Sign upLogin

thoughtbot/paperclip

View on GitHub
Star

Showing 1,009 of 1,009 total issues

Method fog_public has a Cognitive Complexity of 7 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring.
Open

      def fog_public(style = default_style)
        if @options.key?(:fog_public)
          value = @options[:fog_public]
          if value.respond_to?(:key?) && value.key?(style)
            value[style]
Severity: Minor
Found in lib/paperclip/storage/fog.rb - About 35 mins 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 content_type_extension has a Cognitive Complexity of 7 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring.
Open

    def content_type_extension attachment, style_name
      mime_type = MIME::Types[attachment.content_type]
      extensions_for_mime_type = unless mime_type.empty?
        mime_type.first.extensions
      else
Severity: Minor
Found in lib/paperclip/interpolations.rb - About 35 mins 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 queue_all_for_delete has a Cognitive Complexity of 7 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring.
Open

    def queue_all_for_delete #:nodoc:
      return if !file?
      unless @options[:preserve_files]
        @queued_for_delete += [:original, *styles.keys].uniq.map do |style|
          path(style) if exists?(style)
Severity: Minor
Found in lib/paperclip/attachment.rb - About 35 mins 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 transformation_command has a Cognitive Complexity of 7 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring.
Open

    def transformation_command
      scale, crop = @current_geometry.transformation_to(@target_geometry, crop?)
      trans = []
      trans << "-coalesce" if animated?
      trans << "-auto-orient" if auto_orient
Severity: Minor
Found in lib/paperclip/thumbnail.rb - About 35 mins 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

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

        Paperclip.interpolates(:s3_path_url) do |attachment, style|
          "#{attachment.s3_protocol(style, true)}//#{attachment.s3_host_name}/#{attachment.bucket_name}/#{attachment.path(style).sub(%r{\A/}, "".freeze)}"
        end unless Paperclip::Interpolations.respond_to? :s3_path_url
        Paperclip.interpolates(:s3_domain_url) do |attachment, style|
Severity: Minor
Found in lib/paperclip/storage/s3.rb and 1 other location - About 30 mins to fix
lib/paperclip/storage/s3.rb on lines 173..176

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 33.

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

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

        Paperclip.interpolates(:s3_domain_url) do |attachment, style|
          "#{attachment.s3_protocol(style, true)}//#{attachment.bucket_name}.#{attachment.s3_host_name}/#{attachment.path(style).sub(%r{\A/}, "".freeze)}"
        end unless Paperclip::Interpolations.respond_to? :s3_domain_url
        Paperclip.interpolates(:asset_host) do |attachment, style|
Severity: Minor
Found in lib/paperclip/storage/s3.rb and 1 other location - About 30 mins to fix
lib/paperclip/storage/s3.rb on lines 170..173

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 33.

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

Method timestamp_as_needed has a Cognitive Complexity of 6 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring.
Open

    def timestamp_as_needed(url, options)
      if options[:timestamp] && timestamp_possible?
        delimiter_char = url.match(/\?.+=/) ? '&' : '?'
        "#{url}#{delimiter_char}#{@attachment.updated_at.to_s}"
      else
Severity: Minor
Found in lib/paperclip/url_generator.rb - About 25 mins 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 current_attachments_styles has a Cognitive Complexity of 6 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring.
Open

  def self.current_attachments_styles
    Hash.new.tap do |current_styles|
      Paperclip::AttachmentRegistry.each_definition do |klass, attachment_name, attachment_attributes|
        # TODO: is it even possible to take into account Procs?
        next if attachment_attributes[:styles].kind_of?(Proc)
Severity: Minor
Found in lib/paperclip/missing_attachment_styles.rb - About 25 mins 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 initialize has a Cognitive Complexity of 6 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring.
Open

    def initialize(file, options = {}, attachment = nil)
      super

      geometry             = options[:geometry].to_s
      @crop                = geometry[-1,1] == '#'
Severity: Minor
Found in lib/paperclip/thumbnail.rb - About 25 mins 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 should_validate_attachment_size has a Cognitive Complexity of 6 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring.
Open

    def should_validate_attachment_size name, options = {}
      klass   = self.name.gsub(/Test$/, '').constantize
      min     = options[:greater_than] || (options[:in] && options[:in].first) || 0
      max     = options[:less_than]    || (options[:in] && options[:in].last)  || (1.0/0)
      range   = (min..max)
Severity: Minor
Found in shoulda_macros/paperclip.rb - About 25 mins 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 processor has a Cognitive Complexity of 6 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring.
Open

    def processor(name) #:nodoc:
      @known_processors ||= {}
      if @known_processors[name.to_s]
        @known_processors[name.to_s]
      else
Severity: Minor
Found in lib/paperclip/processor_helpers.rb - About 25 mins 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

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

        def accepted_types_and_failures
          if @allowed_types.present?
            "Accept content types: #{@allowed_types.join(", ")}\n".tap do |message|
              if @missing_allowed_types.present?
                message << "  #{@missing_allowed_types.join(", ")} were rejected."
Severity: Minor
Found in lib/paperclip/matchers/validate_attachment_content_type_matcher.rb and 1 other location - About 20 mins to fix
lib/paperclip/matchers/validate_attachment_content_type_matcher.rb on lines 66..72

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 28.

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

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

        def rejected_types_and_failures
          if @rejected_types.present?
            "Reject content types: #{@rejected_types.join(", ")}\n".tap do |message|
              if @missing_rejected_types.present?
                message << "  #{@missing_rejected_types.join(", ")} were accepted."
Severity: Minor
Found in lib/paperclip/matchers/validate_attachment_content_type_matcher.rb and 1 other location - About 20 mins to fix
lib/paperclip/matchers/validate_attachment_content_type_matcher.rb on lines 55..61

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 28.

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

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

      def min_value_in_human_size(record)
        value = options[:greater_than_or_equal_to] || options[:greater_than]
        value = value.call(record) if value.respond_to?(:call)
        value = value.min if value.respond_to?(:min)
        human_size(value)
Severity: Minor
Found in lib/paperclip/validators/attachment_size_validator.rb and 1 other location - About 20 mins to fix
lib/paperclip/validators/attachment_size_validator.rb on lines 84..88

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 27.

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

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

      def max_value_in_human_size(record)
        value = options[:less_than_or_equal_to] || options[:less_than]
        value = value.call(record) if value.respond_to?(:call)
        value = value.max if value.respond_to?(:max)
        human_size(value)
Severity: Minor
Found in lib/paperclip/validators/attachment_size_validator.rb and 1 other location - About 20 mins to fix
lib/paperclip/validators/attachment_size_validator.rb on lines 77..81

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 27.

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

Line is too long. [83/80]
Open

  s.executables   = `git ls-files -- bin/*`.split("\n").map{ |f| File.basename(f) }
Severity: Minor
Found in paperclip.gemspec by rubocop

Prefer double-quoted strings unless you need single quotes to avoid extra backslashes for escaping.
Open

  if File.exist?('UPGRADING')
Severity: Minor
Found in paperclip.gemspec by rubocop

Checks if uses of quotes match the configured preference.

Example: EnforcedStyle: single_quotes (default)

# bad
"No special symbols"
"No string interpolation"
"Just text"

# good
'No special symbols'
'No string interpolation'
'Just text'
"Wait! What's #{this}!"

Example: EnforcedStyle: double_quotes

# bad
'Just some text'
'No special chars or interpolation'

# good
"Just some text"
"No special chars or interpolation"
"Every string in #{project} uses double_quotes"

Prefer double-quoted strings unless you need single quotes to avoid extra backslashes for escaping.
Open

  s.add_dependency('activemodel', '>= 4.2.0')
Severity: Minor
Found in paperclip.gemspec by rubocop

Checks if uses of quotes match the configured preference.

Example: EnforcedStyle: single_quotes (default)

# bad
"No special symbols"
"No string interpolation"
"Just text"

# good
'No special symbols'
'No string interpolation'
'Just text'
"Wait! What's #{this}!"

Example: EnforcedStyle: double_quotes

# bad
'Just some text'
'No special chars or interpolation'

# good
"Just some text"
"No special chars or interpolation"
"Every string in #{project} uses double_quotes"

Prefer double-quoted strings unless you need single quotes to avoid extra backslashes for escaping.
Open

  s.add_dependency('mime-types')
Severity: Minor
Found in paperclip.gemspec by rubocop

Checks if uses of quotes match the configured preference.

Example: EnforcedStyle: single_quotes (default)

# bad
"No special symbols"
"No string interpolation"
"Just text"

# good
'No special symbols'
'No string interpolation'
'Just text'
"Wait! What's #{this}!"

Example: EnforcedStyle: double_quotes

# bad
'Just some text'
'No special chars or interpolation'

# good
"Just some text"
"No special chars or interpolation"
"Every string in #{project} uses double_quotes"

Prefer double-quoted strings unless you need single quotes to avoid extra backslashes for escaping.
Open

  s.add_development_dependency('rspec', '~> 3.0')
Severity: Minor
Found in paperclip.gemspec by rubocop

Checks if uses of quotes match the configured preference.

Example: EnforcedStyle: single_quotes (default)

# bad
"No special symbols"
"No string interpolation"
"Just text"

# good
'No special symbols'
'No string interpolation'
'Just text'
"Wait! What's #{this}!"

Example: EnforcedStyle: double_quotes

# bad
'Just some text'
'No special chars or interpolation'

# good
"Just some text"
"No special chars or interpolation"
"Every string in #{project} uses double_quotes"
Severity
Category
Status
Source
Language