Showing 203 of 203 total issues
Method get_balanced_term_data
has a Cognitive Complexity of 13 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def get_balanced_term_data(user, section=Osm::Section.get(user.osm_api, section_id))
zones = {:number => {}, :time => {}}
methods = {:number => {}, :time => {}}
meetings = Osm::Meeting.get_for_section(user.osm_api, section_id, term_id, {:no_cache => true})
- Read upRead up
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
Method become
has a Cognitive Complexity of 13 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def become
user = User.find(params[:id])
if user
current_user = user
session[:user_id] = user.id
- Read upRead up
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
Method configuration=
has a Cognitive Complexity of 13 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def configuration=(config)
conversion_functions = {
:integer => Proc.new { |value| value.to_i },
:positive_integer => Proc.new { |value| value.to_i.magnitude },
:boolean => Proc.new { |value| ['0', 0].include?(value) ? false : !!value },
- Read upRead up
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
Method get_list
has a Cognitive Complexity of 13 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def get_list
emails = Array.new
no_emails = Array.new
section = Osm::Section.get(user.osm_api, section_id)
fail Osm::Forbidden if section.nil?
- Read upRead up
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
Method configuration=
has a Cognitive Complexity of 13 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def configuration=(config)
conversion_functions = {
:integer => Proc.new { |value| value.to_i },
:positive_integer => Proc.new { |value| value.to_i.magnitude },
:boolean => Proc.new { |value| value.is_a?(String) ? value.eql?('1') : !!value },
- Read upRead up
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
Method get_data
has a Cognitive Complexity of 13 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def get_data
earliest = configuration[:the_last_n_weeks].weeks.ago.to_date
latest = Date.current
api = user.osm_api
- Read upRead up
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
Method seconds_to_time
has a Cognitive Complexity of 13 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def seconds_to_time(seconds)
fail ArgumentError 'time must be a positive number' if !seconds.is_a?(Numeric) || seconds < 0
parts = []
remaining = seconds
- Read upRead up
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
Method get_data
has 38 lines of code (exceeds 25 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def get_data
latest = configuration[:the_next_n_weeks].weeks.from_now.to_date
earliest = Date.current
api = user.osm_api
Method sections
has 38 lines of code (exceeds 25 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def self.sections
section_ids_seen = []
section_types = {:beavers=>0, :cubs=>0, :scouts=>0, :explorers=>0, :adults=>0, :waiting=>0}
subscription_levels = {1=>0, 2=>0, 3=>0}
addons = {'Badges'=>0, 'Events'=>0, 'Payments'=>0, 'Programme'=>0, 'GoCardless'=>0}
Method create
has 37 lines of code (exceeds 25 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def create
user = login(params[:email_address].downcase, params[:password])
Rails.logger.debug "SessionsController#create: user is #{user.inspect}"
if user
Method get_balanced_statistics
has 36 lines of code (exceeds 25 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def get_balanced_statistics(data, type)
statistics = {}
[:number, :time].each do |num_or_time|
statistics[num_or_time] = {
Method leader_access_audit
has 36 lines of code (exceeds 25 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def leader_access_audit
unless @my_params[:sections].is_a?(Hash)
flash[:error] = 'You must select some sections to sudit'
redirect_to reports_path
return
Method no_current_term
has a Cognitive Complexity of 12 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def no_current_term(email_list, exception)
@email_list = email_list
user = @email_list.user
unless user.nil? || !user.connected_to_osm? || @email_list.section_id.nil?
- Read upRead up
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
Method no_current_term
has a Cognitive Complexity of 12 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def no_current_term(reminder, exception)
@reminder = reminder
user = reminder.user
unless user.nil? || !user.connected_to_osm? || @reminder.section_id.nil?
- Read upRead up
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
Method similar?
has a Cognitive Complexity of 12 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def similar?(a, b)
if a.is_a? Array
a.each do |item|
return true if similar?(item, b)
end
- Read upRead up
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
Method create
has a Cognitive Complexity of 12 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def create
@user = User.new(params[:user].permit(:name, :email_address, :password, :password_confirmation, :gdpr_consent))
@user.gdpr_consent ||= false
if @signup_code
- Read upRead up
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
Method no_current_term
has a Cognitive Complexity of 12 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def no_current_term(task, exception)
@task = task
user = task.user
unless user.nil? || !user.connected_to_osm? || task.section_id.nil?
- Read upRead up
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
Method perform
has 35 lines of code (exceeds 25 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def perform
noterm_emails_sent = {}
forbidden_emails_sent = {}
tasks = AutomationTask.where(active: true).order(:section_id)
count = tasks.count
Similar blocks of code found in 2 locations. Consider refactoring. Open
unless user.nil? || !user.connected_to_osm? || @reminder.section_id.nil?
api = user.osm_api
@next_term = nil
@last_term = nil
terms = Osm::Term.get_for_section(api, @email_list.section)
- Read upRead up
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 59.
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
Similar blocks of code found in 2 locations. Consider refactoring. Open
unless user.nil? || !user.connected_to_osm? || @email_list.section_id.nil?
api = user.osm_api
@next_term = nil
@last_term = nil
terms = Osm::Term.get_for_section(api, @email_list.section)
- Read upRead up
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 59.
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