Showing 27 of 27 total issues
Function STC_COM_SEND
has a Cognitive Complexity of 29 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
CommunicationModel.prototype.send = function STC_COM_SEND(id, message, timeout, callback) {
// Check if ID is valid
if((!this.cluster.workers[id]) && (id !== 'master')) {
if(callback) {
return callback(new Error('Worker with the given ID was not found.'));
- 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
Function STC_COM_INCOMING
has a Cognitive Complexity of 28 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
CommunicationModel.prototype.incoming = function STC_COM_INCOMING(id, message) {
if(message.ticket && !message.type) {
this.emit('CLUSTER_CALLBACK::' + id + "::" + message.ticket, message);
}else if(message.type === 'buffer') {
var callback = this.callback(id, message.ticket);
- 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
Identical blocks of code found in 2 locations. Consider refactoring. Open
if(message.done) {
buffer.set(message.data, message.chunk);
buffer.setDone();
// Finish Buffer
callback(null, { ticket: "STC_BUFFER:" + message.name, digest: buffer.digest(), encoding: buffer.encoding })
- 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 112.
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(message.done) {
buffer.set(message.data, message.chunk);
buffer.setDone();
// Finish Buffer
callback(null, { ticket: "STC_BUFFER:" + message.name, digest: buffer.digest(), encoding: buffer.encoding });
- 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 112.
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
Function STC_DEPLOY_CLUSTER
has a Cognitive Complexity of 13 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
SuperTaskCluster.prototype.deploy = function STC_DEPLOY_CLUSTER(maxTotalWorkers) {
var _this = this;
this.STC_MAX_TOTAL_WORKERS = maxTotalWorkers || this.STC_MAX_TOTAL_WORKERS || os.cpus().length;
var WorkersRequired = Math.max(this.STC_MAX_TOTAL_WORKERS - COM.headcount(), 0) || 0;
- 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
Function STC_HANDLER
has 37 lines of code (exceeds 25 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
SuperTaskCluster.prototype._STC_HANDLER = function STC_HANDLER() {
var args = Array.prototype.slice.call(arguments);
var name = args.shift(), context = args.shift(), callback = args.pop();
// Run task on a free Worker
var Candidate = { v: Infinity, i: 'master', refs: 0 };
Function STC_DEPLOY_CLUSTER
has 33 lines of code (exceeds 25 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
SuperTaskCluster.prototype.deploy = function STC_DEPLOY_CLUSTER(maxTotalWorkers) {
var _this = this;
this.STC_MAX_TOTAL_WORKERS = maxTotalWorkers || this.STC_MAX_TOTAL_WORKERS || os.cpus().length;
var WorkersRequired = Math.max(this.STC_MAX_TOTAL_WORKERS - COM.headcount(), 0) || 0;
Function STC_COM_INCOMING
has 29 lines of code (exceeds 25 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
CommunicationModel.prototype.incoming = function STC_COM_INCOMING(id, message) {
if(message.ticket && !message.type) {
this.emit('CLUSTER_CALLBACK::' + id + "::" + message.ticket, message);
}else if(message.type === 'buffer') {
var callback = this.callback(id, message.ticket);
Function STC_COM_CALLBACK
has a Cognitive Complexity of 10 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
CommunicationModel.prototype.callback = function STC_COM_CALLBACK(id, ticket) {
var _this = this;
return function STC_WORKER_CALLBACK(error, extension) {
if(error) {
_this.send(id, { ticket: ticket, success: false, error: error.message });
- 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
Function STC_COM_SEND
has 26 lines of code (exceeds 25 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
CommunicationModel.prototype.send = function STC_COM_SEND(id, message, timeout, callback) {
// Check if ID is valid
if((!this.cluster.workers[id]) && (id !== 'master')) {
if(callback) {
return callback(new Error('Worker with the given ID was not found.'));
Function createBufferOnWorker
has 7 arguments (exceeds 4 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
SuperTaskCluster.prototype.createBufferOnWorker = function STC_CREATE_BUFFER(workerID, name, buffer, encoding, mutable, chunky, callback) {
Function autoBuffer
has 7 arguments (exceeds 4 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
CommunicationModel.prototype.autoBuffer = function STC_AUTO_BUFFER(workerID, name, buffer, encoding, mutable, sendInChunks, callback) {
Function STC_BUFFER
has a Cognitive Complexity of 8 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
CommunicationModel.prototype.buffer = function STC_BUFFER(workerID, BufferProtoObject, buffer, sendInChunks, callback) {
var _this = this;
// Chucks buffer/Creates MD5 checksum etc.
BufferProtoObject.setBuffer(buffer);
- 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
Function STCBA_GET
has a Cognitive Complexity of 8 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
BufferAllocator.prototype.get = function STCBA_GET(offset, length) {
"use strict";
if(!this.done) return false;
if(!offset) offset = 0;
else offset = parseInt(offset);
- 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
Function BufferAllocator
has 5 arguments (exceeds 4 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
var BufferAllocator = function STCBA_INIT(name, size, encoding, immutable, split) {
Function allocate
has 5 arguments (exceeds 4 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
CommunicationModel.prototype.allocate = function STC_COM_ALLOCATE(name, size, encoding, mutable, split) {
Function buffer
has 5 arguments (exceeds 4 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
CommunicationModel.prototype.buffer = function STC_BUFFER(workerID, BufferProtoObject, buffer, sendInChunks, callback) {
Function STC_HANDLER
has a Cognitive Complexity of 6 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
SuperTaskCluster.prototype._STC_HANDLER = function STC_HANDLER() {
var args = Array.prototype.slice.call(arguments);
var name = args.shift(), context = args.shift(), callback = args.pop();
// Run task on a free Worker
var Candidate = { v: Infinity, i: 'master', refs: 0 };
- 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
Missing radix parameter. Open
else length = parseInt(length);
- Read upRead up
- Exclude checks
Require Radix Parameter (radix)
When using the parseInt()
function it is common to omit the second argument, the radix, and let the function try to determine from the first argument what type of number it is. By default, parseInt()
will autodetect decimal and hexadecimal (via 0x
prefix). Prior to ECMAScript 5, parseInt()
also autodetected octal literals, which caused problems because many developers assumed a leading 0
would be ignored.
This confusion led to the suggestion that you always use the radix parameter to parseInt()
to eliminate unintended consequences. So instead of doing this:
var num = parseInt("071"); // 57
Do this:
var num = parseInt("071", 10); // 71
ECMAScript 5 changed the behavior of parseInt()
so that it no longer autodetects octal literals and instead treats them as decimal literals. However, the differences between hexadecimal and decimal interpretation of the first parameter causes many developers to continue using the radix parameter to ensure the string is interpreted in the intended way.
On the other hand, if the code is targeting only ES5-compliant environments passing the radix 10
may be redundant. In such a case you might want to disallow using such a radix.
Rule Details
This rule is aimed at preventing the unintended conversion of a string to a number of a different base than intended or at preventing the redundant 10
radix if targeting modern environments only.
Options
There are two options for this rule:
-
"always"
enforces providing a radix (default) -
"as-needed"
disallows providing the10
radix
always
Examples of incorrect code for the default "always"
option:
/*eslint radix: "error"*/
var num = parseInt("071");
var num = parseInt(someValue);
var num = parseInt("071", "abc");
var num = parseInt();
Examples of correct code for the default "always"
option:
/*eslint radix: "error"*/
var num = parseInt("071", 10);
var num = parseInt("071", 8);
var num = parseFloat(someValue);
as-needed
Examples of incorrect code for the "as-needed"
option:
/*eslint radix: ["error", "as-needed"]*/
var num = parseInt("071", 10);
var num = parseInt("071", "abc");
var num = parseInt();
Examples of correct code for the "as-needed"
option:
/*eslint radix: ["error", "as-needed"]*/
var num = parseInt("071");
var num = parseInt("071", 8);
var num = parseFloat(someValue);
When Not To Use It
If you don't want to enforce either presence or omission of the 10
radix value you can turn this rule off.
Further Reading
Expected return with your callback function. Open
callback(null, { allocated: true });
- Read upRead up
- Exclude checks
Enforce Return After Callback (callback-return)
The callback pattern is at the heart of most I/O and event-driven programming in JavaScript.
function doSomething(err, callback) {
if (err) {
return callback(err);
}
callback();
}
To prevent calling the callback multiple times it is important to return
anytime the callback is triggered outside
of the main function body. Neglecting this technique often leads to issues where you do something more than once.
For example, in the case of an HTTP request, you may try to send HTTP headers more than once leading Node.js to throw
a Can't render headers after they are sent to the client.
error.
Rule Details
This rule is aimed at ensuring that callbacks used outside of the main function block are always part-of or immediately
preceding a return
statement. This rule decides what is a callback based on the name of the function being called.
Options
The rule takes a single option - an array of possible callback names - which may include object methods. The default callback names are callback
, cb
, next
.
Default callback names
Examples of incorrect code for this rule with the default ["callback", "cb", "next"]
option:
/*eslint callback-return: "error"*/
function foo(err, callback) {
if (err) {
callback(err);
}
callback();
}
Examples of correct code for this rule with the default ["callback", "cb", "next"]
option:
/*eslint callback-return: "error"*/
function foo(err, callback) {
if (err) {
return callback(err);
}
callback();
}
Supplied callback names
Examples of incorrect code for this rule with the option ["done", "send.error", "send.success"]
:
/*eslint callback-return: ["error", ["done", "send.error", "send.success"]]*/
function foo(err, done) {
if (err) {
done(err);
}
done();
}
function bar(err, send) {
if (err) {
send.error(err);
}
send.success();
}
Examples of correct code for this rule with the option ["done", "send.error", "send.success"]
:
/*eslint callback-return: ["error", ["done", "send.error", "send.success"]]*/
function foo(err, done) {
if (err) {
return done(err);
}
done();
}
function bar(err, send) {
if (err) {
return send.error(err);
}
send.success();
}
Known Limitations
Because it is difficult to understand the meaning of a program through static analysis, this rule has limitations:
- false negatives when this rule reports correct code, but the program calls the callback more than one time (which is incorrect behavior)
- false positives when this rule reports incorrect code, but the program calls the callback only one time (which is correct behavior)
Passing the callback by reference
The static analysis of this rule does not detect that the program calls the callback if it is an argument of a function (for example, setTimeout
).
Example of a false negative when this rule reports correct code:
/*eslint callback-return: "error"*/
function foo(err, callback) {
if (err) {
setTimeout(callback, 0); // this is bad, but WILL NOT warn
}
callback();
}
Triggering the callback within a nested function
The static analysis of this rule does not detect that the program calls the callback from within a nested function or an immediately-invoked function expression (IIFE).
Example of a false negative when this rule reports correct code:
/*eslint callback-return: "error"*/
function foo(err, callback) {
if (err) {
process.nextTick(function() {
return callback(); // this is bad, but WILL NOT warn
});
}
callback();
}
If/else statements
The static analysis of this rule does not detect that the program calls the callback only one time in each branch of an if
statement.
Example of a false positive when this rule reports incorrect code:
/*eslint callback-return: "error"*/
function foo(err, callback) {
if (err) {
callback(err); // this is fine, but WILL warn
} else {
callback(); // this is fine, but WILL warn
}
}
When Not To Use It
There are some cases where you might want to call a callback function more than once. In those cases this rule may lead to incorrect behavior. In those cases you may want to reserve a special name for those callbacks and not include that in the list of callbacks that trigger warnings.
Further Reading
Related Rules
- [handle-callback-err](handle-callback-err.md) Source: http://eslint.org/docs/rules/