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 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 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 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

This cop checks dynamic find_by_* methods. Use find_by instead of dynamic method. See. https://github.com/bbatsov/rails-style-guide#find_by

Example:

# bad
User.find_by_name(name)

# bad
User.find_by_name_and_email(name)

# bad
User.find_by_email!(name)

# good
User.find_by(name: name)

# good
User.find_by(name: name, email: email)

# good
User.find_by!(email: email)

This cop checks dynamic find_by_* methods. Use find_by instead of dynamic method. See. https://github.com/bbatsov/rails-style-guide#find_by

Example:

# bad
User.find_by_name(name)

# bad
User.find_by_name_and_email(name)

# bad
User.find_by_email!(name)

# good
User.find_by(name: name)

# good
User.find_by(name: name, email: email)

# good
User.find_by!(email: email)

This cop checks dynamic find_by_* methods. Use find_by instead of dynamic method. See. https://github.com/bbatsov/rails-style-guide#find_by

Example:

# bad
User.find_by_name(name)

# bad
User.find_by_name_and_email(name)

# bad
User.find_by_email!(name)

# good
User.find_by(name: name)

# good
User.find_by(name: name, email: email)

# good
User.find_by!(email: email)

This cop checks dynamic find_by_* methods. Use find_by instead of dynamic method. See. https://github.com/bbatsov/rails-style-guide#find_by

Example:

# bad
User.find_by_name(name)

# bad
User.find_by_name_and_email(name)

# bad
User.find_by_email!(name)

# good
User.find_by(name: name)

# good
User.find_by(name: name, email: email)

# good
User.find_by!(email: email)

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 37.

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 26.

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 cop checks for the formatting of empty method definitions. By default it enforces empty method definitions to go on a single line (compact style), but it can be configured to enforce the end to go on its own line (expanded style).

Note: A method definition is not considered empty if it contains comments.

Example: EnforcedStyle: compact (default)

# bad
def foo(bar)
end

def self.foo(bar)
end

# good
def foo(bar); end

def foo(bar)
  # baz
end

def self.foo(bar); end

Example: EnforcedStyle: expanded

# bad
def foo(bar); end

def self.foo(bar); end

# good
def foo(bar)
end

def self.foo(bar)
end

This cop checks for the formatting of empty method definitions. By default it enforces empty method definitions to go on a single line (compact style), but it can be configured to enforce the end to go on its own line (expanded style).

Note: A method definition is not considered empty if it contains comments.

Example: EnforcedStyle: compact (default)

# bad
def foo(bar)
end

def self.foo(bar)
end

# good
def foo(bar); end

def foo(bar)
  # baz
end

def self.foo(bar); end

Example: EnforcedStyle: expanded

# bad
def foo(bar); end

def self.foo(bar); end

# good
def foo(bar)
end

def self.foo(bar)
end

This cop can check for array literals made up of symbols that are not using the %i() syntax.

Alternatively, it checks for symbol arrays using the %i() syntax on projects which do not want to use that syntax.

Configuration option: MinSize If set, arrays with fewer elements than this value will not trigger the cop. For example, a MinSize of3` will not enforce a style on an array of 2 or fewer elements.

Example: EnforcedStyle: percent (default)

# good
%i[foo bar baz]

# bad
[:foo, :bar, :baz]

Example: EnforcedStyle: brackets

# good
[:foo, :bar, :baz]

# bad
%i[foo bar baz]

This cop can check for array literals made up of symbols that are not using the %i() syntax.

Alternatively, it checks for symbol arrays using the %i() syntax on projects which do not want to use that syntax.

Configuration option: MinSize If set, arrays with fewer elements than this value will not trigger the cop. For example, a MinSize of3` will not enforce a style on an array of 2 or fewer elements.

Example: EnforcedStyle: percent (default)

# good
%i[foo bar baz]

# bad
[:foo, :bar, :baz]

Example: EnforcedStyle: brackets

# good
[:foo, :bar, :baz]

# bad
%i[foo bar baz]

This cop can check for array literals made up of symbols that are not using the %i() syntax.

Alternatively, it checks for symbol arrays using the %i() syntax on projects which do not want to use that syntax.

Configuration option: MinSize If set, arrays with fewer elements than this value will not trigger the cop. For example, a MinSize of3` will not enforce a style on an array of 2 or fewer elements.

Example: EnforcedStyle: percent (default)

# good
%i[foo bar baz]

# bad
[:foo, :bar, :baz]

Example: EnforcedStyle: brackets

# good
[:foo, :bar, :baz]

# bad
%i[foo bar baz]

This cop checks for the presence of parentheses around ternary conditions. It is configurable to enforce inclusion or omission of parentheses using EnforcedStyle. Omission is only enforced when removing the parentheses won't cause a different behavior.

Example: EnforcedStyle: requirenoparentheses (default)

# bad
foo = (bar?) ? a : b
foo = (bar.baz?) ? a : b
foo = (bar && baz) ? a : b

# good
foo = bar? ? a : b
foo = bar.baz? ? a : b
foo = bar && baz ? a : b

Example: EnforcedStyle: require_parentheses

# bad
foo = bar? ? a : b
foo = bar.baz? ? a : b
foo = bar && baz ? a : b

# good
foo = (bar?) ? a : b
foo = (bar.baz?) ? a : b
foo = (bar && baz) ? a : b

Example: EnforcedStyle: requireparentheseswhen_complex

# bad
foo = (bar?) ? a : b
foo = (bar.baz?) ? a : b
foo = bar && baz ? a : b

# good
foo = bar? ? a : b
foo = bar.baz? ? a : b
foo = (bar && baz) ? a : b