Function `action` has a Cognitive Complexity of 9 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring.
Open

    action (val, p) {
      if (this.sem) {
        if (val === null) { return }
        this.sem = false
        if (val && this.callback instanceof Function) this.callback()

Found in src/modal/script.js - About 55 mins to fix

Read up
Read 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"

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 67.

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

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 67.

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

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 67.

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

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 67.

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

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"

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"

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"

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"

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"

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"

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 61.

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

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 61.

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

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 60.

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

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 60.

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

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"

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"

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"

Require or disallow a space before function parenthesis (space-before-function-paren)

When formatting a function, whitespace is allowed between the function name or function keyword and the opening paren. Named functions also require a space between the function keyword and the function name, but anonymous functions require no whitespace. For example:

function withoutSpace(x) {
    // ...
}

function withSpace (x) {
    // ...
}

var anonymousWithoutSpace = function() {};

var anonymousWithSpace = function () {};

Style guides may require a space after the function keyword for anonymous functions, while others specify no whitespace. Similarly, the space after a function name may or may not be required.

Rule Details

This rule aims to enforce consistent spacing before function parentheses and as such, will warn whenever whitespace doesn't match the preferences specified.

Options

This rule has a string option or an object option:

{
    "space-before-function-paren": ["error", "always"],
    // or
    "space-before-function-paren": ["error", {
        "anonymous": "always",
        "named": "always",
        "asyncArrow": "ignore"
    }],
}

always (default) requires a space followed by the ( of arguments.
never disallows any space followed by the ( of arguments.

The string option does not check async arrow function expressions for backward compatibility.

You can also use a separate option for each type of function. Each of the following options can be set to "always", "never", or "ignore". Default is "always" basically.

anonymous is for anonymous function expressions (e.g. function () {}).
named is for named function expressions (e.g. function foo () {}).
asyncArrow is for async arrow function expressions (e.g. async () => {}). asyncArrow is set to "ignore" by default for backwards compatibility.

"always"

Examples of incorrect code for this rule with the default "always" option:

/*eslint space-before-function-paren: "error"*/
/*eslint-env es6*/

function foo() {
    // ...
}

var bar = function() {
    // ...
};

var bar = function foo() {
    // ...
};

class Foo {
    constructor() {
        // ...
    }
}

var foo = {
    bar() {
        // ...
    }
};

Examples of correct code for this rule with the default "always" option:

/*eslint space-before-function-paren: "error"*/
/*eslint-env es6*/

function foo () {
    // ...
}

var bar = function () {
    // ...
};

var bar = function foo () {
    // ...
};

class Foo {
    constructor () {
        // ...
    }
}

var foo = {
    bar () {
        // ...
    }
};

// async arrow function expressions are ignored by default.
var foo = async () => 1
var foo = async() => 1

"never"

Examples of incorrect code for this rule with the "never" option:

/*eslint space-before-function-paren: ["error", "never"]*/
/*eslint-env es6*/

function foo () {
    // ...
}

var bar = function () {
    // ...
};

var bar = function foo () {
    // ...
};

class Foo {
    constructor () {
        // ...
    }
}

var foo = {
    bar () {
        // ...
    }
};

Examples of correct code for this rule with the "never" option:

/*eslint space-before-function-paren: ["error", "never"]*/
/*eslint-env es6*/

function foo() {
    // ...
}

var bar = function() {
    // ...
};

var bar = function foo() {
    // ...
};

class Foo {
    constructor() {
        // ...
    }
}

var foo = {
    bar() {
        // ...
    }
};

// async arrow function expressions are ignored by default.
var foo = async () => 1
var foo = async() => 1

`{"anonymous": "always", "named": "never", "asyncArrow": "always"}`

Examples of incorrect code for this rule with the {"anonymous": "always", "named": "never", "asyncArrow": "always"} option:

/*eslint space-before-function-paren: ["error", {"anonymous": "always", "named": "never", "asyncArrow": "always"}]*/
/*eslint-env es6*/

function foo () {
    // ...
}

var bar = function() {
    // ...
};

class Foo {
    constructor () {
        // ...
    }
}

var foo = {
    bar () {
        // ...
    }
};

var foo = async(a) => await a

Examples of correct code for this rule with the {"anonymous": "always", "named": "never", "asyncArrow": "always"} option:

/*eslint space-before-function-paren: ["error", {"anonymous": "always", "named": "never", "asyncArrow": "always"}]*/
/*eslint-env es6*/

function foo() {
    // ...
}

var bar = function () {
    // ...
};

class Foo {
    constructor() {
        // ...
    }
}

var foo = {
    bar() {
        // ...
    }
};

var foo = async (a) => await a

`{"anonymous": "never", "named": "always"}`

Examples of incorrect code for this rule with the {"anonymous": "never", "named": "always"} option:

/*eslint space-before-function-paren: ["error", { "anonymous": "never", "named": "always" }]*/
/*eslint-env es6*/

function foo() {
    // ...
}

var bar = function () {
    // ...
};

class Foo {
    constructor() {
        // ...
    }
}

var foo = {
    bar() {
        // ...
    }
};

Examples of correct code for this rule with the {"anonymous": "never", "named": "always"} option:

/*eslint space-before-function-paren: ["error", { "anonymous": "never", "named": "always" }]*/
/*eslint-env es6*/

function foo () {
    // ...
}

var bar = function() {
    // ...
};

class Foo {
    constructor () {
        // ...
    }
}

var foo = {
    bar () {
        // ...
    }
};

`{"anonymous": "ignore", "named": "always"}`

Examples of incorrect code for this rule with the {"anonymous": "ignore", "named": "always"} option:

/*eslint space-before-function-paren: ["error", { "anonymous": "ignore", "named": "always" }]*/
/*eslint-env es6*/

function foo() {
    // ...
}

class Foo {
    constructor() {
        // ...
    }
}

var foo = {
    bar() {
        // ...
    }
};

Examples of correct code for this rule with the {"anonymous": "ignore", "named": "always"} option:

/*eslint space-before-function-paren: ["error", { "anonymous": "ignore", "named": "always" }]*/
/*eslint-env es6*/

var bar = function() {
    // ...
};

var bar = function () {
    // ...
};

function foo () {
    // ...
}

class Foo {
    constructor () {
        // ...
    }
}

var foo = {
    bar () {
        // ...
    }
};

When Not To Use It

You can turn this rule off if you are not concerned with the consistency of spacing before function parenthesis.

Related Rules

[space-after-keywords](space-after-keywords.md)
[space-return-throw-case](space-return-throw-case.md) Source: http://eslint.org/docs/rules/

Unexpected trailing comma.
Open

          preset: ['default', {discardComments: {removeAll: true}}],

Found in webpack.config.prod.js by eslint

Read up
Read up
Exclude checks
- Disable engine
- Disable check

require or disallow trailing commas (comma-dangle)

Trailing commas in object literals are valid according to the ECMAScript 5 (and ECMAScript 3!) spec. However, IE8 (when not in IE8 document mode) and below will throw an error when it encounters trailing commas in JavaScript.

var foo = {
    bar: "baz",
    qux: "quux",
};

Trailing commas simplify adding and removing items to objects and arrays, since only the lines you are modifying must be touched. Another argument in favor of trailing commas is that it improves the clarity of diffs when an item is added or removed from an object or array:

Less clear:

var foo = {
-    bar: "baz",
-    qux: "quux"
+    bar: "baz"
 };

More clear:

var foo = {
     bar: "baz",
-    qux: "quux",
 };

Rule Details

This rule enforces consistent use of trailing commas in object and array literals.

Options

This rule has a string option or an object option:

{
    "comma-dangle": ["error", "never"],
    // or
    "comma-dangle": ["error", {
        "arrays": "never",
        "objects": "never",
        "imports": "never",
        "exports": "never",
        "functions": "ignore",
    }]
}

"never" (default) disallows trailing commas
"always" requires trailing commas
"always-multiline" requires trailing commas when the last element or property is in a different line than the closing ] or } and disallows trailing commas when the last element or property is on the same line as the closing ] or }
"only-multiline" allows (but does not require) trailing commas when the last element or property is in a different line than the closing ] or } and disallows trailing commas when the last element or property is on the same line as the closing ] or }

Trailing commas in function declarations and function calls are valid syntax since ECMAScript 2017; however, the string option does not check these situations for backwards compatibility.

You can also use an object option to configure this rule for each type of syntax. Each of the following options can be set to "never", "always", "always-multiline", "only-multiline", or "ignore". The default for each option is "never" unless otherwise specified.

arrays is for array literals and array patterns of destructuring. (e.g. let [a,] = [1,];)
objects is for object literals and object patterns of destructuring. (e.g. let {a,} = {a: 1};)
imports is for import declarations of ES Modules. (e.g. import {a,} from "foo";)
exports is for export declarations of ES Modules. (e.g. export {a,};)
functions is for function declarations and function calls. (e.g. (function(a,){ })(b,);)
functions is set to "ignore" by default for consistency with the string option.

never

Examples of incorrect code for this rule with the default "never" option:

/*eslint comma-dangle: ["error", "never"]*/

var foo = {
    bar: "baz",
    qux: "quux",
};

var arr = [1,2,];

foo({
  bar: "baz",
  qux: "quux",
});

Examples of correct code for this rule with the default "never" option:

/*eslint comma-dangle: ["error", "never"]*/

var foo = {
    bar: "baz",
    qux: "quux"
};

var arr = [1,2];

foo({
  bar: "baz",
  qux: "quux"
});

always

Examples of incorrect code for this rule with the "always" option:

/*eslint comma-dangle: ["error", "always"]*/

var foo = {
    bar: "baz",
    qux: "quux"
};

var arr = [1,2];

foo({
  bar: "baz",
  qux: "quux"
});

Examples of correct code for this rule with the "always" option:

/*eslint comma-dangle: ["error", "always"]*/

var foo = {
    bar: "baz",
    qux: "quux",
};

var arr = [1,2,];

foo({
  bar: "baz",
  qux: "quux",
});

always-multiline

Examples of incorrect code for this rule with the "always-multiline" option:

/*eslint comma-dangle: ["error", "always-multiline"]*/

var foo = {
    bar: "baz",
    qux: "quux"
};

var foo = { bar: "baz", qux: "quux", };

var arr = [1,2,];

var arr = [1,
    2,];

var arr = [
    1,
    2
];

foo({
  bar: "baz",
  qux: "quux"
});

Examples of correct code for this rule with the "always-multiline" option:

/*eslint comma-dangle: ["error", "always-multiline"]*/

var foo = {
    bar: "baz",
    qux: "quux",
};

var foo = {bar: "baz", qux: "quux"};
var arr = [1,2];

var arr = [1,
    2];

var arr = [
    1,
    2,
];

foo({
  bar: "baz",
  qux: "quux",
});

only-multiline

Examples of incorrect code for this rule with the "only-multiline" option:

/*eslint comma-dangle: ["error", "only-multiline"]*/

var foo = { bar: "baz", qux: "quux", };

var arr = [1,2,];

var arr = [1,
    2,];

Examples of correct code for this rule with the "only-multiline" option:

/*eslint comma-dangle: ["error", "only-multiline"]*/

var foo = {
    bar: "baz",
    qux: "quux",
};

var foo = {
    bar: "baz",
    qux: "quux"
};

var foo = {bar: "baz", qux: "quux"};
var arr = [1,2];

var arr = [1,
    2];

var arr = [
    1,
    2,
];

var arr = [
    1,
    2
];

foo({
  bar: "baz",
  qux: "quux",
});

foo({
  bar: "baz",
  qux: "quux"
});

functions

Examples of incorrect code for this rule with the {"functions": "never"} option:

/*eslint comma-dangle: ["error", {"functions": "never"}]*/

function foo(a, b,) {
}

foo(a, b,);
new foo(a, b,);

Examples of correct code for this rule with the {"functions": "never"} option:

/*eslint comma-dangle: ["error", {"functions": "never"}]*/

function foo(a, b) {
}

foo(a, b);
new foo(a, b);

Examples of incorrect code for this rule with the {"functions": "always"} option:

/*eslint comma-dangle: ["error", {"functions": "always"}]*/

function foo(a, b) {
}

foo(a, b);
new foo(a, b);

Examples of correct code for this rule with the {"functions": "always"} option:

/*eslint comma-dangle: ["error", {"functions": "always"}]*/

function foo(a, b,) {
}

foo(a, b,);
new foo(a, b,);

When Not To Use It

You can turn this rule off if you are not concerned with dangling commas. Source: http://eslint.org/docs/rules/

maestro-server/bootue

Showing 40 of 40 total issues

Function action has a Cognitive Complexity of 9 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open

Cognitive Complexity

A method's cognitive complexity is based on a few simple rules:

Further reading

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

Duplicated Code

Tuning

Refactorings

Further Reading

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

Duplicated Code

Tuning

Refactorings

Further Reading

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

Duplicated Code

Tuning

Refactorings

Further Reading

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

Duplicated Code

Tuning

Refactorings

Further Reading

Function select has a Cognitive Complexity of 8 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open

Cognitive Complexity

A method's cognitive complexity is based on a few simple rules:

Further reading

Function toggleDropdown has a Cognitive Complexity of 8 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open

Cognitive Complexity

A method's cognitive complexity is based on a few simple rules:

Further reading

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

Cognitive Complexity

A method's cognitive complexity is based on a few simple rules:

Further reading

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

Cognitive Complexity

A method's cognitive complexity is based on a few simple rules:

Further reading

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

Cognitive Complexity

A method's cognitive complexity is based on a few simple rules:

Further reading

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

Cognitive Complexity

A method's cognitive complexity is based on a few simple rules:

Further reading

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

Duplicated Code

Tuning

Refactorings

Further Reading

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

Duplicated Code

Tuning

Refactorings

Further Reading

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

Duplicated Code

Tuning

Refactorings

Further Reading

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

Duplicated Code

Tuning

Refactorings

Further Reading

Function rangeLength42 has a Cognitive Complexity of 6 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open

Cognitive Complexity

A method's cognitive complexity is based on a few simple rules:

Further reading

Function rangeMajor1 has a Cognitive Complexity of 6 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open

Cognitive Complexity

A method's cognitive complexity is based on a few simple rules:

Further reading

Function updateParent has a Cognitive Complexity of 6 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open

Cognitive Complexity

Function `action` has a Cognitive Complexity of 9 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring.
Open

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

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

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

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

Function `select` has a Cognitive Complexity of 8 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring.
Open

Function `toggleDropdown` has a Cognitive Complexity of 8 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring.
Open

Function `boolean` has a Cognitive Complexity of 7 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring.
Open

Function `mutableValue` has a Cognitive Complexity of 7 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring.
Open

Function `show` has a Cognitive Complexity of 7 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring.
Open

Function `show` has a Cognitive Complexity of 7 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring.
Open

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

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

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

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

Function `rangeLength42` has a Cognitive Complexity of 6 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring.
Open

Function `rangeMajor1` has a Cognitive Complexity of 6 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring.
Open

Function `updateParent` has a Cognitive Complexity of 6 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring.
Open

Missing space before function parentheses.
Open

`{"anonymous": "always", "named": "never", "asyncArrow": "always"}`

`{"anonymous": "never", "named": "always"}`

`{"anonymous": "ignore", "named": "always"}`

Unexpected trailing comma.
Open