Showing 100 of 100 total issues
Function correct_color
has a Cognitive Complexity of 7 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def correct_color(img, percent):
"""
Correct the color of an image.
:param img: <RGB> Image to correct
- Read upRead 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
Function run_worker
has a Cognitive Complexity of 7 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def run_worker(klass, image_step, config=None):
r = None
for k in ("gan", "opencv"):
if workers.get(k).get(klass) is not None:
#Conf.log.debug("wk {}".format(workers.get(k).get(klass)))
- Read upRead 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
Similar blocks of code found in 2 locations. Consider refactoring. Open
Conf.log.success("Done! We have taken {} seconds".format(round(time.time() - start, 2)))
- Read upRead up
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 32.
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
Conf.log.debug("Model load done in {} seconds".format(round(time.time() - start, 2)))
- Read upRead up
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 32.
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
Function find_min
has a Cognitive Complexity of 6 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def find_min(bp_list, min_a, min_b, min_diff):
for a, _ in enumerate(bp_list):
for b, _ in enumerate(bp_list):
# TODO: avoid repetition (1,0) (0,1)
diff = abs(bp_list[a].y - bp_list[b].y)
- Read upRead 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
Function is_file
has a Cognitive Complexity of 6 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def is_file(args, path):
if not os.path.isfile(path):
return False
for mod in (overlay, auto_resize, auto_resize_crop, auto_rescale):
- Read upRead 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
Function __draw_ellipse
has a Cognitive Complexity of 6 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def __draw_ellipse(a_max, a_min, angle, aurmax, aurmin, details, hairmax, hairmin, nipmax, nipmin, obj,
titmax, titmin, vagmax, vagmin, x, y):
# Draw ellipse
if obj.name == "tit":
cv2.ellipse(details, (x, y), (titmax, titmin), angle, 0, 360, (0, 205, 0), -1) # (0,0,0,50)
- Read upRead 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
Function download
has a Cognitive Complexity of 6 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def download(_):
"""
Start checkpoints download logic.
:param _: None
- Read upRead 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
Function arg_step
has a Cognitive Complexity of 6 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def arg_step(parser):
def check_steps_args():
def type_func(a):
if not re.match(r"^[0-5]:[0-5]$", a):
raise parser.error("Incorrect skip format. "
- Read upRead up
Cognitive Complexity
Cognitive Complexity is a measure of how difficult a unit of code is to intuitively understand. Unlike Cyclomatic Complexity, which determines how difficult your code will be to test, Cognitive Complexity tells you how difficult your code will be to read and comprehend.
A method's cognitive complexity is based on a few simple rules:
- Code is not considered more complex when it uses shorthand that the language provides for collapsing multiple statements into one
- Code is considered more complex for each "break in the linear flow of the code"
- Code is considered more complex when "flow breaking structures are nested"
Further reading
Standard pseudo-random generators are not suitable for security/cryptographic purposes. Open
random_tit_factor = random.randint(2, 5) # TOTEST
- Exclude checks
Standard pseudo-random generators are not suitable for security/cryptographic purposes. Open
new_w = tits_list[1].w * random.uniform(0.03, 0.1) # TOTEST
- Exclude checks
Standard pseudo-random generators are not suitable for security/cryptographic purposes. Open
hair_h = vag.h * random.uniform(0.4, 1.5)
- Exclude checks
Consider possible security implications associated with subprocess module. Open
import subprocess
- Exclude checks
Use of insecure and deprecated function (mktemp). Open
temp_path = tempfile.mktemp(".jpg")
- Exclude checks
Standard pseudo-random generators are not suitable for security/cryptographic purposes. Open
nip_dim = int(5 + aur.w * random.uniform(0.03, 0.09))
- Exclude checks
Rename function "cd" to match the regular expression ^[a-z_][a-z0-9_]{2,}$. Open
def cd(newdir):
- Read upRead up
- Exclude checks
Shared coding conventions allow teams to collaborate efficiently. This rule checks that all function names match a provided regular expression.
Noncompliant Code Example
With the default provided regular expression: ^[a-z_][a-z0-9_]{2,30}$
def MyFunction(a,b): ...
Compliant Solution
def my_function(a,b): ...
Method "__init__" has 8 parameters, which is greater than the 7 authorized. Open
self,
input_nc,
output_nc,
ngf=64,
n_downsampling=3,
- Read upRead up
- Exclude checks
A long parameter list can indicate that a new structure should be created to wrap the numerous parameters or that the function is doing too many things.
Noncompliant Code Example
With a maximum number of 4 parameters:
def do_something(param1, param2, param3, param4, param5): ...
Compliant Solution
def do_something(param1, param2, param3, param4): ...
Remove this commented out code. Open
#if self._gpu_ids:
- Read upRead up
- Exclude checks
Programmers should not comment out code as it bloats programs and reduces readability.
Unused code should be deleted and can be retrieved from source control history if required.
See
- MISRA C:2004, 2.4 - Sections of code should not be "commented out".
- MISRA C++:2008, 2-7-2 - Sections of code shall not be "commented out" using C-style comments.
- MISRA C++:2008, 2-7-3 - Sections of code should not be "commented out" using C++ comments.
- MISRA C:2012, Dir. 4.4 - Sections of code should not be "commented out"
Remove this commented out code. Open
#return p
- Read upRead up
- Exclude checks
Programmers should not comment out code as it bloats programs and reduces readability.
Unused code should be deleted and can be retrieved from source control history if required.
See
- MISRA C:2004, 2.4 - Sections of code should not be "commented out".
- MISRA C++:2008, 2-7-2 - Sections of code shall not be "commented out" using C-style comments.
- MISRA C++:2008, 2-7-3 - Sections of code should not be "commented out" using C++ comments.
- MISRA C:2012, Dir. 4.4 - Sections of code should not be "commented out"
Rename field "parser" Open
parser = None
- Read upRead up
- Exclude checks
It's confusing to have a class member with the same name (case differences aside) as its enclosing class. This is particularly so when you consider the common practice of naming a class instance for the class itself.
Best practice dictates that any field or member with the same name as the enclosing class be renamed to be more descriptive of the particular aspect of the class it represents or holds.
Noncompliant Code Example
class Foo: foo = '' def getFoo(self): ... foo = Foo() foo.getFoo() # what does this return?
Compliant Solution
class Foo: name = '' def getName(self): ... foo = Foo() foo.getName()