Sign upLogin

gcds/libeagle

View on GitHub
Star

Showing 8 of 8 total issues

File eagle.rb has 588 lines of code (exceeds 250 allowed). Consider refactoring.
Open

require_relative "types"
module LibEagle

  CLASS_NAMES = {
    'eagle' => "Eagle",
Severity: Major
Found in lib/libeagle/eagle.rb - About 1 day to fix

    Method valid? has a Cognitive Complexity of 13 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring.
    Open

        def valid?
      self.class.lib_eagle_objects[:attributes].each_pair do |attribute, params|
        value = self.instance_variable_get("@attribute_#{attribute}")
        if params[:required]
          unless value
    Severity: Minor
    Found in lib/libeagle/base.rb - About 1 hr to fix

    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 attribute has a Cognitive Complexity of 12 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring.
    Open

        def self.attribute(attribute_name, params = {})
      attribute_name = attribute_name.to_s
      variable_name = "@attribute_#{attribute_name}"

      # Initialize place inside LibEagle objects
    Severity: Minor
    Found in lib/libeagle/base.rb - About 1 hr to fix

    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 new_with_xml has a Cognitive Complexity of 10 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring.
    Open

        def self.new_with_xml(xml)
      @base_class = self.new

      if @lib_eagle_objects[:text_content]
        @base_class.instance_variable_set("@content", xml.content)
    Severity: Minor
    Found in lib/libeagle/base.rb - About 1 hr to fix

    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 is_valid? has a Cognitive Complexity of 9 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring.
    Open

        def is_valid?(attribute,value)
      params = self.class.lib_eagle_objects[:attributes][attribute]
        if params[:required]
          unless value
            raise AttributeRequired.new("#{self.class.name}: #{attribute} is required")
    Severity: Minor
    Found in lib/libeagle/base.rb - About 55 mins to fix

    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 lib_eagle_objects has a Cognitive Complexity of 7 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring.
    Open

        def self.lib_eagle_objects
      @lib_eagle_objects ||= Hash.new
      @lib_eagle_objects[:attributes] ||= {}
      @lib_eagle_objects[:objects] ||= {}
      @lib_eagle_objects[:empty_element] ||= false
    Severity: Minor
    Found in lib/libeagle/base.rb - About 35 mins to fix

    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 2 locations. Consider refactoring.
    Open

            if params[:type] && value
          unless params[:type] =~ value
            raise AttributeValueInvalid.new("`#{attribute}` value: \"#{value}\" isn't in valid range (#{params[:type]})")
            return false
          end
    Severity: Minor
    Found in lib/libeagle/base.rb and 1 other location - About 25 mins to fix
    lib/libeagle/base.rb on lines 148..153

    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 30.

    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

    Further Reading

    Identical blocks of code found in 2 locations. Consider refactoring.
    Open

            if params[:type] && value
          unless params[:type] =~ value
            raise AttributeValueInvalid.new("`#{attribute}` value: \"#{value}\" isn't in valid range (#{params[:type]})")
            return false
          end
    Severity: Minor
    Found in lib/libeagle/base.rb and 1 other location - About 25 mins to fix
    lib/libeagle/base.rb on lines 167..172

    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 30.

    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

    Further Reading

    Severity
    Category
    Status
    Source
    Language