Sign upLogin

secureCodeBox/secureCodeBox

View on GitHub
Star
operator/controllers/execution/scheduledscan_controller.go

Summary

Maintainability
C
1 day
Test Coverage

Method ScheduledScanReconciler.Reconcile has a Cognitive Complexity of 41 (exceeds 20 allowed). Consider refactoring.
Open

func (r *ScheduledScanReconciler) Reconcile(ctx context.Context, req ctrl.Request) (ctrl.Result, error) {
    log := r.Log.WithValues("scheduledscan", req.NamespacedName)

    // get the ScheduledScan
    var scheduledScan executionv1.ScheduledScan
Severity: Minor
Found in operator/controllers/execution/scheduledscan_controller.go - About 3 hrs to fix

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 ScheduledScanReconciler.Reconcile has 106 lines of code (exceeds 50 allowed). Consider refactoring.
Open

func (r *ScheduledScanReconciler) Reconcile(ctx context.Context, req ctrl.Request) (ctrl.Result, error) {
    log := r.Log.WithValues("scheduledscan", req.NamespacedName)

    // get the ScheduledScan
    var scheduledScan executionv1.ScheduledScan
Severity: Major
Found in operator/controllers/execution/scheduledscan_controller.go - About 3 hrs to fix

    Method ScheduledScanReconciler.Reconcile has 14 return statements (exceeds 4 allowed).
    Open

    func (r *ScheduledScanReconciler) Reconcile(ctx context.Context, req ctrl.Request) (ctrl.Result, error) {
    log := r.Log.WithValues("scheduledscan", req.NamespacedName)

    // get the ScheduledScan
    var scheduledScan executionv1.ScheduledScan
    Severity: Major
    Found in operator/controllers/execution/scheduledscan_controller.go - About 1 hr to fix

      Function getNextSchedule has 5 return statements (exceeds 4 allowed).
      Open

      func getNextSchedule(r *ScheduledScanReconciler, scheduledScan executionv1.ScheduledScan, now time.Time) (next time.Time, err error) {
    // check if the Cron schedule is set
    if scheduledScan.Spec.Schedule != "" {
        sched, err := cron.ParseStandard(scheduledScan.Spec.Schedule)
        if err != nil {
      Severity: Major
      Found in operator/controllers/execution/scheduledscan_controller.go - About 35 mins to fix

        Method ScheduledScanReconciler.SetupWithManager has 5 return statements (exceeds 4 allowed).
        Open

        func (r *ScheduledScanReconciler) SetupWithManager(mgr ctrl.Manager) error {
    // set up a real clock, since we're not in a test
    ctx := context.Background()
    if err := mgr.GetFieldIndexer().IndexField(ctx, &executionv1.Scan{}, ownerKey, func(rawObj client.Object) []string {
        // grab the job object, extract the owner...
        Severity: Major
        Found in operator/controllers/execution/scheduledscan_controller.go - About 35 mins to fix

          Similar blocks of code found in 2 locations. Consider refactoring.
          Open

              if err := mgr.GetFieldIndexer().IndexField(ctx, &executionv1.Scan{}, ownerKey, func(rawObj client.Object) []string {
        // grab the job object, extract the owner...
        scan := rawObj.(*executionv1.Scan)
        owner := metav1.GetControllerOf(scan)
        if owner == nil {
          Severity: Major
          Found in operator/controllers/execution/scheduledscan_controller.go and 1 other location - About 1 hr to fix
          operator/controllers/execution/scans/scan_controller.go on lines 236..252

          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 152.

          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

          Further Reading

          There are no issues that match your filters.

          Category
          Status