Showing 22 of 22 total issues
Method validate
has a Cognitive Complexity of 16 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def validate(machine)
errors = _detected_errors
if backed_by_cloud_provider?(machine)
machine.ui.warn("Disabling vagrant-notify, cloud provider #{machine.provider_name} in use.")
- 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 action_start_server
has a Cognitive Complexity of 16 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def action_start_server
Vagrant::Action::Builder.new.tap do |b|
b.use Call, CheckProvider do |env, b2|
next if !env[:result]
- 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
Identical blocks of code found in 4 locations. Consider refactoring. Open
OptionParser.new do |opts|
opts.on('-u', '--urgency LEVEL') { |v| options[:u] = v } # Option gets removed
opts.on('-t', '--expire-time TIME') { |v| options[:t] = v } # Option gets removed
opts.on('-a', '--app-name APP_NAME') { |v| options[:a] = v } # TO DO: Set to -title
opts.on('-i', '--icon ICON[,ICON...]') { |v| options[:i] = v } # Option gets removed
- 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 76.
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
Identical blocks of code found in 4 locations. Consider refactoring. Open
OptionParser.new do |opts|
opts.on('-u', '--urgency LEVEL') { |v| options[:u] = v } # TO DO: set to priority
opts.on('-t', '--expire-time TIME') { |v| options[:t] = v } # Set to timeout (notify-send milliseconds to snarl seconds)
opts.on('-a', '--app-name APP_NAME') { |v| options[:a] = v } # Option gets removed
opts.on('-i', '--icon ICON[,ICON...]') { |v| options[:i] = v } # Option gets removed (Snarl does not properly handle masked git-bash/cygwin absoute paths)
- 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 76.
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
Identical blocks of code found in 4 locations. Consider refactoring. Open
OptionParser.new do |opts|
opts.on('-u', '--urgency LEVEL') { |v| options[:u] = v } # TO DO: set to --priority
opts.on('-t', '--expire-time TIME') { |v| options[:t] = v } # Option gets removed
opts.on('-a', '--app-name APP_NAME') { |v| options[:a] = v } # Set to --name
opts.on('-i', '--icon ICON[,ICON...]') { |v| options[:i] = v } # Set to --image
- 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 76.
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
Identical blocks of code found in 4 locations. Consider refactoring. Open
OptionParser.new do |opts|
opts.on('-u', '--urgency LEVEL') { |v| options[:u] = v } # Option gets removed
opts.on('-t', '--expire-time TIME') { |v| options[:t] = v } # Option gets removed
opts.on('-a', '--app-name APP_NAME') { |v| options[:a] = v } # TO DO: Set to -title
opts.on('-i', '--icon ICON[,ICON...]') { |v| options[:i] = v } # Option gets removed
- 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 76.
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
Method execute
has 46 lines of code (exceeds 25 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def execute
options = {}
opts = OptionParser.new do |o|
o.banner = 'Usage: vagrant notify'
o.separator ''
Method execute
has a Cognitive Complexity of 14 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def execute
options = {}
opts = OptionParser.new do |o|
o.banner = 'Usage: vagrant notify'
o.separator ''
- 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 call
has a Cognitive Complexity of 11 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def call(env)
message = notify_provision_messages(env) unless env[:machine].config.notify.enable == false
system(message[:start]) unless env[:machine].config.notify.enable == false
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
Method action_status_server
has a Cognitive Complexity of 10 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def action_status_server
Vagrant::Action::Builder.new.tap do |b|
b.use Call, CheckProvider do |env, b2|
next if !env[:result]
- 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 validate
has 27 lines of code (exceeds 25 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def validate(machine)
errors = _detected_errors
if backed_by_cloud_provider?(machine)
machine.ui.warn("Disabling vagrant-notify, cloud provider #{machine.provider_name} in use.")
Method run
has 8 arguments (exceeds 4 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def self.run(id, port, bind_ip, sender_app, sender_params_str, sender_params_escape, machine_name='default', provider='virtualbox')
Similar blocks of code found in 2 locations. Consider refactoring. Open
if ARGV.length == 0
puts "No summary specified"
exit 1
elsif ARGV.length == 1
message = "-message '\\#{ARGV[0]}'"
- 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 44.
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 ARGV.length == 0
puts "No summary specified"
exit 1
elsif ARGV.length == 1
message = "\"#{ARGV[0]}\""
- 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 44.
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
Method initialize
has 6 arguments (exceeds 4 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def initialize(id, sender_app, sender_params_str, sender_params_escape, machine_name = :default, provider = :virtualbox)
Method action_stop_server
has a Cognitive Complexity of 8 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def action_stop_server
Vagrant::Action::Builder.new.tap do |b|
b.use Call, CheckProvider do |env, b2|
next if !env[:result]
- 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 valid_process?
has a Cognitive Complexity of 7 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def valid_process?(pid)
if RUBY_PLATFORM =~ /mswin|msys|mingw|cygwin|bccwin|wince|emc/
Vagrant::Notify::Action::Windows::ProcessInfo.queryProcess(pid) if pid
else
Process.getpgid(pid.to_i) if pid
- 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 queryProcess
has a Cognitive Complexity of 7 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def self.queryProcess(pid)
return false unless pid =~ /\A\d+\z/
result = `c\:/Windows/System32/wbem/WMIC.exe process where \"ProcessID = '#{pid}'\" get ProcessID,Commandline /format:list 2>nul`
querypid = false
result.split(/\r?\n/).each do |line|
- 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 which
has a Cognitive Complexity of 6 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def which(cmd)
exts = ENV['PATHEXT'] ? ENV['PATHEXT'].split(';') : ['']
ENV['PATH'].split(File::PATH_SEPARATOR).each do |path|
exts.each { |ext|
exe = File.join(path, "#{cmd}#{ext}")
- 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 next_available_port
has a Cognitive Complexity of 6 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def next_available_port(bind_ip)
# Determine a list of usable ports for us to use
usable_ports = Set.new(@env[:machine].config.vm.usable_port_range)
# Pass one, remove all defined host ports from usable ports
- 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"