Complex method StudyReport::StudyDetails#progress_report_on_all_assets (56.7) Open
def progress_report_on_all_assets # rubocop:todo Metrics/AbcSize
yield(progress_report_header)
each_stock_well_id_in_study_in_batches do |asset_ids|
# eager loading of well_attribute , can only be done on wells ...
- Read upRead up
- Exclude checks
Flog calculates the ABC score for methods. The ABC score is based on assignments, branches (method calls), and conditions.
You can read more about ABC metrics or the flog tool
Method progress_report_on_all_assets
has 45 lines of code (exceeds 25 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def progress_report_on_all_assets # rubocop:todo Metrics/AbcSize
yield(progress_report_header)
each_stock_well_id_in_study_in_batches do |asset_ids|
# eager loading of well_attribute , can only be done on wells ...
Method progress_report_header
has 32 lines of code (exceeds 25 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def progress_report_header
[
'Status',
'Study',
'Supplier',
StudyReport::StudyDetails#progress_report_on_all_assets contains iterators nested 2 deep Open
Well
- Read upRead up
- Exclude checks
A Nested Iterator
occurs when a block contains another block.
Example
Given
class Duck
class << self
def duck_names
%i!tick trick track!.each do |surname|
%i!duck!.each do |last_name|
puts "full name is #{surname} #{last_name}"
end
end
end
end
end
Reek would report the following warning:
test.rb -- 1 warning:
[5]:Duck#duck_names contains iterators nested 2 deep (NestedIterators)
StudyReport::StudyDetails#progress_report_on_all_assets has approx 6 statements Open
def progress_report_on_all_assets # rubocop:todo Metrics/AbcSize
- 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.)
StudyReport::StudyDetails#progress_report_on_all_assets refers to 'asset_progress_data' more than self (maybe move it to another class?) Open
next if asset_progress_data.nil?
yield(
[
asset_progress_data[:status],
- 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.
StudyReport::StudyDetails#well_report_ids doesn't depend on instance state (maybe move it to another class?) Open
def well_report_ids(join, study_condition, plate_purpose_id)
- Read upRead up
- Exclude checks
A Utility Function is any instance method that has no dependency on the state of the instance.
StudyReport::StudyDetails#progress_report_on_all_assets performs a nil-check Open
next if asset_progress_data.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)