Showing 774 of 774 total issues
Function selectionChanged
has 41 lines of code (exceeds 25 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def selectionChanged(e: SelectionEvent): Unit = {
if (CodeInsightSettings.getInstance().HIGHLIGHT_IDENTIFIER_UNDER_CARET) {
if (e.getEditor == editor) {
selectedSymbHighlights.foreach(h => editor.getMarkupModel.removeHighlighter(h))
selectedSymbHighlights.clear()
Function editorOpened
has 41 lines of code (exceeds 25 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def editorOpened(editor: Editor): Unit = {
if (!loadedExtensions) {
val extensions = LanguageServerDefinition.getAllDefinitions.filter(s => !extToServerDefinition.contains(s.ext))
LOG.info("Added serverDefinitions " + extensions + " from plugins")
extToServerDefinition = extToServerDefinition ++ extensions.map(s => (s.ext, s))
Function connect
has 39 lines of code (exceeds 25 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def connect(editor: Editor): Unit = {
val uri = FileUtils.editorToURIString(editor)
if (!this.connectedEditors.contains(uri)) {
start()
if (this.initializeFuture != null && editor != null) {
Function signatureHelp
has 38 lines of code (exceeds 25 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def signatureHelp(): Unit = {
val lPos = editor.getCaretModel.getCurrentCaret.getLogicalPosition
val point = editor.logicalPositionToXY(lPos)
val params = new TextDocumentPositionParams(identifier, DocumentUtils.logicalToLSPPos(lPos, editor))
pool(() => {
Function mouseMoved
has 37 lines of code (exceeds 25 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def mouseMoved(e: EditorMouseEvent): Unit = {
if (e.getEditor == editor) {
val language = PsiDocumentManager.getInstance(project).getPsiFile(editor.getDocument).getLanguage
if ((EditorSettingsExternalizable.getInstance().isShowQuickDocOnMouseOverElement && //Fixes double doc if documentation provider is present
(LanguageDocumentation.INSTANCE.allForLanguage(language).isEmpty || language.equals(PlainTextLanguage.INSTANCE))) || isCtrlDown) {
Function workspaceSymbols
has 37 lines of code (exceeds 25 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def workspaceSymbols(name: String, pattern: String, project: Project, includeNonProjectItems: Boolean = false, onlyKind: Set[SymbolKind] = Set()): Array[NavigationItem] = {
projectToLanguageWrappers.get(FileUtils.pathToUri(project.getBasePath)) match {
case Some(set) =>
val params: WorkspaceSymbolParams = new WorkspaceSymbolParams(name)
val servDefToReq = set.collect {
Function documentChanged
has 37 lines of code (exceeds 25 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def documentChanged(event: DocumentEvent): Unit = {
if (!editor.isDisposed) {
if (event.getDocument == editor.getDocument) {
predTime = System.nanoTime() //So that there are no hover events while typing
changesParams.getTextDocument.setVersion({
Function createCtrlRange
has 36 lines of code (exceeds 25 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
private def createCtrlRange(serverPos: Position, range: Range): Unit = {
val loc = requestDefinition(serverPos)
if (loc != null) {
if (!editor.isDisposed) {
val corRange = if (range == null) {
Function requestDoc
has a Cognitive Complexity of 12 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def requestDoc(editor: Editor, offset: Int): String = {
if (editor == this.editor) {
if (offset != -1) {
val serverPos = DocumentUtils.offsetToLSPPos(editor, offset)
val request = requestManager.hover(new TextDocumentPositionParams(identifier, serverPos))
- 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
Function checkFile
has 35 lines of code (exceeds 25 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
override def checkFile(file: PsiFile, manager: InspectionManager, isOnTheFly: Boolean): Array[ProblemDescriptor] = {
val virtualFile = file.getVirtualFile
if (PluginMain.isExtensionSupported(virtualFile.getExtension)) {
val uri = FileUtils.VFSToURI(virtualFile)
Function willSaveWaitUntil
has 34 lines of code (exceeds 25 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
private def willSaveWaitUntil(): Unit = {
if (wrapper.isWillSaveWaitUntil) {
pool(() => {
if (!editor.isDisposed) {
val params = new WillSaveTextDocumentParams(identifier, TextDocumentSaveReason.Manual)
Function diagnostics
has 34 lines of code (exceeds 25 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def diagnostics(diagnostics: Iterable[Diagnostic]): Unit = {
pool(() => {
if (!editor.isDisposed) {
invokeLater(() => {
diagnosticsHighlights.foreach(highlight => editor.getMarkupModel.removeHighlighter(highlight.rangeHighlighter))
Identical blocks of code found in 2 locations. Consider refactoring. Open
fields.get(label).fold("") {
case t: JTextField => t.getText().trim
case tb: TextFieldWithBrowseButton => tb.getText.trim
case b: JComboBox[String@unchecked] => b.getSelectedItem.asInstanceOf[String]
case u: JComponent => LOG.error("Unknown JComponent : " + u)
- 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 111.
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 2 locations. Consider refactoring. Open
Array(typ) ++ fields.values.map {
case t: JTextField => t.getText().trim
case tb: TextFieldWithBrowseButton => tb.getText.trim
case b: JComboBox[String@unchecked] => b.getSelectedItem.asInstanceOf[String]
case u: JComponent => LOG.error("Unknown JComponent : " + u)
- 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 111.
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
Function documentReferences
has 33 lines of code (exceeds 25 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def documentReferences(offset: Int): Iterable[(Int, Int)] = {
val params = new ReferenceParams()
val context = new ReferenceContext()
context.setIncludeDeclaration(true)
params.setContext(context)
Function checkFile
has a Cognitive Complexity of 11 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
override def checkFile(file: PsiFile, manager: InspectionManager, isOnTheFly: Boolean): Array[ProblemDescriptor] = {
val virtualFile = file.getVirtualFile
if (PluginMain.isExtensionSupported(virtualFile.getExtension)) {
val uri = FileUtils.VFSToURI(virtualFile)
- 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
Function connect
has a Cognitive Complexity of 11 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
@throws[IOException]
def connect(editor: Editor): Unit = {
val uri = FileUtils.editorToURIString(editor)
if (!this.connectedEditors.contains(uri)) {
start()
- 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
Function requestDoc
has 30 lines of code (exceeds 25 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def requestDoc(editor: Editor, offset: Int): String = {
if (editor == this.editor) {
if (offset != -1) {
val serverPos = DocumentUtils.offsetToLSPPos(editor, offset)
val request = requestManager.hover(new TextDocumentPositionParams(identifier, serverPos))
Function showReferences
has 30 lines of code (exceeds 25 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def showReferences(includeDefinition: Boolean = true): Unit = {
pool(() => {
if (!editor.isDisposed) {
val context = new ReferenceContext(includeDefinition)
val params = new ReferenceParams(context)
Similar blocks of code found in 2 locations. Consider refactoring. Open
EditorEventManager.forEditor(editor) match {
case Some(manager) =>
val renameTo = Messages.showInputDialog(editor.getProject, "Enter new name: ", "Rename", Messages.getQuestionIcon, "", new NonEmptyInputValidator())
if (renameTo != null && renameTo != "") manager.rename(renameTo)
case None =>
- 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 102.
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