'?' should be placed at the beginning of the line. Open
const active = matchChildRoutes ?
- Read upRead up
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
- Exclude checks
enforce consistent linebreak style for operators (operator-linebreak)
When a statement is too long to fit on a single line, line breaks are generally inserted next to the operators separating expressions. The first style coming to mind would be to place the operator at the end of the line, following the English punctuation rules.
var fullHeight = borderTop +
innerHeight +
borderBottom;
Some developers find that placing operators at the beginning of the line makes the code more readable.
var fullHeight = borderTop
+ innerHeight
+ borderBottom;
Rule Details
This rule enforces a consistent linebreak style for operators.
Options
This rule has one option, which can be a string option or an object option.
String option:
-
"after"
requires linebreaks to be placed after the operator -
"before"
requires linebreaks to be placed before the operator -
"none"
disallows linebreaks on either side of the operator
Object option:
-
"overrides"
overrides the global setting for specified operators
The default configuration is "after", { "overrides": { "?": "before", ":": "before" } }
after
Examples of incorrect code for this rule with the default "after"
option:
/*eslint operator-linebreak: ["error", "after"]*/
foo = 1
+
2;
foo = 1
+ 2;
foo
= 5;
if (someCondition
|| otherCondition) {
}
answer = everything
? 42
: foo;
Examples of correct code for this rule with the default "after"
option:
/*eslint operator-linebreak: ["error", "after"]*/
foo = 1 + 2;
foo = 1 +
2;
foo =
5;
if (someCondition ||
otherCondition) {
}
answer = everything ?
42 :
foo;
before
Examples of incorrect code for this rule with the "before"
option:
/*eslint operator-linebreak: ["error", "before"]*/
foo = 1 +
2;
foo =
5;
if (someCondition ||
otherCondition) {
}
answer = everything ?
42 :
foo;
Examples of correct code for this rule with the "before"
option:
/*eslint operator-linebreak: ["error", "before"]*/
foo = 1 + 2;
foo = 1
+ 2;
foo
= 5;
if (someCondition
|| otherCondition) {
}
answer = everything
? 42
: foo;
none
Examples of incorrect code for this rule with the "none"
option:
/*eslint operator-linebreak: ["error", "none"]*/
foo = 1 +
2;
foo = 1
+ 2;
if (someCondition ||
otherCondition) {
}
if (someCondition
|| otherCondition) {
}
answer = everything
? 42
: foo;
answer = everything ?
42 :
foo;
Examples of correct code for this rule with the "none"
option:
/*eslint operator-linebreak: ["error", "none"]*/
foo = 1 + 2;
foo = 5;
if (someCondition || otherCondition) {
}
answer = everything ? 42 : foo;
overrides
Examples of additional correct code for this rule with the { "overrides": { "+=": "before" } }
option:
/*eslint operator-linebreak: ["error", "after", { "overrides": { "+=": "before" } }]*/
var thing
+= 'thing';
Examples of additional correct code for this rule with the { "overrides": { "?": "ignore", ":": "ignore" } }
option:
/*eslint operator-linebreak: ["error", "after", { "overrides": { "?": "ignore", ":": "ignore" } }]*/
answer = everything ?
42
: foo;
answer = everything
?
42
:
foo;
When Not To Use It
If your project will not be using a common operator line break style, turn this rule off.
Related Rules
- [comma-style](comma-style.md) Source: http://eslint.org/docs/rules/
':' should be placed at the beginning of the line. Open
location.pathname.startsWith(href) :
- Read upRead up
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
- Exclude checks
enforce consistent linebreak style for operators (operator-linebreak)
When a statement is too long to fit on a single line, line breaks are generally inserted next to the operators separating expressions. The first style coming to mind would be to place the operator at the end of the line, following the English punctuation rules.
var fullHeight = borderTop +
innerHeight +
borderBottom;
Some developers find that placing operators at the beginning of the line makes the code more readable.
var fullHeight = borderTop
+ innerHeight
+ borderBottom;
Rule Details
This rule enforces a consistent linebreak style for operators.
Options
This rule has one option, which can be a string option or an object option.
String option:
-
"after"
requires linebreaks to be placed after the operator -
"before"
requires linebreaks to be placed before the operator -
"none"
disallows linebreaks on either side of the operator
Object option:
-
"overrides"
overrides the global setting for specified operators
The default configuration is "after", { "overrides": { "?": "before", ":": "before" } }
after
Examples of incorrect code for this rule with the default "after"
option:
/*eslint operator-linebreak: ["error", "after"]*/
foo = 1
+
2;
foo = 1
+ 2;
foo
= 5;
if (someCondition
|| otherCondition) {
}
answer = everything
? 42
: foo;
Examples of correct code for this rule with the default "after"
option:
/*eslint operator-linebreak: ["error", "after"]*/
foo = 1 + 2;
foo = 1 +
2;
foo =
5;
if (someCondition ||
otherCondition) {
}
answer = everything ?
42 :
foo;
before
Examples of incorrect code for this rule with the "before"
option:
/*eslint operator-linebreak: ["error", "before"]*/
foo = 1 +
2;
foo =
5;
if (someCondition ||
otherCondition) {
}
answer = everything ?
42 :
foo;
Examples of correct code for this rule with the "before"
option:
/*eslint operator-linebreak: ["error", "before"]*/
foo = 1 + 2;
foo = 1
+ 2;
foo
= 5;
if (someCondition
|| otherCondition) {
}
answer = everything
? 42
: foo;
none
Examples of incorrect code for this rule with the "none"
option:
/*eslint operator-linebreak: ["error", "none"]*/
foo = 1 +
2;
foo = 1
+ 2;
if (someCondition ||
otherCondition) {
}
if (someCondition
|| otherCondition) {
}
answer = everything
? 42
: foo;
answer = everything ?
42 :
foo;
Examples of correct code for this rule with the "none"
option:
/*eslint operator-linebreak: ["error", "none"]*/
foo = 1 + 2;
foo = 5;
if (someCondition || otherCondition) {
}
answer = everything ? 42 : foo;
overrides
Examples of additional correct code for this rule with the { "overrides": { "+=": "before" } }
option:
/*eslint operator-linebreak: ["error", "after", { "overrides": { "+=": "before" } }]*/
var thing
+= 'thing';
Examples of additional correct code for this rule with the { "overrides": { "?": "ignore", ":": "ignore" } }
option:
/*eslint operator-linebreak: ["error", "after", { "overrides": { "?": "ignore", ":": "ignore" } }]*/
answer = everything ?
42
: foo;
answer = everything
?
42
:
foo;
When Not To Use It
If your project will not be using a common operator line break style, turn this rule off.
Related Rules
- [comma-style](comma-style.md) Source: http://eslint.org/docs/rules/
Similar blocks of code found in 2 locations. Consider refactoring. Open
return (
<Link { ...otherProps } to={href} className={classes.join(' ')}>
{linkClass && <div className="navBarIcon"></div>}
<div className="navBarLinkText">{text}</div>
</Link>
- Read upRead up
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
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 82.
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
return (
<a { ...otherProps } href={href} className={classes.join(' ')}>
{linkClass && <div className="navBarIcon"></div>}
<div className="navBarLinkText">{text}</div>
</a>
- Read upRead up
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
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 82.
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