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

• Cognitive Complexity docs
• Cognitive Complexity: A new way of measuring understandability

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

• Cognitive Complexity docs
• Cognitive Complexity: A new way of measuring understandability

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

• Cognitive Complexity docs
• Cognitive Complexity: A new way of measuring understandability

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

• Cognitive Complexity docs
• Cognitive Complexity: A new way of measuring understandability

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

• Cognitive Complexity docs
• Cognitive Complexity: A new way of measuring understandability

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

• Cognitive Complexity docs
• Cognitive Complexity: A new way of measuring understandability

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

• Cognitive Complexity docs
• Cognitive Complexity: A new way of measuring understandability

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

• Cognitive Complexity docs
• Cognitive Complexity: A new way of measuring understandability

This cop enforces the consistent usage of %-literal delimiters.

Specify the 'default' key to set all preferred delimiters at once. You can continue to specify individual preferred delimiters to override the default.

Example:

# Style/PercentLiteralDelimiters:
#   PreferredDelimiters:
#     default: '[]'
#     '%i':    '()'
 
# good
%w[alpha beta] + %i(gamma delta)
 
# bad
%W(alpha #{beta})
 
# bad
%I(alpha beta)

This cop enforces the consistent usage of %-literal delimiters.

Specify the 'default' key to set all preferred delimiters at once. You can continue to specify individual preferred delimiters to override the default.

Example:

# Style/PercentLiteralDelimiters:
#   PreferredDelimiters:
#     default: '[]'
#     '%i':    '()'
 
# good
%w[alpha beta] + %i(gamma delta)
 
# bad
%W(alpha #{beta})
 
# bad
%I(alpha beta)

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

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

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

This cop enforces the consistent usage of %-literal delimiters.

Specify the 'default' key to set all preferred delimiters at once. You can continue to specify individual preferred delimiters to override the default.

Example:

# Style/PercentLiteralDelimiters:
#   PreferredDelimiters:
#     default: '[]'
#     '%i':    '()'
 
# good
%w[alpha beta] + %i(gamma delta)
 
# bad
%W(alpha #{beta})
 
# bad
%I(alpha beta)

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

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

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

Dependencies in the gemspec should be alphabetically sorted.

Example:

# bad
spec.add_dependency 'rubocop'
spec.add_dependency 'rspec'
 
# good
spec.add_dependency 'rspec'
spec.add_dependency 'rubocop'
 
# good
spec.add_dependency 'rubocop'
 
spec.add_dependency 'rspec'
 
# bad
spec.add_development_dependency 'rubocop'
spec.add_development_dependency 'rspec'
 
# good
spec.add_development_dependency 'rspec'
spec.add_development_dependency 'rubocop'
 
# good
spec.add_development_dependency 'rubocop'
 
spec.add_development_dependency 'rspec'
 
# bad
spec.add_runtime_dependency 'rubocop'
spec.add_runtime_dependency 'rspec'
 
# good
spec.add_runtime_dependency 'rspec'
spec.add_runtime_dependency 'rubocop'
 
# good
spec.add_runtime_dependency 'rubocop'
 
spec.add_runtime_dependency 'rspec'
 
# good only if TreatCommentsAsGroupSeparators is true
# For code quality
spec.add_dependency 'rubocop'
# For tests
spec.add_dependency 'rspec'

Dependencies in the gemspec should be alphabetically sorted.

Example:

# bad
spec.add_dependency 'rubocop'
spec.add_dependency 'rspec'
 
# good
spec.add_dependency 'rspec'
spec.add_dependency 'rubocop'
 
# good
spec.add_dependency 'rubocop'
 
spec.add_dependency 'rspec'
 
# bad
spec.add_development_dependency 'rubocop'
spec.add_development_dependency 'rspec'
 
# good
spec.add_development_dependency 'rspec'
spec.add_development_dependency 'rubocop'
 
# good
spec.add_development_dependency 'rubocop'
 
spec.add_development_dependency 'rspec'
 
# bad
spec.add_runtime_dependency 'rubocop'
spec.add_runtime_dependency 'rspec'
 
# good
spec.add_runtime_dependency 'rspec'
spec.add_runtime_dependency 'rubocop'
 
# good
spec.add_runtime_dependency 'rubocop'
 
spec.add_runtime_dependency 'rspec'
 
# good only if TreatCommentsAsGroupSeparators is true
# For code quality
spec.add_dependency 'rubocop'
# For tests
spec.add_dependency 'rspec'

This cop enforces the consistent usage of %-literal delimiters.

Specify the 'default' key to set all preferred delimiters at once. You can continue to specify individual preferred delimiters to override the default.

Example:

# Style/PercentLiteralDelimiters:
#   PreferredDelimiters:
#     default: '[]'
#     '%i':    '()'
 
# good
%w[alpha beta] + %i(gamma delta)
 
# bad
%W(alpha #{beta})
 
# bad
%I(alpha beta)