaire_id && Questionnaire.find(aq.questionnaire_id).type == questionnaire_type
Method rubric_weight_error
has a Cognitive Complexity of 7 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def rubric_weight_error(attributes)
error = false
attributes[:assignment_questionnaire].each do |assignment_questionnaire|
# Check rubrics to make sure weight is 0 if there are no Scored Questions
scored_questionnaire = false
- 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
Method create_or_update_tag_prompt_deployments
has a Cognitive Complexity of 7 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def create_or_update_tag_prompt_deployments(questionnaire_id, value)
(0..value['tag_prompt'].count - 1).each do |i|
tag_dep = nil
tag_params = {
assignment_id: @assignment.id,
- 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
Avoid too many return
statements within this method. Open
return aq if aq.questionnaire_id && Questionnaire.find(aq.questionnaire_id).type == questionnaire_type
Method update_assigned_badges
has a Cognitive Complexity of 6 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def update_assigned_badges(badge, assignment)
if assignment && badge
AssignmentBadge.where(assignment_id: assignment[:id]).map(&:id).each do |assigned_badge_id|
AssignmentBadge.delete(assigned_badge_id) unless badge[:id].include?(assigned_badge_id)
end
- 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 3 locations. Consider refactoring. Open
assignment_questionnaires = AssignmentQuestionnaire.where(assignment_id: @assignment.id, used_in_round: round_number)
assignment_questionnaires.each do |aq|
# If the AQ questionnaire matches the type of the questionnaire that needs to be updated, return it
return aq if aq.questionnaire_id && Questionnaire.find(aq.questionnaire_id).type == questionnaire_type
end
- 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 27.
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 3 locations. Consider refactoring. Open
assignment_questionnaires = AssignmentQuestionnaire.where(assignment_id: @assignment.id, topic_id: topic_id)
assignment_questionnaires.each do |aq|
# If the AQ questionnaire matches the type of the questionnaire that needs to be updated, return it
return aq if aq.questionnaire_id && Questionnaire.find(aq.questionnaire_id).type == questionnaire_type
end
- 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 27.
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 3 locations. Consider refactoring. Open
assignment_questionnaires = AssignmentQuestionnaire.where(assignment_id: @assignment.id, duty_id: duty_id)
assignment_questionnaires.each do |aq|
# If the AQ questionnaire matches the type of the questionnaire that needs to be updated, return it
return aq if aq.questionnaire_id && Questionnaire.find(aq.questionnaire_id).type == questionnaire_type
end
- 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 27.
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
Space missing after comma. Open
create_or_update_tag_prompt_deployments(questionnaire.id,value)
- Read upRead up
- Exclude checks
Checks for comma (,) not followed by some kind of space.
Example:
# bad
[1,2]
{ foo:bar,}
# good
[1, 2]
{ foo:bar, }
Space missing after comma. Open
create_or_update_tag_prompt_deployments(key,value)
- Read upRead up
- Exclude checks
Checks for comma (,) not followed by some kind of space.
Example:
# bad
[1,2]
{ foo:bar,}
# good
[1, 2]
{ foo:bar, }
Use 2 spaces for indentation in a hash, relative to the start of the line where the left curly brace is. Open
assignment_id: @assignment.id,
- Read upRead up
- Exclude checks
This cops checks the indentation of the first key in a hash literal where the opening brace and the first key are on separate lines. The other keys' indentations are handled by the AlignHash cop.
By default, Hash literals that are arguments in a method call with parentheses, and where the opening curly brace of the hash is on the same line as the opening parenthesis of the method call, shall have their first key indented one step (two spaces) more than the position inside the opening parenthesis.
Other hash literals shall have their first key indented one step more than the start of the line where the opening curly brace is.
This default style is called 'specialinsideparentheses'. Alternative styles are 'consistent' and 'align_braces'. Here are examples:
Example: EnforcedStyle: specialinsideparentheses (default)
# The `special_inside_parentheses` style enforces that the first key
# in a hash literal where the opening brace and the first key are on
# separate lines is indented one step (two spaces) more than the
# position inside the opening parentheses.
# bad
hash = {
key: :value
}
and_in_a_method_call({
no: :difference
})
# good
special_inside_parentheses
hash = {
key: :value
}
but_in_a_method_call({
its_like: :this
})
Example: EnforcedStyle: consistent
# The `consistent` style enforces that the first key in a hash
# literal where the opening brace and the first key are on
# seprate lines is indented the same as a hash literal which is not
# defined inside a method call.
# bad
hash = {
key: :value
}
but_in_a_method_call({
its_like: :this
})
# good
hash = {
key: :value
}
and_in_a_method_call({
no: :difference
})
Example: EnforcedStyle: align_braces
# The `align_brackets` style enforces that the opening and closing
# braces are indented to the same position.
# bad
and_now_for_something = {
completely: :different
}
# good
and_now_for_something = {
completely: :different
}
Indent the right brace the same as the start of the line where the left brace is. Open
}
- Read upRead up
- Exclude checks
This cops checks the indentation of the first key in a hash literal where the opening brace and the first key are on separate lines. The other keys' indentations are handled by the AlignHash cop.
By default, Hash literals that are arguments in a method call with parentheses, and where the opening curly brace of the hash is on the same line as the opening parenthesis of the method call, shall have their first key indented one step (two spaces) more than the position inside the opening parenthesis.
Other hash literals shall have their first key indented one step more than the start of the line where the opening curly brace is.
This default style is called 'specialinsideparentheses'. Alternative styles are 'consistent' and 'align_braces'. Here are examples:
Example: EnforcedStyle: specialinsideparentheses (default)
# The `special_inside_parentheses` style enforces that the first key
# in a hash literal where the opening brace and the first key are on
# separate lines is indented one step (two spaces) more than the
# position inside the opening parentheses.
# bad
hash = {
key: :value
}
and_in_a_method_call({
no: :difference
})
# good
special_inside_parentheses
hash = {
key: :value
}
but_in_a_method_call({
its_like: :this
})
Example: EnforcedStyle: consistent
# The `consistent` style enforces that the first key in a hash
# literal where the opening brace and the first key are on
# seprate lines is indented the same as a hash literal which is not
# defined inside a method call.
# bad
hash = {
key: :value
}
but_in_a_method_call({
its_like: :this
})
# good
hash = {
key: :value
}
and_in_a_method_call({
no: :difference
})
Example: EnforcedStyle: align_braces
# The `align_brackets` style enforces that the opening and closing
# braces are indented to the same position.
# bad
and_now_for_something = {
completely: :different
}
# good
and_now_for_something = {
completely: :different
}
Space missing after comma. Open
TagPromptDeployment.where(assignment_id: @assignment.id,questionnaire_id: questionnaire.id).destroy_all if value.key?('deleted')
- Read upRead up
- Exclude checks
Checks for comma (,) not followed by some kind of space.
Example:
# bad
[1,2]
{ foo:bar,}
# good
[1, 2]
{ foo:bar, }
Favor modifier if
usage when having a single-line body. Another good alternative is the usage of control flow &&
/||
. Open
if tag_dep
- Read upRead up
- Exclude checks
Checks for if and unless statements that would fit on one line
if written as a modifier if/unless. The maximum line length is
configured in the Metrics/LineLength
cop.
Example:
# bad
if condition
do_stuff(bar)
end
unless qux.empty?
Foo.do_something
end
# good
do_stuff(bar) if condition
Foo.do_something unless qux.empty?
Use a guard clause instead of wrapping the code inside a conditional expression. Open
if simicheck_delay.to_i >= 0
- 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
Move assignment_questionnaires.each do |aq|
# If the AQ questionnaire matches the type of the questionnaire that needs to be updated, return it
return aq if aq.questionnaire_id && Questionnaire.find(aq.questionnaire_id).type == questionnaire_type
end
out of the conditional. Open
assignment_questionnaires.each do |aq|
# If the AQ questionnaire matches the type of the questionnaire that needs to be updated, return it
return aq if aq.questionnaire_id && Questionnaire.find(aq.questionnaire_id).type == questionnaire_type
end
- Read upRead up
- Exclude checks
This cop checks for identical lines at the beginning or end of each branch of a conditional statement.
Example:
# bad
if condition
do_x
do_z
else
do_y
do_z
end
# good
if condition
do_x
else
do_y
end
do_z
# bad
if condition
do_z
do_x
else
do_z
do_y
end
# good
do_z
if condition
do_x
else
do_y
end
# bad
case foo
when 1
do_x
when 2
do_x
else
do_x
end
# good
case foo
when 1
do_x
do_y
when 2
# nothing
else
do_x
do_z
end
Move assignment_questionnaires.each do |aq|
# If the AQ questionnaire matches the type of the questionnaire that needs to be updated, return it
return aq if aq.questionnaire_id && Questionnaire.find(aq.questionnaire_id).type == questionnaire_type
end
out of the conditional. Open
assignment_questionnaires.each do |aq|
# If the AQ questionnaire matches the type of the questionnaire that needs to be updated, return it
return aq if aq.questionnaire_id && Questionnaire.find(aq.questionnaire_id).type == questionnaire_type
end
- Read upRead up
- Exclude checks
This cop checks for identical lines at the beginning or end of each branch of a conditional statement.
Example:
# bad
if condition
do_x
do_z
else
do_y
do_z
end
# good
if condition
do_x
else
do_y
end
do_z
# bad
if condition
do_z
do_x
else
do_z
do_y
end
# good
do_z
if condition
do_x
else
do_y
end
# bad
case foo
when 1
do_x
when 2
do_x
else
do_x
end
# good
case foo
when 1
do_x
do_y
when 2
# nothing
else
do_x
do_z
end
Missing top-level class documentation comment. Open
class AssignmentForm
- Read upRead up
- Exclude checks
This cop checks for missing top-level documentation of classes and modules. Classes with no body are exempt from the check and so are namespace modules - modules that have nothing in their bodies except classes, other modules, or constant definitions.
The documentation requirement is annulled if the class or module has a "#:nodoc:" comment next to it. Likewise, "#:nodoc: all" does the same for all its children.
Example:
# bad
class Person
# ...
end
# good
# Description/Explanation of Person class
class Person
# ...
end
Use a guard clause instead of wrapping the code inside a conditional expression. Open
unless attributes.nil?
- 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
Trailing whitespace detected. Open
- Exclude checks
Use snake_case for variable names. Open
assignmentId = job.args.first
- Read upRead up
- Exclude checks
This cop makes sure that all variables use the configured style, snake_case or camelCase, for their names.
Example: EnforcedStyle: snake_case (default)
# bad
fooBar = 1
# good
foo_bar = 1
Example: EnforcedStyle: camelCase
# bad
foo_bar = 1
# good
fooBar = 1
Use a guard clause instead of wrapping the code inside a conditional expression. Open
if @assignment.require_quiz.nil?
- 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
Move assignment_questionnaires.each do |aq|
# If the AQ questionnaire matches the type of the questionnaire that needs to be updated, return it
return aq if aq.questionnaire_id && Questionnaire.find(aq.questionnaire_id).type == questionnaire_type
end
out of the conditional. Open
assignment_questionnaires.each do |aq|
# If the AQ questionnaire matches the type of the questionnaire that needs to be updated, return it
return aq if aq.questionnaire_id && Questionnaire.find(aq.questionnaire_id).type == questionnaire_type
end
- Read upRead up
- Exclude checks
This cop checks for identical lines at the beginning or end of each branch of a conditional statement.
Example:
# bad
if condition
do_x
do_z
else
do_y
do_z
end
# good
if condition
do_x
else
do_y
end
do_z
# bad
if condition
do_z
do_x
else
do_z
do_y
end
# good
do_z
if condition
do_x
else
do_y
end
# bad
case foo
when 1
do_x
when 2
do_x
else
do_x
end
# good
case foo
when 1
do_x
do_y
when 2
# nothing
else
do_x
do_z
end
Move assignment_questionnaires.each do |aq|
# If the AQ questionnaire matches the type of the questionnaire that needs to be updated, return it
return aq if aq.questionnaire_id && Questionnaire.find(aq.questionnaire_id).type == questionnaire_type
end
out of the conditional. Open
assignment_questionnaires.each do |aq|
# If the AQ questionnaire matches the type of the questionnaire that needs to be updated, return it
return aq if aq.questionnaire_id && Questionnaire.find(aq.questionnaire_id).type == questionnaire_type
end
- Read upRead up
- Exclude checks
This cop checks for identical lines at the beginning or end of each branch of a conditional statement.
Example:
# bad
if condition
do_x
do_z
else
do_y
do_z
end
# good
if condition
do_x
else
do_y
end
do_z
# bad
if condition
do_z
do_x
else
do_z
do_y
end
# good
do_z
if condition
do_x
else
do_y
end
# bad
case foo
when 1
do_x
when 2
do_x
else
do_x
end
# good
case foo
when 1
do_x
do_y
when 2
# nothing
else
do_x
do_z
end
Use snake_case for variable names. Open
assignmentId = job.args.first
- Read upRead up
- Exclude checks
This cop makes sure that all variables use the configured style, snake_case or camelCase, for their names.
Example: EnforcedStyle: snake_case (default)
# bad
fooBar = 1
# good
foo_bar = 1
Example: EnforcedStyle: camelCase
# bad
foo_bar = 1
# good
fooBar = 1
Use a guard clause instead of wrapping the code inside a conditional expression. Open
unless @has_errors
- 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
Use a guard clause instead of wrapping the code inside a conditional expression. Open
unless total_weight.zero? || total_weight == 100
- 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
Move assignment_questionnaires.each do |aq|
# If the AQ questionnaire matches the type of the questionnaire that needs to be updated, return it
return aq if aq.questionnaire_id && Questionnaire.find(aq.questionnaire_id).type == questionnaire_type
end
out of the conditional. Open
assignment_questionnaires.each do |aq|
# If the AQ questionnaire matches the type of the questionnaire that needs to be updated, return it
return aq if aq.questionnaire_id && Questionnaire.find(aq.questionnaire_id).type == questionnaire_type
end
- Read upRead up
- Exclude checks
This cop checks for identical lines at the beginning or end of each branch of a conditional statement.
Example:
# bad
if condition
do_x
do_z
else
do_y
do_z
end
# good
if condition
do_x
else
do_y
end
do_z
# bad
if condition
do_z
do_x
else
do_z
do_y
end
# good
do_z
if condition
do_x
else
do_y
end
# bad
case foo
when 1
do_x
when 2
do_x
else
do_x
end
# good
case foo
when 1
do_x
do_y
when 2
# nothing
else
do_x
do_z
end
Prefer Date or Time over DateTime. Open
curr_time = DateTime.now.in_time_zone('UTC').to_s(:db)
- Read upRead up
- Exclude checks
This cop checks for uses of DateTime
that should be replaced by
Date
or Time
.
Example:
# bad - uses `DateTime` for current time
DateTime.now
# good - uses `Time` for current time
Time.now
# bad - uses `DateTime` for modern date
DateTime.iso8601('2016-06-29')
# good - uses `Date` for modern date
Date.iso8601('2016-06-29')
# good - uses `DateTime` with start argument for historical date
DateTime.iso8601('1751-04-23', Date::ENGLAND)
Use a guard clause instead of wrapping the code inside a conditional expression. Open
if assignment && badge
- 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