jenkinsci/hpe-application-automation-tools-plugin

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 40.

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

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 40.

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

CollapsibleIfStatements

Since: PMD 3.1

Priority: Medium

Categories: Style

Remediation Points: 50000

Sometimes two consecutive 'if' statements can be consolidated by separating their conditions with a boolean short-circuit operator.

Example:

void bar() {
 if (x) { // original implementation
 if (y) {
 // do stuff
 }
 }
}

void bar() {
 if (x && y) { // optimized implementation
 // do stuff
 }
}

CollapsibleIfStatements

Since: PMD 3.1

Priority: Medium

Categories: Style

Remediation Points: 50000

Sometimes two consecutive 'if' statements can be consolidated by separating their conditions with a boolean short-circuit operator.

Example:

void bar() {
 if (x) { // original implementation
 if (y) {
 // do stuff
 }
 }
}

void bar() {
 if (x && y) { // optimized implementation
 // do stuff
 }
}

CollapsibleIfStatements

Since: PMD 3.1

Priority: Medium

Categories: Style

Remediation Points: 50000

Sometimes two consecutive 'if' statements can be consolidated by separating their conditions with a boolean short-circuit operator.

Example:

void bar() {
 if (x) { // original implementation
 if (y) {
 // do stuff
 }
 }
}

void bar() {
 if (x && y) { // optimized implementation
 // do stuff
 }
}

CollapsibleIfStatements

Since: PMD 3.1

Priority: Medium

Categories: Style

Remediation Points: 50000

Sometimes two consecutive 'if' statements can be consolidated by separating their conditions with a boolean short-circuit operator.

Example:

void bar() {
 if (x) { // original implementation
 if (y) {
 // do stuff
 }
 }
}

void bar() {
 if (x && y) { // optimized implementation
 // do stuff
 }
}

CollapsibleIfStatements

Since: PMD 3.1

Priority: Medium

Categories: Style

Remediation Points: 50000

Sometimes two consecutive 'if' statements can be consolidated by separating their conditions with a boolean short-circuit operator.

Example:

void bar() {
 if (x) { // original implementation
 if (y) {
 // do stuff
 }
 }
}

void bar() {
 if (x && y) { // optimized implementation
 // do stuff
 }
}

CollapsibleIfStatements

Since: PMD 3.1

Priority: Medium

Categories: Style

Remediation Points: 50000

Sometimes two consecutive 'if' statements can be consolidated by separating their conditions with a boolean short-circuit operator.

Example:

void bar() {
 if (x) { // original implementation
 if (y) {
 // do stuff
 }
 }
}

void bar() {
 if (x && y) { // optimized implementation
 // do stuff
 }
}

Abstract classes should not have public constructors. Constructors of abstract classes can only be called in constructors of their subclasses. So there is no point in making them public. The protected modifier should be enough.

Noncompliant Code Example

public abstract class AbstractClass1 {
    public AbstractClass1 () { // Noncompliant, has public modifier
        // do something here
    }
}

Compliant Solution

public abstract class AbstractClass2 {
    protected AbstractClass2 () {
        // do something here
    }
}

It is highly recommended not to use wildcard types as return types. Because the type inference rules are fairly complex it is unlikely the user of that API will know how to use it correctly.

Let's take the example of method returning a "List<? extends Animal>". Is it possible on this list to add a Dog, a Cat, ... we simply don't know. And neither does the compiler, which is why it will not allow such a direct use. The use of wildcard types should be limited to method parameters.

This rule raises an issue when a method returns a wildcard type.

Noncompliant Code Example

List<? extends Animal> getAnimals(){...}

Compliant Solution

List<Animal> getAnimals(){...}

or

List<Dog> getAnimals(){...}