DataJSON::Persistence::HTTPPersistence#accessible? has approx 6 statements Open
def accessible?
- Read upRead up
- Exclude checks
A method with Too Many Statements
is any method that has a large number of lines.
Too Many Statements
warns about any method that has more than 5 statements. Reek's smell detector for Too Many Statements
counts +1 for every simple statement in a method and +1 for every statement within a control structure (if
, else
, case
, when
, for
, while
, until
, begin
, rescue
) but it doesn't count the control structure itself.
So the following method would score +6 in Reek's statement-counting algorithm:
def parse(arg, argv, &error)
if !(val = arg) and (argv.empty? or /\A-/ =~ (val = argv[0]))
return nil, block, nil # +1
end
opt = (val = parse_arg(val, &error))[1] # +2
val = conv_arg(*val) # +3
if opt and !arg
argv.shift # +4
else
val[0] = nil # +5
end
val # +6
end
(You might argue that the two assigments within the first @if@ should count as statements, and that perhaps the nested assignment should count as +2.)
DataJSON::DataJSON has at least 6 instance variables Open
class DataJSON
- Read upRead up
- Exclude checks
Too Many Instance Variables
is a special case of LargeClass
.
Example
Given this configuration
TooManyInstanceVariables:
max_instance_variables: 3
and this code:
class TooManyInstanceVariables
def initialize
@arg_1 = :dummy
@arg_2 = :dummy
@arg_3 = :dummy
@arg_4 = :dummy
end
end
Reek would emit the following warning:
test.rb -- 5 warnings:
[1]:TooManyInstanceVariables has at least 4 instance variables (TooManyInstanceVariables)
DataJSON::Persistence::HTTPPersistence#accessible? refers to 'uri' more than self (maybe move it to another class?) Open
http = Net::HTTP.new(uri.host, uri.port)
# TODO: Handle HTTPS paths correctly
# http.use_ssl = true # If using SSL
# http.verify_mode = OpenSSL::SSL::VERIFY_NONE # Don't verify SSL
- Read upRead up
- Exclude checks
Feature Envy occurs when a code fragment references another object more often than it references itself, or when several clients do the same series of manipulations on a particular type of object.
Feature Envy reduces the code's ability to communicate intent: code that "belongs" on one class but which is located in another can be hard to find, and may upset the "System of Names" in the host class.
Feature Envy also affects the design's flexibility: A code fragment that is in the wrong class creates couplings that may not be natural within the application's domain, and creates a loss of cohesion in the unwilling host class.
Feature Envy often arises because it must manipulate other objects (usually its arguments) to get them into a useful form, and one force preventing them (the arguments) doing this themselves is that the common knowledge lives outside the arguments, or the arguments are of too basic a type to justify extending that type. Therefore there must be something which 'knows' about the contents or purposes of the arguments. That thing would have to be more than just a basic type, because the basic types are either containers which don't know about their contents, or they are single objects which can't capture their relationship with their fellows of the same type. So, this thing with the extra knowledge should be reified into a class, and the utility method will most likely belong there.
Example
Running Reek on:
class Warehouse
def sale_price(item)
(item.price - item.rebate) * @vat
end
end
would report:
Warehouse#total_price refers to item more than self (FeatureEnvy)
since this:
(item.price - item.rebate)
belongs to the Item class, not the Warehouse.
DataJSON::DataJSON#read has approx 8 statements Open
def read
- Read upRead up
- Exclude checks
A method with Too Many Statements
is any method that has a large number of lines.
Too Many Statements
warns about any method that has more than 5 statements. Reek's smell detector for Too Many Statements
counts +1 for every simple statement in a method and +1 for every statement within a control structure (if
, else
, case
, when
, for
, while
, until
, begin
, rescue
) but it doesn't count the control structure itself.
So the following method would score +6 in Reek's statement-counting algorithm:
def parse(arg, argv, &error)
if !(val = arg) and (argv.empty? or /\A-/ =~ (val = argv[0]))
return nil, block, nil # +1
end
opt = (val = parse_arg(val, &error))[1] # +2
val = conv_arg(*val) # +3
if opt and !arg
argv.shift # +4
else
val[0] = nil # +5
end
val # +6
end
(You might argue that the two assigments within the first @if@ should count as statements, and that perhaps the nested assignment should count as +2.)
DataJSON::DataJSON#read calls 'json[:broadcast]' 4 times Open
if !json[:broadcast].nil?
self.slug = json[:broadcast][:slug]
self.title = json[:broadcast][:title]
@started_at = json[:broadcast][:started_at]
- Read upRead up
- Exclude checks
Duplication occurs when two fragments of code look nearly identical, or when two fragments of code have nearly identical effects at some conceptual level.
Reek implements a check for Duplicate Method Call.
Example
Here's a very much simplified and contrived example. The following method will report a warning:
def double_thing()
@other.thing + @other.thing
end
One quick approach to silence Reek would be to refactor the code thus:
def double_thing()
thing = @other.thing
thing + thing
end
A slightly different approach would be to replace all calls of double_thing
by calls to @other.double_thing
:
class Other
def double_thing()
thing + thing
end
end
The approach you take will depend on balancing other factors in your code.
DataJSON has no descriptive comment Open
module DataJSON
- Read upRead up
- Exclude checks
Classes and modules are the units of reuse and release. It is therefore considered good practice to annotate every class and module with a brief comment outlining its responsibilities.
Example
Given
class Dummy
# Do things...
end
Reek would emit the following warning:
test.rb -- 1 warning:
[1]:Dummy has no descriptive comment (IrresponsibleModule)
Fixing this is simple - just an explaining comment:
# The Dummy class is responsible for ...
class Dummy
# Do things...
end
DataJSON::DataJSON has no descriptive comment Open
class DataJSON
- Read upRead up
- Exclude checks
Classes and modules are the units of reuse and release. It is therefore considered good practice to annotate every class and module with a brief comment outlining its responsibilities.
Example
Given
class Dummy
# Do things...
end
Reek would emit the following warning:
test.rb -- 1 warning:
[1]:Dummy has no descriptive comment (IrresponsibleModule)
Fixing this is simple - just an explaining comment:
# The Dummy class is responsible for ...
class Dummy
# Do things...
end
DataJSON::Persistence::NilPersistence has no descriptive comment Open
class NilPersistence
- Read upRead up
- Exclude checks
Classes and modules are the units of reuse and release. It is therefore considered good practice to annotate every class and module with a brief comment outlining its responsibilities.
Example
Given
class Dummy
# Do things...
end
Reek would emit the following warning:
test.rb -- 1 warning:
[1]:Dummy has no descriptive comment (IrresponsibleModule)
Fixing this is simple - just an explaining comment:
# The Dummy class is responsible for ...
class Dummy
# Do things...
end
DataJSON::Persistence::HTTPPersistence has no descriptive comment Open
class HTTPPersistence
- Read upRead up
- Exclude checks
Classes and modules are the units of reuse and release. It is therefore considered good practice to annotate every class and module with a brief comment outlining its responsibilities.
Example
Given
class Dummy
# Do things...
end
Reek would emit the following warning:
test.rb -- 1 warning:
[1]:Dummy has no descriptive comment (IrresponsibleModule)
Fixing this is simple - just an explaining comment:
# The Dummy class is responsible for ...
class Dummy
# Do things...
end
DataJSON::Persistence::FilePersistence has no descriptive comment Open
class FilePersistence
- Read upRead up
- Exclude checks
Classes and modules are the units of reuse and release. It is therefore considered good practice to annotate every class and module with a brief comment outlining its responsibilities.
Example
Given
class Dummy
# Do things...
end
Reek would emit the following warning:
test.rb -- 1 warning:
[1]:Dummy has no descriptive comment (IrresponsibleModule)
Fixing this is simple - just an explaining comment:
# The Dummy class is responsible for ...
class Dummy
# Do things...
end
DataJSON::Persistence::FilePersistence#relativize doesn't depend on instance state (maybe move it to another class?) Open
def relativize(path)
- Read upRead up
- Exclude checks
A Utility Function is any instance method that has no dependency on the state of the instance.
DataJSON::DataJSON#read performs a nil-check Open
if !json[:broadcast].nil?
- Read upRead up
- Exclude checks
A NilCheck
is a type check. Failures of NilCheck
violate the "tell, don't ask" principle.
Additionally, type checks often mask bigger problems in your source code like not using OOP and / or polymorphism when you should.
Example
Given
class Klass
def nil_checker(argument)
if argument.nil?
puts "argument isn't nil!"
end
end
end
Reek would emit the following warning:
test.rb -- 1 warning:
[3]:Klass#nil_checker performs a nil-check. (NilCheck)
DataJSON::Persistence::FilePersistence#absolute? doesn't depend on instance state (maybe move it to another class?) Open
def absolute?(path)
- Read upRead up
- Exclude checks
A Utility Function is any instance method that has no dependency on the state of the instance.
DataJSON#self.persistence_for performs a nil-check Open
persistence = if path.nil? || path.empty?
- Read upRead up
- Exclude checks
A NilCheck
is a type check. Failures of NilCheck
violate the "tell, don't ask" principle.
Additionally, type checks often mask bigger problems in your source code like not using OOP and / or polymorphism when you should.
Example
Given
class Klass
def nil_checker(argument)
if argument.nil?
puts "argument isn't nil!"
end
end
end
Reek would emit the following warning:
test.rb -- 1 warning:
[3]:Klass#nil_checker performs a nil-check. (NilCheck)
DataJSON::Persistence::HTTPPersistence#write has unused parameter 'contents' Open
def write(contents)
- Read upRead up
- Exclude checks
Unused Parameter
refers to methods with parameters that are unused in scope of the method.
Having unused parameters in a method is code smell because leaving dead code in a method can never improve the method and it makes the code confusing to read.
Example
Given:
class Klass
def unused_parameters(x,y,z)
puts x,y # but not z
end
end
Reek would emit the following warning:
[2]:Klass#unused_parameters has unused parameter 'z' (UnusedParameters)
DataJSON::Persistence::NilPersistence#write has unused parameter 'contents' Open
def write(contents)
- Read upRead up
- Exclude checks
Unused Parameter
refers to methods with parameters that are unused in scope of the method.
Having unused parameters in a method is code smell because leaving dead code in a method can never improve the method and it makes the code confusing to read.
Example
Given:
class Klass
def unused_parameters(x,y,z)
puts x,y # but not z
end
end
Reek would emit the following warning:
[2]:Klass#unused_parameters has unused parameter 'z' (UnusedParameters)
TODO found Open
# TODO: PUT request
- Exclude checks
TODO found Open
# TODO: Handle HTTPS paths correctly
- Exclude checks
Unused method argument - contents
. If it's necessary, use _
or _contents
as an argument name to indicate that it won't be used. You can also write as write(*)
if you want the method to accept any arguments but don't care about them. Open
def write(contents)
- Read upRead up
- Exclude checks
This cop checks for unused method arguments.
Example:
# bad
def some_method(used, unused, _unused_but_allowed)
puts used
end
Example:
# good
def some_method(used, _unused, _unused_but_allowed)
puts used
end
Unused method argument - contents
. If it's necessary, use _
or _contents
as an argument name to indicate that it won't be used. You can also write as write(*)
if you want the method to accept any arguments but don't care about them. Open
def write(contents)
- Read upRead up
- Exclude checks
This cop checks for unused method arguments.
Example:
# bad
def some_method(used, unused, _unused_but_allowed)
puts used
end
Example:
# good
def some_method(used, _unused, _unused_but_allowed)
puts used
end
Useless private
access modifier. Open
private
- Read upRead up
- Exclude checks
This cop checks for redundant access modifiers, including those with no
code, those which are repeated, and leading public
modifiers in a
class or module body. Conditionally-defined methods are considered as
always being defined, and thus access modifiers guarding such methods
are not redundant.
Example:
class Foo
public # this is redundant (default access is public)
def method
end
private # this is not redundant (a method is defined)
def method2
end
private # this is redundant (no following methods are defined)
end
Example:
class Foo
# The following is not redundant (conditionally defined methods are
# considered as always defining a method)
private
if condition?
def method
end
end
protected # this is not redundant (method is defined)
define_method(:method2) do
end
protected # this is redundant (repeated from previous modifier)
[1,2,3].each do |i|
define_method("foo#{i}") do
end
end
# The following is redundant (methods defined on the class'
# singleton class are not affected by the public modifier)
public
def self.method3
end
end
Example:
# Lint/UselessAccessModifier:
# ContextCreatingMethods:
# - concerning
require 'active_support/concern'
class Foo
concerning :Bar do
def some_public_method
end
private
def some_private_method
end
end
# this is not redundant because `concerning` created its own context
private
def some_other_private_method
end
end
Example:
# Lint/UselessAccessModifier:
# MethodCreatingMethods:
# - delegate
require 'active_support/core_ext/module/delegation'
class Foo
# this is not redundant because `delegate` creates methods
private
delegate :method_a, to: :method_b
end
end
at 21, 6 is not aligned with if
at 15, 18. Open
end
- Read upRead up
- Exclude checks
This cop checks whether the end keywords are aligned properly.
Three modes are supported through the EnforcedStyleAlignWith
configuration parameter:
If it's set to keyword
(which is the default), the end
shall be aligned with the start of the keyword (if, class, etc.).
If it's set to variable
the end
shall be aligned with the
left-hand-side of the variable assignment, if there is one.
If it's set to start_of_line
, the end
shall be aligned with the
start of the line where the matching keyword appears.
Example: EnforcedStyleAlignWith: keyword (default)
# bad
variable = if true
end
# good
variable = if true
end
Example: EnforcedStyleAlignWith: variable
# bad
variable = if true
end
# good
variable = if true
end
Example: EnforcedStyleAlignWith: startofline
# bad
variable = if true
end
# good
puts(if true
end)