Method has too many lines. [12/10] Open
def execute
validate_dir
puts "execute"
# exit 1
pipelines = list_pipelines
- Read upRead up
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
- Exclude checks
This cop checks if the length of a method exceeds some maximum value. Comment lines can optionally be ignored. The maximum allowed length is configurable.
Assignment Branch Condition size for generate_vars_files is too high. [16.28/15] Open
def generate_vars_files(pipeline_name)
credential_filenames = Dir[File.join(@config_dir, 'credentials-*.yml')].reject { |file_path| filter_credentials_file(file_path) }
.map { |file_path| File.basename(file_path) }
vars_files = credential_filenames.map { |filename| File.join(@output_config_path, filename) }
config_file_suffix = pipeline_name.gsub('-generated', '')
- Read upRead up
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
- Exclude checks
This cop checks that the ABC size of methods is not higher than the configured maximum. The ABC size is based on assignments, branches (method calls), and conditions. See http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?AbcMetric
ConcoursePipelineResourceConfigGenerator#add_pipeline is controlled by argument 'vars_files' Open
pipeline['vars_files'] = vars_files || []
- Read upRead up
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
- Exclude checks
Control Parameter
is a special case of Control Couple
Example
A simple example would be the "quoted" parameter in the following method:
def write(quoted)
if quoted
write_quoted @value
else
write_unquoted @value
end
end
Fixing those problems is out of the scope of this document but an easy solution could be to remove the "write" method alltogether and to move the calls to "writequoted" / "writeunquoted" in the initial caller of "write".
ConcoursePipelineResourceConfigGenerator#add_pipeline is controlled by argument 'team' Open
pipeline['team'] = team || 'main'
- Read upRead up
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
- Exclude checks
Control Parameter
is a special case of Control Couple
Example
A simple example would be the "quoted" parameter in the following method:
def write(quoted)
if quoted
write_quoted @value
else
write_unquoted @value
end
end
Fixing those problems is out of the scope of this document but an easy solution could be to remove the "write" method alltogether and to move the calls to "writequoted" / "writeunquoted" in the initial caller of "write".
ConcoursePipelineResourceConfigGenerator has at least 9 instance variables Open
class ConcoursePipelineResourceConfigGenerator
- Read upRead up
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
- Exclude checks
Too Many Instance Variables
is a special case of LargeClass
.
Example
Given this configuration
TooManyInstanceVariables:
max_instance_variables: 3
and this code:
class TooManyInstanceVariables
def initialize
@arg_1 = :dummy
@arg_2 = :dummy
@arg_3 = :dummy
@arg_4 = :dummy
end
end
Reek would emit the following warning:
test.rb -- 5 warnings:
[1]:TooManyInstanceVariables has at least 4 instance variables (TooManyInstanceVariables)
ConcoursePipelineResourceConfigGenerator#generate_vars_files has approx 11 statements Open
def generate_vars_files(pipeline_name)
- Read upRead up
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
- Exclude checks
A method with Too Many Statements
is any method that has a large number of lines.
Too Many Statements
warns about any method that has more than 5 statements. Reek's smell detector for Too Many Statements
counts +1 for every simple statement in a method and +1 for every statement within a control structure (if
, else
, case
, when
, for
, while
, until
, begin
, rescue
) but it doesn't count the control structure itself.
So the following method would score +6 in Reek's statement-counting algorithm:
def parse(arg, argv, &error)
if !(val = arg) and (argv.empty? or /\A-/ =~ (val = argv[0]))
return nil, block, nil # +1
end
opt = (val = parse_arg(val, &error))[1] # +2
val = conv_arg(*val) # +3
if opt and !arg
argv.shift # +4
else
val[0] = nil # +5
end
val # +6
end
(You might argue that the two assigments within the first @if@ should count as statements, and that perhaps the nested assignment should count as +2.)
ConcoursePipelineResourceConfigGenerator#execute has approx 12 statements Open
def execute
- Read upRead up
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
- Exclude checks
A method with Too Many Statements
is any method that has a large number of lines.
Too Many Statements
warns about any method that has more than 5 statements. Reek's smell detector for Too Many Statements
counts +1 for every simple statement in a method and +1 for every statement within a control structure (if
, else
, case
, when
, for
, while
, until
, begin
, rescue
) but it doesn't count the control structure itself.
So the following method would score +6 in Reek's statement-counting algorithm:
def parse(arg, argv, &error)
if !(val = arg) and (argv.empty? or /\A-/ =~ (val = argv[0]))
return nil, block, nil # +1
end
opt = (val = parse_arg(val, &error))[1] # +2
val = conv_arg(*val) # +3
if opt and !arg
argv.shift # +4
else
val[0] = nil # +5
end
val # +6
end
(You might argue that the two assigments within the first @if@ should count as statements, and that perhaps the nested assignment should count as +2.)
ConcoursePipelineResourceConfigGenerator#add_pipeline refers to 'pipeline' more than self (maybe move it to another class?) Open
pipeline['name'] = name
pipeline['team'] = team || 'main'
pipeline['config_file'] = config
pipeline['vars_files'] = vars_files || []
pipeline['unpaused'] = true
- Read upRead up
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
- Exclude checks
Feature Envy occurs when a code fragment references another object more often than it references itself, or when several clients do the same series of manipulations on a particular type of object.
Feature Envy reduces the code's ability to communicate intent: code that "belongs" on one class but which is located in another can be hard to find, and may upset the "System of Names" in the host class.
Feature Envy also affects the design's flexibility: A code fragment that is in the wrong class creates couplings that may not be natural within the application's domain, and creates a loss of cohesion in the unwilling host class.
Feature Envy often arises because it must manipulate other objects (usually its arguments) to get them into a useful form, and one force preventing them (the arguments) doing this themselves is that the common knowledge lives outside the arguments, or the arguments are of too basic a type to justify extending that type. Therefore there must be something which 'knows' about the contents or purposes of the arguments. That thing would have to be more than just a basic type, because the basic types are either containers which don't know about their contents, or they are single objects which can't capture their relationship with their fellows of the same type. So, this thing with the extra knowledge should be reified into a class, and the utility method will most likely belong there.
Example
Running Reek on:
class Warehouse
def sale_price(item)
(item.price - item.rebate) * @vat
end
end
would report:
Warehouse#total_price refers to item more than self (FeatureEnvy)
since this:
(item.price - item.rebate)
belongs to the Item class, not the Warehouse.
Method validate_dir
has a Cognitive Complexity of 8 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def validate_dir
error_message = ''
error_message << "\nPipelines directory does not exist: #{@pipelines_base_dir}" unless File.exist?(@pipelines_base_dir)
error_message << "\nConfig directory does not exist: #{@config_dir}" unless File.exist?(@config_dir)
error_message << "\nOutput directory does not exist: #{@output_dir}" unless File.exist?(@output_dir)
- Read upRead up
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
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
ConcoursePipelineResourceConfigGenerator has no descriptive comment Open
class ConcoursePipelineResourceConfigGenerator
- Read upRead up
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
- Exclude checks
Classes and modules are the units of reuse and release. It is therefore considered good practice to annotate every class and module with a brief comment outlining its responsibilities.
Example
Given
class Dummy
# Do things...
end
Reek would emit the following warning:
test.rb -- 1 warning:
[1]:Dummy has no descriptive comment (IrresponsibleModule)
Fixing this is simple - just an explaining comment:
# The Dummy class is responsible for ...
class Dummy
# Do things...
end
ConcoursePipelineResourceConfigGenerator#filter_credentials_file doesn't depend on instance state (maybe move it to another class?) Open
def filter_credentials_file(file_path)
- Read upRead up
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
- Exclude checks
A Utility Function is any instance method that has no dependency on the state of the instance.
1 trailing blank lines detected. Open
- Create a ticketCreate a ticket
- Exclude checks