Showing 407 of 407 total issues
Similar blocks of code found in 7 locations. Consider refactoring. Open
class << self
def create(tab, item)
res = GoodData::GeoChartItem.new(tab, GoodData::Helpers.deep_dup(GoodData::Helpers.stringify_keys(EMPTY_OBJECT)))
item.each do |k, v|
res.send("#{k}=", v) if ASSIGNABLE_MEMBERS.include? k
- 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 32.
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 7 locations. Consider refactoring. Open
class << self
def create(tab, item)
res = GoodData::HeadlineItem.new(tab, GoodData::Helpers.deep_dup(GoodData::Helpers.stringify_keys(EMPTY_OBJECT)))
item.each do |k, v|
res.send("#{k}=", v) if ASSIGNABLE_MEMBERS.include? k
- 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 32.
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 7 locations. Consider refactoring. Open
class << self
def create(dashboard, tab)
res = GoodData::DashboardTab.new(dashboard, GoodData::Helpers.deep_dup(GoodData::Helpers.stringify_keys(EMPTY_OBJECT)))
tab.each do |k, v|
res.send("#{k}=", v) if ASSIGNABLE_MEMBERS.include? k
- 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 32.
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 7 locations. Consider refactoring. Open
class << self
def create(tab, item)
res = GoodData::FilterApply.new(tab, GoodData::Helpers.deep_dup(GoodData::Helpers.stringify_keys(EMPTY_OBJECT)))
item.each do |k, v|
res.send("#{k}=", v) if ASSIGNABLE_MEMBERS.include? k
- 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 32.
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 7 locations. Consider refactoring. Open
class << self
def create(tab, item)
res = GoodData::TextItem.new(tab, GoodData::Helpers.deep_dup(GoodData::Helpers.stringify_keys(EMPTY_OBJECT)))
item.each do |k, v|
res.send("#{k}=", v) if ASSIGNABLE_MEMBERS.include? k
- 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 32.
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 id == :all
data = c.get uri
data['channelConfigurations']['items'].map { |channel_data| c.create(ChannelConfiguration, channel_data) }
else
c.create(ChannelConfiguration, c.get("#{uri}/#{id}"))
- 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 32.
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 get_user
has a Cognitive Complexity of 6 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def get_user(slug, user_list = users)
search_crit = if slug.respond_to?(:login)
slug.login || slug.uri
elsif slug.is_a?(Hash)
slug[:login] || slug[:uri]
- 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 a Cognitive Complexity of 6 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def ==(other)
# to_hash == other.to_hash
return false unless id == other.id
return false unless title == other.title
left = to_hash[:datasets].map { |d| d[:columns].to_set }.to_set
- 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 delete_all_data
has a Cognitive Complexity of 6 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def delete_all_data(options = {})
return false unless options[:force]
begin
datasets.reject(&:date_dimension?).pmap(&:delete_data)
rescue MaqlExecutionError => e
- 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 a Cognitive Complexity of 6 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def validate
fail 'Invalid data source json data' unless @json['dataSource']
fail 'Data source connection info has to be provided' unless @json['dataSource']['connectionInfo']
fail 'Data source name has to be provided' if name.nil? || name.blank?
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
Method build_connection_info
has a Cognitive Complexity of 6 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def build_connection_info
return snowflake_connection_info if is(SNOWFLAKE)
return redshift_connection_info if is(REDSHIFT)
return bigquery_connection_info if is(BIGQUERY)
return generic_connection_info if is(GENERIC)
- 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 a Cognitive Complexity of 6 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def validate
fail 'Data source url has to be provided' if url.nil? || url.blank?
fail 'Data source database has to be provided' if database.nil? || database.blank?
fail ERROR_MESSAGE_NO_SCHEMA if schema.nil? || schema.blank?
fail 'Data source warehouse has to be provided' if warehouse.nil? || warehouse.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
Method to_b
has a Cognitive Complexity of 6 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def to_b
return true if self == true || self =~ (/(true|t|yes|y|1)$/i)
return false if self == false || blank? || self =~ (/(false|f|no|n|0)$/i)
raise ArgumentError, "invalid value for Boolean: \"#{self}\""
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
Method []
has a Cognitive Complexity of 6 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def [](id = :all, opts = { client: GoodData.connection })
c = GoodData.get_client(opts)
pid = (opts[:project].respond_to?(:pid) && opts[:project].pid) || opts[:project]
process_id = (opts[:process].respond_to?(:process_id) && opts[:process].process_id) || opts[:process]
uri = NOTIFICATION_RULES_PATH % [pid, process_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
Method execute
has a Cognitive Complexity of 6 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def execute(options = {})
left = Array(options[:left])
top = Array(options[:top])
metrics = (left + top).select { |item| item.respond_to?(:metric?) && item.metric? }
- 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_metric
has a Cognitive Complexity of 6 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def create_metric(options = {})
an_attribute = options[:attribute]
a_type = options[:type] || :count
unless ATTRIBUTE_BASE_AGGREGATIONS.include?(a_type)
fail 'Suggested aggreagtion function (#{a_type}) does not exist for ' \
- 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 sso_url
has a Cognitive Complexity of 6 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def sso_url(login, provider, url, opts = DEFAULT_SSO_OPTIONS)
opts = DEFAULT_SSO_OPTIONS.merge(opts)
ts = DateTime.now.strftime('%s').to_i + opts[:valid]
obj = {
- 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 slice
has a Cognitive Complexity of 6 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def slice(rows, cols)
rows = rows.is_a?(Enumerable) ? rows : [rows, size.first]
cols = cols.is_a?(Enumerable) ? cols : [cols, size.last]
new_data = @data[rows.first..rows.last].map { |col| col[cols.first..cols.last] }
if client
- 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 replace
has a Cognitive Complexity of 6 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def replace(obj, mapping, &block)
json = mapping.reduce(obj.to_json) do |a, e|
obj_a, obj_b = e
uri_what = obj_a.respond_to?(:uri) ? obj_a.uri : obj_a
uri_for_what = obj_b.respond_to?(:uri) ? obj_b.uri : obj_b
- 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 initialize
has a Cognitive Complexity of 6 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def initialize(init_data)
some_data = if init_data.respond_to?(:project_blueprint?) && init_data.project_blueprint?
init_data.to_hash
elsif init_data.respond_to?(:to_blueprint)
init_data.to_blueprint.to_hash
- 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"