metanorma/metanorma-bipm

Class `PresentationXMLConvert` has 27 methods (exceeds 20 allowed). Consider refactoring.
Open

    class PresentationXMLConvert < IsoDoc::Generic::PresentationXMLConvert
      def convert1(docxml, filename, dir)
        @jcgm = docxml&.at(ns("//bibdata/ext/editorialgroup/committee/" \
                              "@acronym"))&.value == "JCGM"
        @xrefs.klass.jcgm = @jcgm

Found in lib/isodoc/bipm/presentation_xml_convert.rb - About 3 hrs to fix

Class `Xref` has 26 methods (exceeds 20 allowed). Consider refactoring.
Open

    class Xref < IsoDoc::Xref
      attr_accessor :jcgm

      def initialize(lang, script, klass, i18n, options = {})
        @iso = IsoDoc::Iso::Xref.new(lang, script, klass, i18n, options)

Found in lib/isodoc/bipm/xref.rb - About 3 hrs to fix

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

      def list_cochairs(xml)
        ret = list_people(xml, "//bibdata/contributor[#{COCHAIR}]/person")
        ret.empty? and return ""
        role = xml&.at(ns("//bibdata/contributor[#{COCHAIR}]/role"))&.text
        label = ret.size > 1 && role ? "#{role}s" : role

Found in lib/isodoc/bipm/doccontrol.rb and 1 other location - About 55 mins to fix

Read up
Read up

lib/isodoc/bipm/doccontrol.rb on lines 79..84

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 45.

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

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

      def list_chairs(xml)
        ret = list_people(xml, "//bibdata/contributor#{CHAIR}/person")
        ret.empty? and return ""
        role = xml&.at(ns("//bibdata/contributor#{CHAIR}/role"))&.text
        label = ret.size > 1 && role ? "#{role}s" : role

Found in lib/isodoc/bipm/doccontrol.rb and 1 other location - About 55 mins to fix

Read up
Read up

lib/isodoc/bipm/doccontrol.rb on lines 71..76

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 45.

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

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 `norm_ref_entry_code` has 6 arguments (exceeds 4 allowed). Consider refactoring.
Open

      def norm_ref_entry_code(_ordinal, identifiers, _ids, _standard, datefn,
_bib)

Found in lib/isodoc/bipm/presentation_xml_convert.rb - About 45 mins to fix

Method `biblio_ref_entry_code` has 6 arguments (exceeds 4 allowed). Consider refactoring.
Open

      def biblio_ref_entry_code(ordinal, ids, _id, _standard, datefn, _bib)

Found in lib/isodoc/bipm/presentation_xml_convert.rb - About 45 mins to fix

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

      def annex_anchor_names(docxml)
        n = @jcgm ? Counter.new("@", skip_i: true) : Counter.new(0)
        clause_order_annex(docxml).each_with_index do |a, i|
          docxml.xpath(ns(a[:path])).each do |c|
            if i.zero?

Found in lib/isodoc/bipm/xref.rb - About 45 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"

Further reading

Method `xref_init` has 5 arguments (exceeds 4 allowed). Consider refactoring.
Open

      def xref_init(lang, script, _klass, labels, options)

Found in lib/isodoc/bipm/init.rb - About 35 mins to fix

Method `output` has 5 arguments (exceeds 4 allowed). Consider refactoring.
Open

      def output(isodoc_node, inname, outname, format, options = {})

Found in lib/metanorma/bipm/processor.rb - About 35 mins to fix

Method `initialize` has 5 arguments (exceeds 4 allowed). Consider refactoring.
Open

      def initialize(lang, script, klass, i18n, options = {})

Found in lib/isodoc/bipm/xref.rb - About 35 mins to fix

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

      def main_anchor_names(xml)
        @jcgm and return super
        t = clause_order_main(xml)
        n = Counter.new
        t.each_with_index do |a, i|

Found in lib/isodoc/bipm/xref.rb - About 35 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"

Further reading

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

      def prefix_name(node, delim, number, elem)
        number.nil? || number.empty? and return
        unless name = node.at(ns("./#{elem}[not(@type = 'quoted')]"))
          node.at(ns("./#{elem}[@type = 'quoted']")) and return
          (node.children.empty? and node.add_child("<#{elem}></#{elem}>")) or

Found in lib/isodoc/bipm/presentation_xml_convert.rb - About 35 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"

Further reading

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

      def extract_indexterms(terms)
        terms.each_with_object({}) do |t, v|
          term = to_xml(t.at(ns("./primary"))&.children)
          term2 = to_xml(t.at(ns("./secondary"))&.children)
          term3 = to_xml(t.at(ns("./tertiary"))&.children)

Found in lib/isodoc/bipm/index.rb - About 35 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"

Further reading

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

      def metadata_committee(node, xml)
        return unless node.attr("committee-en") || node.attr("committee-fr")

        xml.editorialgroup do |a|
          metadata_committee1(node, a)

Found in lib/metanorma/bipm/front.rb - About 25 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"

Further reading

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

      def sequential_formula_names(clause, container: false)
        c = Counter.new
        clause.xpath(ns(".//formula")).noblank.each do |t|
          @anchors[t["id"]] = anchor_struct(
            c.increment(t).print, container ? t : nil,

Found in lib/isodoc/bipm/xref.rb - About 25 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"

Further reading