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

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.

This cop checks that the cyclomatic complexity of methods is not higher than the configured maximum. The cyclomatic complexity is the number of linearly independent paths through a method. The algorithm counts decision points and adds one.

An if statement (or unless or ?:) increases the complexity by one. An else branch does not, since it doesn't add a decision point. The && operator (or keyword and) can be converted to a nested if statement, and ||/or is shorthand for a sequence of ifs, so they also add one. Loops can be said to have an exit condition, so they add one.

This cop tries to produce a complexity score that's a measure of the complexity the reader experiences when looking at a method. For that reason it considers when nodes as something that doesn't add as much complexity as an if or a &&. Except if it's one of those special case/when constructs where there's no expression after case. Then the cop treats it as an if/elsif/elsif... and lets all the when nodes count. In contrast to the CyclomaticComplexity cop, this cop considers else nodes as adding complexity.

Example:

def my_method                   # 1
  if cond                       # 1
    case var                    # 2 (0.8 + 4 * 0.2, rounded)
    when 1 then func_one
    when 2 then func_two
    when 3 then func_three
    when 4..10 then func_other
    end
  else                          # 1
    do_something until a && b   # 2
  end                           # ===
end                             # 7 complexity points

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.

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

This cop checks that the cyclomatic complexity of methods is not higher than the configured maximum. The cyclomatic complexity is the number of linearly independent paths through a method. The algorithm counts decision points and adds one.

An if statement (or unless or ?:) increases the complexity by one. An else branch does not, since it doesn't add a decision point. The && operator (or keyword and) can be converted to a nested if statement, and ||/or is shorthand for a sequence of ifs, so they also add one. Loops can be said to have an exit condition, so they add one.

This cop tries to produce a complexity score that's a measure of the complexity the reader experiences when looking at a method. For that reason it considers when nodes as something that doesn't add as much complexity as an if or a &&. Except if it's one of those special case/when constructs where there's no expression after case. Then the cop treats it as an if/elsif/elsif... and lets all the when nodes count. In contrast to the CyclomaticComplexity cop, this cop considers else nodes as adding complexity.

Example:

def my_method                   # 1
  if cond                       # 1
    case var                    # 2 (0.8 + 4 * 0.2, rounded)
    when 1 then func_one
    when 2 then func_two
    when 3 then func_three
    when 4..10 then func_other
    end
  else                          # 1
    do_something until a && b   # 2
  end                           # ===
end                             # 7 complexity points

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

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

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 29.

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

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 29.

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

This cops checks for indentation that doesn't use the specified number of spaces.

See also the IndentationConsistency cop which is the companion to this one.

Example:

# bad
class A
 def test
  puts 'hello'
 end
end

# good
class A
  def test
    puts 'hello'
  end
end

Example: IgnoredPatterns: ['^\s*module']

# bad
module A
class B
  def test
  puts 'hello'
  end
end
end

# good
module A
class B
  def test
    puts 'hello'
  end
end
end

Use a guard clause instead of wrapping the code inside a conditional expression

Example:

# bad
def test
  if something
    work
  end
end

# good
def test
  return unless something
  work
end

# also good
def test
  work if something
end

# bad
if something
  raise 'exception'
else
  ok
end

# good
raise 'exception' if something
ok

This cop checks for potential usage of the ||= operator.

Example:

# bad
name = name ? name : 'Bozhidar'

# bad
name = if name
         name
       else
         'Bozhidar'
       end

# bad
unless name
  name = 'Bozhidar'
end

# bad
name = 'Bozhidar' unless name

# good - set name to 'Bozhidar', only if it's nil or false
name ||= 'Bozhidar'

This cops checks if empty lines around the bodies of modules match the configuration.

Example: EnforcedStyle: empty_lines

# good

module Foo

  def bar
    # ...
  end

end

Example: EnforcedStyle: emptylinesexcept_namespace

# good

module Foo
  module Bar

    # ...

  end
end

Example: EnforcedStyle: emptylinesspecial

# good
module Foo

  def bar; end

end

Example: EnforcedStyle: noemptylines (default)

# good

module Foo
  def bar
    # ...
  end
end

This cop checks whether some constant value isn't a mutable literal (e.g. array or hash).

Example:

# bad
CONST = [1, 2, 3]

# good
CONST = [1, 2, 3].freeze

Here we check if the parameters on a multi-line method call or definition are aligned.

Example: EnforcedStyle: withfirstparameter (default)

# good

foo :bar,
    :baz

# bad

foo :bar,
  :baz

Example: EnforcedStyle: withfixedindentation

# good

foo :bar,
  :baz

# bad

foo :bar,
    :baz

This cop enforces using // or %r around regular expressions.

Example: EnforcedStyle: slashes (default)

# bad
snake_case = %r{^[\dA-Z_]+$}

# bad
regex = %r{
  foo
  (bar)
  (baz)
}x

# good
snake_case = /^[\dA-Z_]+$/

# good
regex = /
  foo
  (bar)
  (baz)
/x

Example: EnforcedStyle: percent_r

# bad
snake_case = /^[\dA-Z_]+$/

# bad
regex = /
  foo
  (bar)
  (baz)
/x

# good
snake_case = %r{^[\dA-Z_]+$}

# good
regex = %r{
  foo
  (bar)
  (baz)
}x

Example: EnforcedStyle: mixed

# bad
snake_case = %r{^[\dA-Z_]+$}

# bad
regex = /
  foo
  (bar)
  (baz)
/x

# good
snake_case = /^[\dA-Z_]+$/

# good
regex = %r{
  foo
  (bar)
  (baz)
}x

Example: AllowInnerSlashes: false (default)

# If `false`, the cop will always recommend using `%r` if one or more
# slashes are found in the regexp string.

# bad
x =~ /home\//

# good
x =~ %r{home/}

Example: AllowInnerSlashes: true

# good
x =~ /home\//

This cop checks whether some constant value isn't a mutable literal (e.g. array or hash).

Example:

# bad
CONST = [1, 2, 3]

# good
CONST = [1, 2, 3].freeze

This cop checks for potential usage of the ||= operator.

Example:

# bad
name = name ? name : 'Bozhidar'

# bad
name = if name
         name
       else
         'Bozhidar'
       end

# bad
unless name
  name = 'Bozhidar'
end

# bad
name = 'Bozhidar' unless name

# good - set name to 'Bozhidar', only if it's nil or false
name ||= 'Bozhidar'

Here we check if the parameters on a multi-line method call or definition are aligned.

Example: EnforcedStyle: withfirstparameter (default)

# good

foo :bar,
    :baz

# bad

foo :bar,
  :baz

Example: EnforcedStyle: withfixedindentation

# good

foo :bar,
  :baz

# bad

foo :bar,
    :baz