Class Literal has 33 methods (exceeds 20 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
class Literal
private
@@subclasses = [] # @private
@@datatype_map = nil # @privateFile literal.rb has 282 lines of code (exceeds 250 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
require 'bcp47_spec'
module RDF
##
# An RDF literal.Method new has a Cognitive Complexity of 16 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def self.new(value, language: nil, datatype: nil, direction: nil, lexical: nil, validate: false, canonicalize: false, **options)
if language && direction
raise ArgumentError, "datatype with language and direction must be rdf:dirLangString" if (datatype || RDF.dirLangString).to_s != RDF.dirLangString.to_s
elsif language
raise ArgumentError, "datatype with language must be rdf:langString" if (datatype || RDF.langString).to_s != RDF.langString.to_s- 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 valid? has a Cognitive Complexity of 11 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def valid?
BCP47.parse(language.to_s) if language?
return false if direction? && !%i{ltr rtl}.include?(direction)
return false if datatype? && datatype.invalid?
grammar = self.class.const_get(:GRAMMAR) rescue 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 initialize has a Cognitive Complexity of 11 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def initialize(value, language: nil, datatype: nil, direction: nil, lexical: nil, validate: false, canonicalize: false, **options)
@object = value.freeze
@string = lexical if lexical
@string = value if !defined?(@string) && value.is_a?(String)
@string = @string.encode(Encoding::UTF_8).freeze if instance_variable_defined?(:@string)- 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 new has 31 lines of code (exceeds 25 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def self.new(value, language: nil, datatype: nil, direction: nil, lexical: nil, validate: false, canonicalize: false, **options)
if language && direction
raise ArgumentError, "datatype with language and direction must be rdf:dirLangString" if (datatype || RDF.dirLangString).to_s != RDF.dirLangString.to_s
elsif language
raise ArgumentError, "datatype with language must be rdf:langString" if (datatype || RDF.langString).to_s != RDF.langString.to_sMethod compatible? has a Cognitive Complexity of 8 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def compatible?(other)
return false unless other.literal? && plain? && other.plain?
# * The arguments are simple literals or literals typed as xsd:string
# * The arguments are plain literals with identical language-tags- 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 <=> has a Cognitive Complexity of 6 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def <=>(other)
case other
when Literal
case
when self.eql?(other)- 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 == has a Cognitive Complexity of 6 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def ==(other)
case other
when Literal
case
when self.eql?(other)- 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"