Showing 90 of 90 total issues
Consider simplifying this complex logical expression. Open
if config[:jndi]
jndi = config[:jndi].to_s
ctx = javax.naming.InitialContext.new
ds = nil
Method visit_Arel_Nodes_SelectStatement
has 55 lines of code (exceeds 25 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def visit_Arel_Nodes_SelectStatement(o, collector)
o = order_hacks(o)
# if need to select first records without ORDER BY and GROUP BY and without DISTINCT
# then can use simple ROWNUM in WHERE clause
Class JDBCConnection
has 21 methods (exceeds 20 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
class JDBCConnection < OracleEnhanced::Connection # :nodoc:
attr_accessor :active
alias :active? :active
attr_accessor :auto_retry
Method table
has 54 lines of code (exceeds 25 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def table(table, stream)
columns = @connection.columns(table)
begin
self.table_name = table
Method type_cast
has a Cognitive Complexity of 16 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def type_cast(value)
case value
when ActiveModel::Type::Binary::Data
lob_value = value == "" ? " " : value
bind_type = OCI8::BLOB
- 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 structure_dump
has 48 lines of code (exceeds 25 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def structure_dump # :nodoc:
sequences = select(<<~SQL.squish, "SCHEMA")
SELECT
sequence_name, min_value, max_value, increment_by, order_flag, cycle_flag
FROM all_sequences
Method visit_Arel_Nodes_HomogeneousIn
has a Cognitive Complexity of 15 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def visit_Arel_Nodes_HomogeneousIn(o, collector)
in_clause_length = @connection.in_clause_length
values = o.casted_values.map { |v| @connection.quote(v) }
column_name = quote_table_name(o.table_name) + "." + quote_column_name(o.column_name)
operator =
- 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 _update_record
has a Cognitive Complexity of 15 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def _update_record(attribute_names = @attributes.keys)
# check if class has custom update method
if self.class.custom_update_method
# run before/after callbacks defined in model
run_callbacks(:update) do
- 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 add_context_index
has a Cognitive Complexity of 15 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def add_context_index(table_name, column_name, options = {})
column_names = Array(column_name)
index_name = options[:name] || index_name(table_name, column: options[:index_column] || column_names,
# CONEXT index name max length is 25
identifier_max_length: 25)
- 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 visit_Arel_Nodes_HomogeneousIn
has a Cognitive Complexity of 15 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def visit_Arel_Nodes_HomogeneousIn(o, collector)
in_clause_length = @connection.in_clause_length
values = o.casted_values.map { |v| @connection.quote(v) }
column_name = quote_table_name(o.table_name) + "." + quote_column_name(o.column_name)
operator =
- 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 add_context_index
has 47 lines of code (exceeds 25 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def add_context_index(table_name, column_name, options = {})
column_names = Array(column_name)
index_name = options[:name] || index_name(table_name, column: options[:index_column] || column_names,
# CONEXT index name max length is 25
identifier_max_length: 25)
Method new_connection
has 47 lines of code (exceeds 25 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def self.new_connection(config)
# to_s needed if username, password or database is specified as number in database.yml file
username = config[:username] && config[:username].to_s
password = config[:password] && config[:password].to_s
database = config[:database] && config[:database].to_s
Identical blocks of code found in 2 locations. Consider refactoring. Open
if (column["data_type"] == "NUMBER") && !column["data_precision"].nil?
col << "(#{column['data_precision'].to_i}"
col << ",#{column['data_scale'].to_i}" if !column["data_scale"].nil?
col << ")"
elsif column["data_type"].include?("CHAR") || column["data_type"] == "RAW"
- 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 72.
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
Identical blocks of code found in 2 locations. Consider refactoring. Open
if (column["data_type"] == "NUMBER") && !column["data_precision"].nil?
col << "(#{column['data_precision'].to_i}"
col << ",#{column['data_scale'].to_i}" if !column["data_scale"].nil?
col << ")"
elsif column["data_type"].include?("CHAR") || column["data_type"] == "RAW"
- 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 72.
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
Method structure_dump
has a Cognitive Complexity of 14 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def structure_dump # :nodoc:
sequences = select(<<~SQL.squish, "SCHEMA")
SELECT
sequence_name, min_value, max_value, increment_by, order_flag, cycle_flag
FROM all_sequences
- 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 select
has a Cognitive Complexity of 14 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def select(sql, name = nil, return_column_names = false)
cursor = @raw_connection.exec(sql)
cols = []
# Ignore raw_rnum_ which is used to simulate LIMIT and OFFSET
cursor.get_col_names.each do |col_name|
- 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 visit_TableDefinition
has a Cognitive Complexity of 14 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def visit_TableDefinition(o)
create_sql = +"CREATE#{' GLOBAL TEMPORARY' if o.temporary} TABLE #{quote_table_name(o.name)} "
statements = o.columns.map { |c| accept c }
statements << accept(o.primary_keys) if o.primary_keys
- 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 add_column_options!
has a Cognitive Complexity of 14 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def add_column_options!(sql, options)
type = options[:type] || ((column = options[:column]) && column.type)
type = type && type.to_sym
# handle case of defaults for CLOB/NCLOB columns, which would otherwise get "quoted" incorrectly
if options_include_default?(options)
- 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 describe
has 43 lines of code (exceeds 25 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def describe(name)
name = name.to_s
if name.include?("@")
raise ArgumentError "db link is not supported"
else
Method get_ruby_value_from_result_set
has 43 lines of code (exceeds 25 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def get_ruby_value_from_result_set(rset, i, type_name, get_lob_value = true)
case type_name
when :NUMBER
d = rset.getNUMBER(i)
if d.nil?