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

NPathComplexity

Since: 0.1

The NPath complexity of a method is the number of acyclic execution paths through that method. A threshold of 200 is generally considered the point where measures should be taken to reduce complexity.

Example

class Foo {
    function bar() {
        // lots of complicated code
    }
}

Source https://phpmd.org/rules/codesize.html#npathcomplexity

CyclomaticComplexity

Since: 0.1

Complexity is determined by the number of decision points in a method plus one for the method entry. The decision points are 'if', 'while', 'for', and 'case labels'. Generally, 1-4 is low complexity, 5-7 indicates moderate complexity, 8-10 is high complexity, and 11+ is very high complexity.

Example

// Cyclomatic Complexity = 11
class Foo {
1   public function example() {
2       if ($a == $b) {
3           if ($a1 == $b1) {
                fiddle();
4           } elseif ($a2 == $b2) {
                fiddle();
            } else {
                fiddle();
            }
5       } elseif ($c == $d) {
6           while ($c == $d) {
                fiddle();
            }
7        } elseif ($e == $f) {
8           for ($n = 0; $n < $h; $n++) {
                fiddle();
            }
        } else {
            switch ($z) {
9               case 1:
                    fiddle();
                    break;
10              case 2:
                    fiddle();
                    break;
11              case 3:
                    fiddle();
                    break;
                default:
                    fiddle();
                    break;
            }
        }
    }
}

Source https://phpmd.org/rules/codesize.html#cyclomaticcomplexity

MissingImport

Since: 2.7.0

Importing all external classes in a file through use statements makes them clearly visible.

Example

function make() {
    return new \stdClass();
}

Source http://phpmd.org/rules/cleancode.html#MissingImport

StaticAccess

Since: 1.4.0

Static access causes unexchangeable dependencies to other classes and leads to hard to test code. Avoid using static access at all costs and instead inject dependencies through the constructor. The only case when static access is acceptable is when used for factory methods.

Example

class Foo
{
    public function bar()
    {
        Bar::baz();
    }
}

Source https://phpmd.org/rules/cleancode.html#staticaccess

StaticAccess

Since: 1.4.0

Static access causes unexchangeable dependencies to other classes and leads to hard to test code. Avoid using static access at all costs and instead inject dependencies through the constructor. The only case when static access is acceptable is when used for factory methods.

Example

class Foo
{
    public function bar()
    {
        Bar::baz();
    }
}

Source https://phpmd.org/rules/cleancode.html#staticaccess

StaticAccess

Since: 1.4.0

Static access causes unexchangeable dependencies to other classes and leads to hard to test code. Avoid using static access at all costs and instead inject dependencies through the constructor. The only case when static access is acceptable is when used for factory methods.

Example

class Foo
{
    public function bar()
    {
        Bar::baz();
    }
}

Source https://phpmd.org/rules/cleancode.html#staticaccess

ConstantNamingConventions

Since: 0.2

Class/Interface constant names should always be defined in uppercase.

Example

class Foo {
    const MY_NUM = 0; // ok
    const myTest = ""; // fail
}

Source https://phpmd.org/rules/naming.html#constantnamingconventions

ConstantNamingConventions

Since: 0.2

Class/Interface constant names should always be defined in uppercase.

Example

class Foo {
    const MY_NUM = 0; // ok
    const myTest = ""; // fail
}

Source https://phpmd.org/rules/naming.html#constantnamingconventions

ConstantNamingConventions

Since: 0.2

Class/Interface constant names should always be defined in uppercase.

Example

class Foo {
    const MY_NUM = 0; // ok
    const myTest = ""; // fail
}

Source https://phpmd.org/rules/naming.html#constantnamingconventions

ConstantNamingConventions

Since: 0.2

Class/Interface constant names should always be defined in uppercase.

Example

class Foo {
    const MY_NUM = 0; // ok
    const myTest = ""; // fail
}

Source https://phpmd.org/rules/naming.html#constantnamingconventions

ConstantNamingConventions

Since: 0.2

Class/Interface constant names should always be defined in uppercase.

Example

class Foo {
    const MY_NUM = 0; // ok
    const myTest = ""; // fail
}

Source https://phpmd.org/rules/naming.html#constantnamingconventions

ConstantNamingConventions

Since: 0.2

Class/Interface constant names should always be defined in uppercase.

Example

class Foo {
    const MY_NUM = 0; // ok
    const myTest = ""; // fail
}

Source https://phpmd.org/rules/naming.html#constantnamingconventions

ConstantNamingConventions

Since: 0.2

Class/Interface constant names should always be defined in uppercase.

Example

class Foo {
    const MY_NUM = 0; // ok
    const myTest = ""; // fail
}

Source https://phpmd.org/rules/naming.html#constantnamingconventions

CamelCaseMethodName

Since: 0.2

It is considered best practice to use the camelCase notation to name methods.

Example

class ClassName {
    public function get_name() {
    }
}

Source