eval (command.script);

Close

Disallow eval() (no-eval)

JavaScript's eval() function is potentially dangerous and is often misused. Using eval() on untrusted code can open a program up to several different injection attacks. The use of eval() in most contexts can be substituted for a better, alternative approach to a problem.

var obj = { x: "foo" },
    key = "x",
    value = eval("obj." + key);

Rule Details

This rule is aimed at preventing potentially dangerous, unnecessary, and slow code by disallowing the use of the eval() function. As such, it will warn whenever the eval() function is used.

Examples of incorrect code for this rule:

/*eslint no-eval: "error"*/

var obj = { x: "foo" },
    key = "x",
    value = eval("obj." + key);

(0, eval)("var a = 0");

var foo = eval;
foo("var a = 0");

// This `this` is the global object.
this.eval("var a = 0");

Example of additional incorrect code for this rule when browser environment is set to true:

/*eslint no-eval: "error"*/
/*eslint-env browser*/

window.eval("var a = 0");

Example of additional incorrect code for this rule when node environment is set to true:

/*eslint no-eval: "error"*/
/*eslint-env node*/

global.eval("var a = 0");

Examples of correct code for this rule:

/*eslint no-eval: "error"*/
/*eslint-env es6*/

var obj = { x: "foo" },
    key = "x",
    value = obj[key];

class A {
    foo() {
        // This is a user-defined method.
        this.eval("var a = 0");
    }

    eval() {
    }
}

Options

This rule has an option to allow indirect calls to eval. Indirect calls to eval are less dangerous than direct calls to eval because they cannot dynamically change the scope. Because of this, they also will not negatively impact performance to the degree of direct eval.

{
    "no-eval": ["error", {"allowIndirect": true}] // default is false
}

Example of incorrect code for this rule with the {"allowIndirect": true} option:

/*eslint no-eval: "error"*/

var obj = { x: "foo" },
    key = "x",
    value = eval("obj." + key);

Examples of correct code for this rule with the {"allowIndirect": true} option:

/*eslint no-eval: "error"*/

(0, eval)("var a = 0");

var foo = eval;
foo("var a = 0");

this.eval("var a = 0");

/*eslint no-eval: "error"*/
/*eslint-env browser*/

window.eval("var a = 0");

/*eslint no-eval: "error"*/
/*eslint-env node*/

global.eval("var a = 0");

Known Limitations

• This rule is warning every eval() even if the eval is not global's. This behavior is in order to detect calls of direct eval. Such as:

module.exports = function(eval) {
      // If the value of this `eval` is built-in `eval` function, this is a
      // call of direct `eval`.
      eval("var a = 0");
  };

• This rule cannot catch renaming the global object. Such as:

var foo = window;
  foo.eval("var a = 0");

Further Reading

• Eval is Evil, Part One
• How evil is eval

Related Rules

• [no-implied-eval](no-implied-eval.md) Source: http://eslint.org/docs/rules/

qcubed.registerControl = function(mixControl) {
    var objControl = qcubed.getControl(mixControl),
        objWrapper;

    if (!objControl) {

Close

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

• Cognitive Complexity docs
• Cognitive Complexity: A new way of measuring understandability

    processImmediateAjaxResponse: function(json, qFormParams) {
        if (json.controls) $j.each(json.controls, function() {
            var strControlId = '#' + this.id,
                control = $j(strControlId),
                wrapper = $j(strControlId + '_ctl');

Close

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

• Cognitive Complexity docs
• Cognitive Complexity: A new way of measuring understandability

    objWrapper.updateStyle = function(strStyleName, strNewValue) {

Close

Limit Cyclomatic Complexity (complexity)

Cyclomatic complexity measures the number of linearly independent paths through a program's source code. This rule allows setting a cyclomatic complexity threshold.

function a(x) {
    if (true) {
        return x; // 1st path
    } else if (false) {
        return x+1; // 2nd path
    } else {
        return 4; // 3rd path
    }
}

Rule Details

This rule is aimed at reducing code complexity by capping the amount of cyclomatic complexity allowed in a program. As such, it will warn when the cyclomatic complexity crosses the configured threshold (default is 20).

Examples of incorrect code for a maximum of 2:

/*eslint complexity: ["error", 2]*/

function a(x) {
    if (true) {
        return x;
    } else if (false) {
        return x+1;
    } else {
        return 4; // 3rd path
    }
}

Examples of correct code for a maximum of 2:

/*eslint complexity: ["error", 2]*/

function a(x) {
    if (true) {
        return x;
    } else {
        return 4;
    }
}

Options

Optionally, you may specify a max object property:

"complexity": ["error", 2]

is equivalent to

"complexity": ["error", { "max": 2 }]

Deprecated: the object property maximum is deprecated. Please use the property max instead.

When Not To Use It

If you can't determine an appropriate complexity limit for your code, then it's best to disable this rule.

Further Reading

• About Complexity
• Complexity Analysis of JavaScript Code

Related Rules

• [max-depth](max-depth.md)
• [max-len](max-len.md)
• [max-nested-callbacks](max-nested-callbacks.md)
• [max-params](max-params.md)
• [max-statements](max-statements.md) Source: http://eslint.org/docs/rules/

    unpackObj: function (obj) {

Close

Limit Cyclomatic Complexity (complexity)

Cyclomatic complexity measures the number of linearly independent paths through a program's source code. This rule allows setting a cyclomatic complexity threshold.

function a(x) {
    if (true) {
        return x; // 1st path
    } else if (false) {
        return x+1; // 2nd path
    } else {
        return 4; // 3rd path
    }
}

Rule Details

This rule is aimed at reducing code complexity by capping the amount of cyclomatic complexity allowed in a program. As such, it will warn when the cyclomatic complexity crosses the configured threshold (default is 20).

Examples of incorrect code for a maximum of 2:

/*eslint complexity: ["error", 2]*/

function a(x) {
    if (true) {
        return x;
    } else if (false) {
        return x+1;
    } else {
        return 4; // 3rd path
    }
}

Examples of correct code for a maximum of 2:

/*eslint complexity: ["error", 2]*/

function a(x) {
    if (true) {
        return x;
    } else {
        return 4;
    }
}

Options

Optionally, you may specify a max object property:

"complexity": ["error", 2]

is equivalent to

"complexity": ["error", { "max": 2 }]

Deprecated: the object property maximum is deprecated. Please use the property max instead.

When Not To Use It

If you can't determine an appropriate complexity limit for your code, then it's best to disable this rule.

Further Reading

• About Complexity
• Complexity Analysis of JavaScript Code

Related Rules

• [max-depth](max-depth.md)
• [max-len](max-len.md)
• [max-nested-callbacks](max-nested-callbacks.md)
• [max-params](max-params.md)
• [max-statements](max-statements.md) Source: http://eslint.org/docs/rules/

        $j.each(controls, function() {

Close

Limit Cyclomatic Complexity (complexity)

Cyclomatic complexity measures the number of linearly independent paths through a program's source code. This rule allows setting a cyclomatic complexity threshold.

function a(x) {
    if (true) {
        return x; // 1st path
    } else if (false) {
        return x+1; // 2nd path
    } else {
        return 4; // 3rd path
    }
}

Rule Details

This rule is aimed at reducing code complexity by capping the amount of cyclomatic complexity allowed in a program. As such, it will warn when the cyclomatic complexity crosses the configured threshold (default is 20).

Examples of incorrect code for a maximum of 2:

/*eslint complexity: ["error", 2]*/

function a(x) {
    if (true) {
        return x;
    } else if (false) {
        return x+1;
    } else {
        return 4; // 3rd path
    }
}

Examples of correct code for a maximum of 2:

/*eslint complexity: ["error", 2]*/

function a(x) {
    if (true) {
        return x;
    } else {
        return 4;
    }
}

Options

Optionally, you may specify a max object property:

"complexity": ["error", 2]

is equivalent to

"complexity": ["error", { "max": 2 }]

Deprecated: the object property maximum is deprecated. Please use the property max instead.

When Not To Use It

If you can't determine an appropriate complexity limit for your code, then it's best to disable this rule.

Further Reading

• About Complexity
• Complexity Analysis of JavaScript Code

Related Rules

• [max-depth](max-depth.md)
• [max-len](max-len.md)
• [max-nested-callbacks](max-nested-callbacks.md)
• [max-params](max-params.md)
• [max-statements](max-statements.md) Source: http://eslint.org/docs/rules/

    unpackObj: function (obj) {
        if ($j.type(obj) == 'object' &&
                obj.qObjType) {

            switch (obj.qObjType) {

Close

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

• Cognitive Complexity docs
• Cognitive Complexity: A new way of measuring understandability

        if (json.controls) $j.each(json.controls, function() {

Close

Limit Cyclomatic Complexity (complexity)

Cyclomatic complexity measures the number of linearly independent paths through a program's source code. This rule allows setting a cyclomatic complexity threshold.

function a(x) {
    if (true) {
        return x; // 1st path
    } else if (false) {
        return x+1; // 2nd path
    } else {
        return 4; // 3rd path
    }
}

Rule Details

This rule is aimed at reducing code complexity by capping the amount of cyclomatic complexity allowed in a program. As such, it will warn when the cyclomatic complexity crosses the configured threshold (default is 20).

Examples of incorrect code for a maximum of 2:

/*eslint complexity: ["error", 2]*/

function a(x) {
    if (true) {
        return x;
    } else if (false) {
        return x+1;
    } else {
        return 4; // 3rd path
    }
}

Examples of correct code for a maximum of 2:

/*eslint complexity: ["error", 2]*/

function a(x) {
    if (true) {
        return x;
    } else {
        return 4;
    }
}

Options

Optionally, you may specify a max object property:

"complexity": ["error", 2]

is equivalent to

"complexity": ["error", { "max": 2 }]

Deprecated: the object property maximum is deprecated. Please use the property max instead.

When Not To Use It

If you can't determine an appropriate complexity limit for your code, then it's best to disable this rule.

Further Reading

• About Complexity
• Complexity Analysis of JavaScript Code

Related Rules

• [max-depth](max-depth.md)
• [max-len](max-len.md)
• [max-nested-callbacks](max-nested-callbacks.md)
• [max-params](max-params.md)
• [max-statements](max-statements.md) Source: http://eslint.org/docs/rules/

        $formElements.each(function() {

Close

Limit Cyclomatic Complexity (complexity)

Cyclomatic complexity measures the number of linearly independent paths through a program's source code. This rule allows setting a cyclomatic complexity threshold.

function a(x) {
    if (true) {
        return x; // 1st path
    } else if (false) {
        return x+1; // 2nd path
    } else {
        return 4; // 3rd path
    }
}

Rule Details

This rule is aimed at reducing code complexity by capping the amount of cyclomatic complexity allowed in a program. As such, it will warn when the cyclomatic complexity crosses the configured threshold (default is 20).

Examples of incorrect code for a maximum of 2:

/*eslint complexity: ["error", 2]*/

function a(x) {
    if (true) {
        return x;
    } else if (false) {
        return x+1;
    } else {
        return 4; // 3rd path
    }
}

Examples of correct code for a maximum of 2:

/*eslint complexity: ["error", 2]*/

function a(x) {
    if (true) {
        return x;
    } else {
        return 4;
    }
}

Options

Optionally, you may specify a max object property:

"complexity": ["error", 2]

is equivalent to

"complexity": ["error", { "max": 2 }]

Deprecated: the object property maximum is deprecated. Please use the property max instead.

When Not To Use It

If you can't determine an appropriate complexity limit for your code, then it's best to disable this rule.

Further Reading

• About Complexity
• Complexity Analysis of JavaScript Code

Related Rules

• [max-depth](max-depth.md)
• [max-len](max-len.md)
• [max-nested-callbacks](max-nested-callbacks.md)
• [max-params](max-params.md)
• [max-statements](max-statements.md) Source: http://eslint.org/docs/rules/

qcubed.registerControl = function(mixControl) {

Close

Limit Cyclomatic Complexity (complexity)

Cyclomatic complexity measures the number of linearly independent paths through a program's source code. This rule allows setting a cyclomatic complexity threshold.

function a(x) {
    if (true) {
        return x; // 1st path
    } else if (false) {
        return x+1; // 2nd path
    } else {
        return 4; // 3rd path
    }
}

Rule Details

This rule is aimed at reducing code complexity by capping the amount of cyclomatic complexity allowed in a program. As such, it will warn when the cyclomatic complexity crosses the configured threshold (default is 20).

Examples of incorrect code for a maximum of 2:

/*eslint complexity: ["error", 2]*/

function a(x) {
    if (true) {
        return x;
    } else if (false) {
        return x+1;
    } else {
        return 4; // 3rd path
    }
}

Examples of correct code for a maximum of 2:

/*eslint complexity: ["error", 2]*/

function a(x) {
    if (true) {
        return x;
    } else {
        return 4;
    }
}

Options

Optionally, you may specify a max object property:

"complexity": ["error", 2]

is equivalent to

"complexity": ["error", { "max": 2 }]

Deprecated: the object property maximum is deprecated. Please use the property max instead.

When Not To Use It

If you can't determine an appropriate complexity limit for your code, then it's best to disable this rule.

Further Reading

• About Complexity
• Complexity Analysis of JavaScript Code

Related Rules

• [max-depth](max-depth.md)
• [max-len](max-len.md)
• [max-nested-callbacks](max-nested-callbacks.md)
• [max-params](max-params.md)
• [max-statements](max-statements.md) Source: http://eslint.org/docs/rules/

    initialize: function() {

        ////////////////////////////////
        // Browser-related functionality
        ////////////////////////////////

Close

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

• Cognitive Complexity docs
• Cognitive Complexity: A new way of measuring understandability

    processDeferredAjaxResponse: function(json) {
        if (json.commands) { // commands
            $j.each(json.commands, function (index, command) {
                if (command.final &&
                    $j.ajaxQueueIsRunning()) {

Close

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

• Cognitive Complexity docs
• Cognitive Complexity: A new way of measuring understandability

    _formObjChangeIndex: function (ctl) {
        var id = $j(ctl).attr('id');
        var strType = $j(ctl).prop("type");
        var name = $j(ctl).attr("name");

Close

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

• Cognitive Complexity docs
• Cognitive Complexity: A new way of measuring understandability

    processCommand: function(command) {
        if (command.script) {
            /** @todo eval is evil, do no evil */
            eval (command.script);
        }

Close

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

• Cognitive Complexity docs
• Cognitive Complexity: A new way of measuring understandability

            if (o.originalEvent.key == "qcubed.broadcast") {

Close

Require === and !== (eqeqeq)

It is considered good practice to use the type-safe equality operators === and !== instead of their regular counterparts == and !=.

The reason for this is that == and != do type coercion which follows the rather obscure Abstract Equality Comparison Algorithm. For instance, the following statements are all considered true:

• [] == false
• [] == ![]
• 3 == "03"

If one of those occurs in an innocent-looking statement such as a == b the actual problem is very difficult to spot.

Rule Details

This rule is aimed at eliminating the type-unsafe equality operators.

Examples of incorrect code for this rule:

/*eslint eqeqeq: "error"*/

if (x == 42) { }

if ("" == text) { }

if (obj.getStuff() != undefined) { }

The --fix option on the command line automatically fixes some problems reported by this rule. A problem is only fixed if one of the operands is a typeof expression, or if both operands are literals with the same type.

Options

always

The "always" option (default) enforces the use of === and !== in every situation (except when you opt-in to more specific handling of null [see below]).

Examples of incorrect code for the "always" option:

/*eslint eqeqeq: ["error", "always"]*/

a == b
foo == true
bananas != 1
value == undefined
typeof foo == 'undefined'
'hello' != 'world'
0 == 0
true == true
foo == null

Examples of correct code for the "always" option:

/*eslint eqeqeq: ["error", "always"]*/

a === b
foo === true
bananas !== 1
value === undefined
typeof foo === 'undefined'
'hello' !== 'world'
0 === 0
true === true
foo === null

This rule optionally takes a second argument, which should be an object with the following supported properties:

• "null": Customize how this rule treats null literals. Possible values:
  • always (default) - Always use === or !==.
  • never - Never use === or !== with null.
  • ignore - Do not apply this rule to null.

smart

The "smart" option enforces the use of === and !== except for these cases:

• Comparing two literal values
• Evaluating the value of typeof
• Comparing against null

Examples of incorrect code for the "smart" option:

/*eslint eqeqeq: ["error", "smart"]*/

// comparing two variables requires ===
a == b

// only one side is a literal
foo == true
bananas != 1

// comparing to undefined requires ===
value == undefined

Examples of correct code for the "smart" option:

/*eslint eqeqeq: ["error", "smart"]*/

typeof foo == 'undefined'
'hello' != 'world'
0 == 0
true == true
foo == null

allow-null

Deprecated: Instead of using this option use "always" and pass a "null" option property with value "ignore". This will tell eslint to always enforce strict equality except when comparing with the null literal.

["error", "always", {"null": "ignore"}]

When Not To Use It

If you don't want to enforce a style for using equality operators, then it's safe to disable this rule. Source: http://eslint.org/docs/rules/

        if ($j.type(obj) == 'object' &&

Close

Require === and !== (eqeqeq)

It is considered good practice to use the type-safe equality operators === and !== instead of their regular counterparts == and !=.

The reason for this is that == and != do type coercion which follows the rather obscure Abstract Equality Comparison Algorithm. For instance, the following statements are all considered true:

• [] == false
• [] == ![]
• 3 == "03"

If one of those occurs in an innocent-looking statement such as a == b the actual problem is very difficult to spot.

Rule Details

This rule is aimed at eliminating the type-unsafe equality operators.

Examples of incorrect code for this rule:

/*eslint eqeqeq: "error"*/

if (x == 42) { }

if ("" == text) { }

if (obj.getStuff() != undefined) { }

The --fix option on the command line automatically fixes some problems reported by this rule. A problem is only fixed if one of the operands is a typeof expression, or if both operands are literals with the same type.

Options

always

The "always" option (default) enforces the use of === and !== in every situation (except when you opt-in to more specific handling of null [see below]).

Examples of incorrect code for the "always" option:

/*eslint eqeqeq: ["error", "always"]*/

a == b
foo == true
bananas != 1
value == undefined
typeof foo == 'undefined'
'hello' != 'world'
0 == 0
true == true
foo == null

Examples of correct code for the "always" option:

/*eslint eqeqeq: ["error", "always"]*/

a === b
foo === true
bananas !== 1
value === undefined
typeof foo === 'undefined'
'hello' !== 'world'
0 === 0
true === true
foo === null

This rule optionally takes a second argument, which should be an object with the following supported properties:

• "null": Customize how this rule treats null literals. Possible values:
  • always (default) - Always use === or !==.
  • never - Never use === or !== with null.
  • ignore - Do not apply this rule to null.

smart

The "smart" option enforces the use of === and !== except for these cases:

• Comparing two literal values
• Evaluating the value of typeof
• Comparing against null

Examples of incorrect code for the "smart" option:

/*eslint eqeqeq: ["error", "smart"]*/

// comparing two variables requires ===
a == b

// only one side is a literal
foo == true
bananas != 1

// comparing to undefined requires ===
value == undefined

Examples of correct code for the "smart" option:

/*eslint eqeqeq: ["error", "smart"]*/

typeof foo == 'undefined'
'hello' != 'world'
0 == 0
true == true
foo == null

allow-null

Deprecated: Instead of using this option use "always" and pass a "null" option property with value "ignore". This will tell eslint to always enforce strict equality except when comparing with the null literal.

["error", "always", {"null": "ignore"}]

When Not To Use It

If you don't want to enforce a style for using equality operators, then it's safe to disable this rule. Source: http://eslint.org/docs/rules/

            else if ($j.type(item) == 'array') {

Close

Require === and !== (eqeqeq)

It is considered good practice to use the type-safe equality operators === and !== instead of their regular counterparts == and !=.

The reason for this is that == and != do type coercion which follows the rather obscure Abstract Equality Comparison Algorithm. For instance, the following statements are all considered true:

• [] == false
• [] == ![]
• 3 == "03"

If one of those occurs in an innocent-looking statement such as a == b the actual problem is very difficult to spot.

Rule Details

This rule is aimed at eliminating the type-unsafe equality operators.

Examples of incorrect code for this rule:

/*eslint eqeqeq: "error"*/

if (x == 42) { }

if ("" == text) { }

if (obj.getStuff() != undefined) { }

The --fix option on the command line automatically fixes some problems reported by this rule. A problem is only fixed if one of the operands is a typeof expression, or if both operands are literals with the same type.

Options

always

The "always" option (default) enforces the use of === and !== in every situation (except when you opt-in to more specific handling of null [see below]).

Examples of incorrect code for the "always" option:

/*eslint eqeqeq: ["error", "always"]*/

a == b
foo == true
bananas != 1
value == undefined
typeof foo == 'undefined'
'hello' != 'world'
0 == 0
true == true
foo == null

Examples of correct code for the "always" option:

/*eslint eqeqeq: ["error", "always"]*/

a === b
foo === true
bananas !== 1
value === undefined
typeof foo === 'undefined'
'hello' !== 'world'
0 === 0
true === true
foo === null

This rule optionally takes a second argument, which should be an object with the following supported properties:

• "null": Customize how this rule treats null literals. Possible values:
  • always (default) - Always use === or !==.
  • never - Never use === or !== with null.
  • ignore - Do not apply this rule to null.

smart

The "smart" option enforces the use of === and !== except for these cases:

• Comparing two literal values
• Evaluating the value of typeof
• Comparing against null

Examples of incorrect code for the "smart" option:

/*eslint eqeqeq: ["error", "smart"]*/

// comparing two variables requires ===
a == b

// only one side is a literal
foo == true
bananas != 1

// comparing to undefined requires ===
value == undefined

Examples of correct code for the "smart" option:

/*eslint eqeqeq: ["error", "smart"]*/

typeof foo == 'undefined'
'hello' != 'world'
0 == 0
true == true
foo == null

allow-null

Deprecated: Instead of using this option use "always" and pass a "null" option property with value "ignore". This will tell eslint to always enforce strict equality except when comparing with the null literal.

["error", "always", {"null": "ignore"}]

When Not To Use It

If you don't want to enforce a style for using equality operators, then it's safe to disable this rule. Source: http://eslint.org/docs/rules/

                            alert("An error occurred.\r\n\r\nThe error response will appear in a new popup.");

Close

Disallow Use of Alert (no-alert)

JavaScript's alert, confirm, and prompt functions are widely considered to be obtrusive as UI elements and should be replaced by a more appropriate custom UI implementation. Furthermore, alert is often used while debugging code, which should be removed before deployment to production.

alert("here!");

Rule Details

This rule is aimed at catching debugging code that should be removed and popup UI elements that should be replaced with less obtrusive, custom UIs. As such, it will warn when it encounters alert, prompt, and confirm function calls which are not shadowed.

Examples of incorrect code for this rule:

/*eslint no-alert: "error"*/

alert("here!");

confirm("Are you sure?");

prompt("What's your name?", "John Doe");

Examples of correct code for this rule:

/*eslint no-alert: "error"*/

customAlert("Something happened!");

customConfirm("Are you sure?");

customPrompt("Who are you?");

function foo() {
    var alert = myCustomLib.customAlert;
    alert();
}

Related Rules

• [no-console](no-console.md)
• [no-debugger](no-debugger.md) Source: http://eslint.org/docs/rules/

            if ($j.type(item) == 'object') {

Close

Require === and !== (eqeqeq)

It is considered good practice to use the type-safe equality operators === and !== instead of their regular counterparts == and !=.

The reason for this is that == and != do type coercion which follows the rather obscure Abstract Equality Comparison Algorithm. For instance, the following statements are all considered true:

• [] == false
• [] == ![]
• 3 == "03"

If one of those occurs in an innocent-looking statement such as a == b the actual problem is very difficult to spot.

Rule Details

This rule is aimed at eliminating the type-unsafe equality operators.

Examples of incorrect code for this rule:

/*eslint eqeqeq: "error"*/

if (x == 42) { }

if ("" == text) { }

if (obj.getStuff() != undefined) { }

The --fix option on the command line automatically fixes some problems reported by this rule. A problem is only fixed if one of the operands is a typeof expression, or if both operands are literals with the same type.

Options

always

The "always" option (default) enforces the use of === and !== in every situation (except when you opt-in to more specific handling of null [see below]).

Examples of incorrect code for the "always" option:

/*eslint eqeqeq: ["error", "always"]*/

a == b
foo == true
bananas != 1
value == undefined
typeof foo == 'undefined'
'hello' != 'world'
0 == 0
true == true
foo == null

Examples of correct code for the "always" option:

/*eslint eqeqeq: ["error", "always"]*/

a === b
foo === true
bananas !== 1
value === undefined
typeof foo === 'undefined'
'hello' !== 'world'
0 === 0
true === true
foo === null

This rule optionally takes a second argument, which should be an object with the following supported properties:

• "null": Customize how this rule treats null literals. Possible values:
  • always (default) - Always use === or !==.
  • never - Never use === or !== with null.
  • ignore - Do not apply this rule to null.

smart

The "smart" option enforces the use of === and !== except for these cases:

• Comparing two literal values
• Evaluating the value of typeof
• Comparing against null

Examples of incorrect code for the "smart" option:

/*eslint eqeqeq: ["error", "smart"]*/

// comparing two variables requires ===
a == b

// only one side is a literal
foo == true
bananas != 1

// comparing to undefined requires ===
value == undefined

Examples of correct code for the "smart" option:

/*eslint eqeqeq: ["error", "smart"]*/

typeof foo == 'undefined'
'hello' != 'world'
0 == 0
true == true
foo == null

allow-null

Deprecated: Instead of using this option use "always" and pass a "null" option property with value "ignore". This will tell eslint to always enforce strict equality except when comparing with the null literal.

["error", "always", {"null": "ignore"}]

When Not To Use It

If you don't want to enforce a style for using equality operators, then it's safe to disable this rule. Source: http://eslint.org/docs/rules/

        if (event.which == 13) {

Close

Require === and !== (eqeqeq)

It is considered good practice to use the type-safe equality operators === and !== instead of their regular counterparts == and !=.

The reason for this is that == and != do type coercion which follows the rather obscure Abstract Equality Comparison Algorithm. For instance, the following statements are all considered true:

• [] == false
• [] == ![]
• 3 == "03"

If one of those occurs in an innocent-looking statement such as a == b the actual problem is very difficult to spot.

Rule Details

This rule is aimed at eliminating the type-unsafe equality operators.

Examples of incorrect code for this rule:

/*eslint eqeqeq: "error"*/

if (x == 42) { }

if ("" == text) { }

if (obj.getStuff() != undefined) { }

The --fix option on the command line automatically fixes some problems reported by this rule. A problem is only fixed if one of the operands is a typeof expression, or if both operands are literals with the same type.

Options

always

The "always" option (default) enforces the use of === and !== in every situation (except when you opt-in to more specific handling of null [see below]).

Examples of incorrect code for the "always" option:

/*eslint eqeqeq: ["error", "always"]*/

a == b
foo == true
bananas != 1
value == undefined
typeof foo == 'undefined'
'hello' != 'world'
0 == 0
true == true
foo == null

Examples of correct code for the "always" option:

/*eslint eqeqeq: ["error", "always"]*/

a === b
foo === true
bananas !== 1
value === undefined
typeof foo === 'undefined'
'hello' !== 'world'
0 === 0
true === true
foo === null

This rule optionally takes a second argument, which should be an object with the following supported properties:

• "null": Customize how this rule treats null literals. Possible values:
  • always (default) - Always use === or !==.
  • never - Never use === or !== with null.
  • ignore - Do not apply this rule to null.

smart

The "smart" option enforces the use of === and !== except for these cases:

• Comparing two literal values
• Evaluating the value of typeof
• Comparing against null

Examples of incorrect code for the "smart" option:

/*eslint eqeqeq: ["error", "smart"]*/

// comparing two variables requires ===
a == b

// only one side is a literal
foo == true
bananas != 1

// comparing to undefined requires ===
value == undefined

Examples of correct code for the "smart" option:

/*eslint eqeqeq: ["error", "smart"]*/

typeof foo == 'undefined'
'hello' != 'world'
0 == 0
true == true
foo == null

allow-null

Deprecated: Instead of using this option use "always" and pass a "null" option property with value "ignore". This will tell eslint to always enforce strict equality except when comparing with the null literal.

["error", "always", {"null": "ignore"}]

When Not To Use It

If you don't want to enforce a style for using equality operators, then it's safe to disable this rule. Source: http://eslint.org/docs/rules/

        if (!controls || controls.length == 0) {

Close

Require === and !== (eqeqeq)

It is considered good practice to use the type-safe equality operators === and !== instead of their regular counterparts == and !=.

The reason for this is that == and != do type coercion which follows the rather obscure Abstract Equality Comparison Algorithm. For instance, the following statements are all considered true:

• [] == false
• [] == ![]
• 3 == "03"

If one of those occurs in an innocent-looking statement such as a == b the actual problem is very difficult to spot.

Rule Details

This rule is aimed at eliminating the type-unsafe equality operators.

Examples of incorrect code for this rule:

/*eslint eqeqeq: "error"*/

if (x == 42) { }

if ("" == text) { }

if (obj.getStuff() != undefined) { }

The --fix option on the command line automatically fixes some problems reported by this rule. A problem is only fixed if one of the operands is a typeof expression, or if both operands are literals with the same type.

Options

always

The "always" option (default) enforces the use of === and !== in every situation (except when you opt-in to more specific handling of null [see below]).

Examples of incorrect code for the "always" option:

/*eslint eqeqeq: ["error", "always"]*/

a == b
foo == true
bananas != 1
value == undefined
typeof foo == 'undefined'
'hello' != 'world'
0 == 0
true == true
foo == null

Examples of correct code for the "always" option:

/*eslint eqeqeq: ["error", "always"]*/

a === b
foo === true
bananas !== 1
value === undefined
typeof foo === 'undefined'
'hello' !== 'world'
0 === 0
true === true
foo === null

This rule optionally takes a second argument, which should be an object with the following supported properties:

• "null": Customize how this rule treats null literals. Possible values:
  • always (default) - Always use === or !==.
  • never - Never use === or !== with null.
  • ignore - Do not apply this rule to null.

smart

The "smart" option enforces the use of === and !== except for these cases:

• Comparing two literal values
• Evaluating the value of typeof
• Comparing against null

Examples of incorrect code for the "smart" option:

/*eslint eqeqeq: ["error", "smart"]*/

// comparing two variables requires ===
a == b

// only one side is a literal
foo == true
bananas != 1

// comparing to undefined requires ===
value == undefined

Examples of correct code for the "smart" option:

/*eslint eqeqeq: ["error", "smart"]*/

typeof foo == 'undefined'
'hello' != 'world'
0 == 0
true == true
foo == null

allow-null

Deprecated: Instead of using this option use "always" and pass a "null" option property with value "ignore". This will tell eslint to always enforce strict equality except when comparing with the null literal.

["error", "always", {"null": "ignore"}]

When Not To Use It

If you don't want to enforce a style for using equality operators, then it's safe to disable this rule. Source: http://eslint.org/docs/rules/

            if (json.loc == 'reload') {

Close

Require === and !== (eqeqeq)

It is considered good practice to use the type-safe equality operators === and !== instead of their regular counterparts == and !=.

The reason for this is that == and != do type coercion which follows the rather obscure Abstract Equality Comparison Algorithm. For instance, the following statements are all considered true:

• [] == false
• [] == ![]
• 3 == "03"

If one of those occurs in an innocent-looking statement such as a == b the actual problem is very difficult to spot.

Rule Details

This rule is aimed at eliminating the type-unsafe equality operators.

Examples of incorrect code for this rule:

/*eslint eqeqeq: "error"*/

if (x == 42) { }

if ("" == text) { }

if (obj.getStuff() != undefined) { }

The --fix option on the command line automatically fixes some problems reported by this rule. A problem is only fixed if one of the operands is a typeof expression, or if both operands are literals with the same type.

Options

always

The "always" option (default) enforces the use of === and !== in every situation (except when you opt-in to more specific handling of null [see below]).

Examples of incorrect code for the "always" option:

/*eslint eqeqeq: ["error", "always"]*/

a == b
foo == true
bananas != 1
value == undefined
typeof foo == 'undefined'
'hello' != 'world'
0 == 0
true == true
foo == null

Examples of correct code for the "always" option:

/*eslint eqeqeq: ["error", "always"]*/

a === b
foo === true
bananas !== 1
value === undefined
typeof foo === 'undefined'
'hello' !== 'world'
0 === 0
true === true
foo === null

This rule optionally takes a second argument, which should be an object with the following supported properties:

• "null": Customize how this rule treats null literals. Possible values:
  • always (default) - Always use === or !==.
  • never - Never use === or !== with null.
  • ignore - Do not apply this rule to null.

smart

The "smart" option enforces the use of === and !== except for these cases:

• Comparing two literal values
• Evaluating the value of typeof
• Comparing against null

Examples of incorrect code for the "smart" option:

/*eslint eqeqeq: ["error", "smart"]*/

// comparing two variables requires ===
a == b

// only one side is a literal
foo == true
bananas != 1

// comparing to undefined requires ===
value == undefined

Examples of correct code for the "smart" option:

/*eslint eqeqeq: ["error", "smart"]*/

typeof foo == 'undefined'
'hello' != 'world'
0 == 0
true == true
foo == null

allow-null

Deprecated: Instead of using this option use "always" and pass a "null" option property with value "ignore". This will tell eslint to always enforce strict equality except when comparing with the null literal.

["error", "always", {"null": "ignore"}]

When Not To Use It

If you don't want to enforce a style for using equality operators, then it's safe to disable this rule. Source: http://eslint.org/docs/rules/

            var params = qc.unpackArray(command.params);

Close

disallow variable redeclaration (no-redeclare)

In JavaScript, it's possible to redeclare the same variable name using var. This can lead to confusion as to where the variable is actually declared and initialized.

Rule Details

This rule is aimed at eliminating variables that have multiple declarations in the same scope.

Examples of incorrect code for this rule:

/*eslint no-redeclare: "error"*/

var a = 3;
var a = 10;

Examples of correct code for this rule:

/*eslint no-redeclare: "error"*/

var a = 3;
// ...
a = 10;

Options

This rule takes one optional argument, an object with a boolean property "builtinGlobals". It defaults to false. If set to true, this rule also checks redeclaration of built-in globals, such as Object, Array, Number...

builtinGlobals

Examples of incorrect code for the { "builtinGlobals": true } option:

/*eslint no-redeclare: ["error", { "builtinGlobals": true }]*/

var Object = 0;

Examples of incorrect code for the { "builtinGlobals": true } option and the browser environment:

/*eslint no-redeclare: ["error", { "builtinGlobals": true }]*/
/*eslint-env browser*/

var top = 0;

The browser environment has many built-in global variables (for example, top). Some of built-in global variables cannot be redeclared. Source: http://eslint.org/docs/rules/

                (offset = id.lastIndexOf('_')) != -1) {

Close

Require === and !== (eqeqeq)

It is considered good practice to use the type-safe equality operators === and !== instead of their regular counterparts == and !=.

The reason for this is that == and != do type coercion which follows the rather obscure Abstract Equality Comparison Algorithm. For instance, the following statements are all considered true:

• [] == false
• [] == ![]
• 3 == "03"

If one of those occurs in an innocent-looking statement such as a == b the actual problem is very difficult to spot.

Rule Details

This rule is aimed at eliminating the type-unsafe equality operators.

Examples of incorrect code for this rule:

/*eslint eqeqeq: "error"*/

if (x == 42) { }

if ("" == text) { }

if (obj.getStuff() != undefined) { }

The --fix option on the command line automatically fixes some problems reported by this rule. A problem is only fixed if one of the operands is a typeof expression, or if both operands are literals with the same type.

Options

always

The "always" option (default) enforces the use of === and !== in every situation (except when you opt-in to more specific handling of null [see below]).

Examples of incorrect code for the "always" option:

/*eslint eqeqeq: ["error", "always"]*/

a == b
foo == true
bananas != 1
value == undefined
typeof foo == 'undefined'
'hello' != 'world'
0 == 0
true == true
foo == null

Examples of correct code for the "always" option:

/*eslint eqeqeq: ["error", "always"]*/

a === b
foo === true
bananas !== 1
value === undefined
typeof foo === 'undefined'
'hello' !== 'world'
0 === 0
true === true
foo === null

This rule optionally takes a second argument, which should be an object with the following supported properties:

• "null": Customize how this rule treats null literals. Possible values:
  • always (default) - Always use === or !==.
  • never - Never use === or !== with null.
  • ignore - Do not apply this rule to null.

smart

The "smart" option enforces the use of === and !== except for these cases:

• Comparing two literal values
• Evaluating the value of typeof
• Comparing against null

Examples of incorrect code for the "smart" option:

/*eslint eqeqeq: ["error", "smart"]*/

// comparing two variables requires ===
a == b

// only one side is a literal
foo == true
bananas != 1

// comparing to undefined requires ===
value == undefined

Examples of correct code for the "smart" option:

/*eslint eqeqeq: ["error", "smart"]*/

typeof foo == 'undefined'
'hello' != 'world'
0 == 0
true == true
foo == null

allow-null

Deprecated: Instead of using this option use "always" and pass a "null" option property with value "ignore". This will tell eslint to always enforce strict equality except when comparing with the null literal.

["error", "always", {"null": "ignore"}]

When Not To Use It

If you don't want to enforce a style for using equality operators, then it's safe to disable this rule. Source: http://eslint.org/docs/rules/

                    break;

Close

disallow unreachable code after return, throw, continue, and break statements (no-unreachable)

Because the return, throw, break, and continue statements unconditionally exit a block of code, any statements after them cannot be executed. Unreachable statements are usually a mistake.

function fn() {
    x = 1;
    return x;
    x = 3; // this will never execute
}

Rule Details

This rule disallows unreachable code after return, throw, continue, and break statements.

Examples of incorrect code for this rule:

/*eslint no-unreachable: "error"*/

function foo() {
    return true;
    console.log("done");
}

function bar() {
    throw new Error("Oops!");
    console.log("done");
}

while(value) {
    break;
    console.log("done");
}

throw new Error("Oops!");
console.log("done");

function baz() {
    if (Math.random() < 0.5) {
        return;
    } else {
        throw new Error();
    }
    console.log("done");
}

for (;;) {}
console.log("done");

Examples of correct code for this rule, because of JavaScript function and variable hoisting:

/*eslint no-unreachable: "error"*/

function foo() {
    return bar();
    function bar() {
        return 1;
    }
}

function bar() {
    return x;
    var x;
}

switch (foo) {
    case 1:
        break;
        var x;
}

Source: http://eslint.org/docs/rules/

        else if ($j.type(obj) == 'object') {

Close

Require === and !== (eqeqeq)

It is considered good practice to use the type-safe equality operators === and !== instead of their regular counterparts == and !=.

The reason for this is that == and != do type coercion which follows the rather obscure Abstract Equality Comparison Algorithm. For instance, the following statements are all considered true:

• [] == false
• [] == ![]
• 3 == "03"

If one of those occurs in an innocent-looking statement such as a == b the actual problem is very difficult to spot.

Rule Details

This rule is aimed at eliminating the type-unsafe equality operators.

Examples of incorrect code for this rule:

/*eslint eqeqeq: "error"*/

if (x == 42) { }

if ("" == text) { }

if (obj.getStuff() != undefined) { }

The --fix option on the command line automatically fixes some problems reported by this rule. A problem is only fixed if one of the operands is a typeof expression, or if both operands are literals with the same type.

Options

always

The "always" option (default) enforces the use of === and !== in every situation (except when you opt-in to more specific handling of null [see below]).

Examples of incorrect code for the "always" option:

/*eslint eqeqeq: ["error", "always"]*/

a == b
foo == true
bananas != 1
value == undefined
typeof foo == 'undefined'
'hello' != 'world'
0 == 0
true == true
foo == null

Examples of correct code for the "always" option:

/*eslint eqeqeq: ["error", "always"]*/

a === b
foo === true
bananas !== 1
value === undefined
typeof foo === 'undefined'
'hello' !== 'world'
0 === 0
true === true
foo === null

This rule optionally takes a second argument, which should be an object with the following supported properties:

• "null": Customize how this rule treats null literals. Possible values:
  • always (default) - Always use === or !==.
  • never - Never use === or !== with null.
  • ignore - Do not apply this rule to null.

smart

The "smart" option enforces the use of === and !== except for these cases:

• Comparing two literal values
• Evaluating the value of typeof
• Comparing against null

Examples of incorrect code for the "smart" option:

/*eslint eqeqeq: ["error", "smart"]*/

// comparing two variables requires ===
a == b

// only one side is a literal
foo == true
bananas != 1

// comparing to undefined requires ===
value == undefined

Examples of correct code for the "smart" option:

/*eslint eqeqeq: ["error", "smart"]*/

typeof foo == 'undefined'
'hello' != 'world'
0 == 0
true == true
foo == null

allow-null

Deprecated: Instead of using this option use "always" and pass a "null" option property with value "ignore". This will tell eslint to always enforce strict equality except when comparing with the null literal.

["error", "always", {"null": "ignore"}]

When Not To Use It

If you don't want to enforce a style for using equality operators, then it's safe to disable this rule. Source: http://eslint.org/docs/rules/

        else if ($j.type(obj) == 'array') {

Close

Require === and !== (eqeqeq)

It is considered good practice to use the type-safe equality operators === and !== instead of their regular counterparts == and !=.

The reason for this is that == and != do type coercion which follows the rather obscure Abstract Equality Comparison Algorithm. For instance, the following statements are all considered true:

• [] == false
• [] == ![]
• 3 == "03"

If one of those occurs in an innocent-looking statement such as a == b the actual problem is very difficult to spot.

Rule Details

This rule is aimed at eliminating the type-unsafe equality operators.

Examples of incorrect code for this rule:

/*eslint eqeqeq: "error"*/

if (x == 42) { }

if ("" == text) { }

if (obj.getStuff() != undefined) { }

The --fix option on the command line automatically fixes some problems reported by this rule. A problem is only fixed if one of the operands is a typeof expression, or if both operands are literals with the same type.

Options

always

The "always" option (default) enforces the use of === and !== in every situation (except when you opt-in to more specific handling of null [see below]).

Examples of incorrect code for the "always" option:

/*eslint eqeqeq: ["error", "always"]*/

a == b
foo == true
bananas != 1
value == undefined
typeof foo == 'undefined'
'hello' != 'world'
0 == 0
true == true
foo == null

Examples of correct code for the "always" option:

/*eslint eqeqeq: ["error", "always"]*/

a === b
foo === true
bananas !== 1
value === undefined
typeof foo === 'undefined'
'hello' !== 'world'
0 === 0
true === true
foo === null

This rule optionally takes a second argument, which should be an object with the following supported properties:

• "null": Customize how this rule treats null literals. Possible values:
  • always (default) - Always use === or !==.
  • never - Never use === or !== with null.
  • ignore - Do not apply this rule to null.

smart

The "smart" option enforces the use of === and !== except for these cases:

• Comparing two literal values
• Evaluating the value of typeof
• Comparing against null

Examples of incorrect code for the "smart" option:

/*eslint eqeqeq: ["error", "smart"]*/

// comparing two variables requires ===
a == b

// only one side is a literal
foo == true
bananas != 1

// comparing to undefined requires ===
value == undefined

Examples of correct code for the "smart" option:

/*eslint eqeqeq: ["error", "smart"]*/

typeof foo == 'undefined'
'hello' != 'world'
0 == 0
true == true
foo == null

allow-null

Deprecated: Instead of using this option use "always" and pass a "null" option property with value "ignore". This will tell eslint to always enforce strict equality except when comparing with the null literal.

["error", "always", {"null": "ignore"}]

When Not To Use It

If you don't want to enforce a style for using equality operators, then it's safe to disable this rule. Source: http://eslint.org/docs/rules/

            var objs = command.func.split(".");

Close

disallow variable redeclaration (no-redeclare)

In JavaScript, it's possible to redeclare the same variable name using var. This can lead to confusion as to where the variable is actually declared and initialized.

Rule Details

This rule is aimed at eliminating variables that have multiple declarations in the same scope.

Examples of incorrect code for this rule:

/*eslint no-redeclare: "error"*/

var a = 3;
var a = 10;

Examples of correct code for this rule:

/*eslint no-redeclare: "error"*/

var a = 3;
// ...
a = 10;

Options

This rule takes one optional argument, an object with a boolean property "builtinGlobals". It defaults to false. If set to true, this rule also checks redeclaration of built-in globals, such as Object, Array, Number...

builtinGlobals

Examples of incorrect code for the { "builtinGlobals": true } option:

/*eslint no-redeclare: ["error", { "builtinGlobals": true }]*/

var Object = 0;

Examples of incorrect code for the { "builtinGlobals": true } option and the browser environment:

/*eslint no-redeclare: ["error", { "builtinGlobals": true }]*/
/*eslint-env browser*/

var top = 0;

The browser environment has many built-in global variables (for example, top). Some of built-in global variables cannot be redeclared. Source: http://eslint.org/docs/rules/

                alert(v);

Close

Disallow Use of Alert (no-alert)

JavaScript's alert, confirm, and prompt functions are widely considered to be obtrusive as UI elements and should be replaced by a more appropriate custom UI implementation. Furthermore, alert is often used while debugging code, which should be removed before deployment to production.

alert("here!");

Rule Details

This rule is aimed at catching debugging code that should be removed and popup UI elements that should be replaced with less obtrusive, custom UIs. As such, it will warn when it encounters alert, prompt, and confirm function calls which are not shadowed.

Examples of incorrect code for this rule:

/*eslint no-alert: "error"*/

alert("here!");

confirm("Are you sure?");

prompt("What's your name?", "John Doe");

Examples of correct code for this rule:

/*eslint no-alert: "error"*/

customAlert("Something happened!");

customConfirm("Are you sure?");

customPrompt("Who are you?");

function foo() {
    var alert = myCustomLib.customAlert;
    alert();
}

Related Rules

• [no-console](no-console.md)
• [no-debugger](no-debugger.md) Source: http://eslint.org/docs/rules/

                    break;

Close

disallow unreachable code after return, throw, continue, and break statements (no-unreachable)

Because the return, throw, break, and continue statements unconditionally exit a block of code, any statements after them cannot be executed. Unreachable statements are usually a mistake.

function fn() {
    x = 1;
    return x;
    x = 3; // this will never execute
}

Rule Details

This rule disallows unreachable code after return, throw, continue, and break statements.

Examples of incorrect code for this rule:

/*eslint no-unreachable: "error"*/

function foo() {
    return true;
    console.log("done");
}

function bar() {
    throw new Error("Oops!");
    console.log("done");
}

while(value) {
    break;
    console.log("done");
}

throw new Error("Oops!");
console.log("done");

function baz() {
    if (Math.random() < 0.5) {
        return;
    } else {
        throw new Error();
    }
    console.log("done");
}

for (;;) {}
console.log("done");

Examples of correct code for this rule, because of JavaScript function and variable hoisting:

/*eslint no-unreachable: "error"*/

function foo() {
    return bar();
    function bar() {
        return 1;
    }
}

function bar() {
    return x;
    var x;
}

switch (foo) {
    case 1:
        break;
        var x;
}

Source: http://eslint.org/docs/rules/

                        return new Function(params, obj.func);

Close

Disallow Function Constructor (no-new-func)

It's possible to create functions in JavaScript using the Function constructor, such as:

var x = new Function("a", "b", "return a + b");

This is considered by many to be a bad practice due to the difficulty in debugging and reading these types of functions.

Rule Details

This error is raised to highlight the use of a bad practice. By passing a string to the Function constructor, you are requiring the engine to parse that string much in the way it has to when you call the eval function.

Examples of incorrect code for this rule:

/*eslint no-new-func: "error"*/

var x = new Function("a", "b", "return a + b");
var x = Function("a", "b", "return a + b");

Examples of correct code for this rule:

/*eslint no-new-func: "error"*/

var x = function (a, b) {
    return a + b;
};

When Not To Use It

In more advanced cases where you really need to use the Function constructor. Source: http://eslint.org/docs/rules/

                        return new Function(obj.func);

Close

Disallow Function Constructor (no-new-func)

It's possible to create functions in JavaScript using the Function constructor, such as:

var x = new Function("a", "b", "return a + b");

This is considered by many to be a bad practice due to the difficulty in debugging and reading these types of functions.

Rule Details

This error is raised to highlight the use of a bad practice. By passing a string to the Function constructor, you are requiring the engine to parse that string much in the way it has to when you call the eval function.

Examples of incorrect code for this rule:

/*eslint no-new-func: "error"*/

var x = new Function("a", "b", "return a + b");
var x = Function("a", "b", "return a + b");

Examples of correct code for this rule:

/*eslint no-new-func: "error"*/

var x = function (a, b) {
    return a + b;
};

When Not To Use It

In more advanced cases where you really need to use the Function constructor. Source: http://eslint.org/docs/rules/

qcubed.dialog = function(controlId) {
    $j('#' + controlId).on("tabsactivate", function(event, ui) {
        var i = $j(this).tabs( "option", "active" );
        var id = ui.newPanel ? ui.newPanel.attr("id") : null;
        qcubed.recordControlModification(controlId, "_active", [i,id]);

Close

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 108.

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

qcubed.tabs = function(controlId) {
    $j('#' + controlId).on("tabsactivate", function(event, ui) {
        var i = $j(this).tabs( "option", "active" );
        var id = ui.newPanel ? ui.newPanel.attr("id") : null;
        qcubed.recordControlModification(controlId, "_active", [i,id]);

Close

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 108.

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

            if (strStyleSheetFile.indexOf("/") === 0) {
                strStyleSheetFile = qc.baseDir + strStyleSheetFile;
            } else if (strStyleSheetFile.indexOf("http") !== 0) {
                strStyleSheetFile = qc.cssAssets + "/" + strStyleSheetFile;
            }

Close

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 73.

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

            if (strScript.indexOf("/") === 0) {
                strScript = qc.baseDir + strScript;
            } else if (strScript.indexOf("http") !== 0) {
                strScript = qc.jsAssets + "/" + strScript;
            }

Close

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 73.

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

    if (objWrapper.control) {
        objWrapper.select = function() {
            $j(this.control).select();
        };
    }

Close

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 49.

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

    if (objWrapper.control) {
        objWrapper.focus = function() {
            $j(this.control).focus();
        };
    }

Close

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 49.

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