Showing 1,006 of 1,009 total issues
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
- 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
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|
- 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 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
- 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
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|
- 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 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
- 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
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] == '#'
- 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 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
- 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 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
- 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 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)
- 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 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)
- 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
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."
- 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 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
- 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
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."
- 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 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
- 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
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)
- 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 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
- 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
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)
- 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 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
- 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
Prefer double-quoted strings unless you need single quotes to avoid extra backslashes for escaping. Open
require 'bundler/gem_tasks'
- Read upRead up
- Exclude checks
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
klass = self.name.gsub(/Test$/, '').constantize
- Read upRead up
- Exclude checks
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('activesupport', '>= 4.2.0')
- Read upRead up
- Exclude checks
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"
Use def with parentheses when there are parameters. Open
def should_have_attached_file name
- Read upRead up
- Exclude checks
This cops checks for parentheses around the arguments in method definitions. Both instance and class/singleton methods are checked.
Example: EnforcedStyle: require_parentheses (default)
# The `require_parentheses` style requires method definitions
# to always use parentheses
# bad
def bar num1, num2
num1 + num2
end
def foo descriptive_var_name,
another_descriptive_var_name,
last_descriptive_var_name
do_something
end
# good
def bar(num1, num2)
num1 + num2
end
def foo(descriptive_var_name,
another_descriptive_var_name,
last_descriptive_var_name)
do_something
end
Example: EnforcedStyle: requirenoparentheses
# The `require_no_parentheses` style requires method definitions
# to never use parentheses
# bad
def bar(num1, num2)
num1 + num2
end
def foo(descriptive_var_name,
another_descriptive_var_name,
last_descriptive_var_name)
do_something
end
# good
def bar num1, num2
num1 + num2
end
def foo descriptive_var_name,
another_descriptive_var_name,
last_descriptive_var_name
do_something
end
Example: EnforcedStyle: requirenoparenthesesexceptmultiline
# The `require_no_parentheses_except_multiline` style prefers no
# parantheses when method definition arguments fit on single line,
# but prefers parantheses when arguments span multiple lines.
# bad
def bar(num1, num2)
num1 + num2
end
def foo descriptive_var_name,
another_descriptive_var_name,
last_descriptive_var_name
do_something
end
# good
def bar num1, num2
num1 + num2
end
def foo(descriptive_var_name,
another_descriptive_var_name,
last_descriptive_var_name)
do_something
end
Use def with parentheses when there are parameters. Open
def should_validate_attachment_presence name
- Read upRead up
- Exclude checks
This cops checks for parentheses around the arguments in method definitions. Both instance and class/singleton methods are checked.
Example: EnforcedStyle: require_parentheses (default)
# The `require_parentheses` style requires method definitions
# to always use parentheses
# bad
def bar num1, num2
num1 + num2
end
def foo descriptive_var_name,
another_descriptive_var_name,
last_descriptive_var_name
do_something
end
# good
def bar(num1, num2)
num1 + num2
end
def foo(descriptive_var_name,
another_descriptive_var_name,
last_descriptive_var_name)
do_something
end
Example: EnforcedStyle: requirenoparentheses
# The `require_no_parentheses` style requires method definitions
# to never use parentheses
# bad
def bar(num1, num2)
num1 + num2
end
def foo(descriptive_var_name,
another_descriptive_var_name,
last_descriptive_var_name)
do_something
end
# good
def bar num1, num2
num1 + num2
end
def foo descriptive_var_name,
another_descriptive_var_name,
last_descriptive_var_name
do_something
end
Example: EnforcedStyle: requirenoparenthesesexceptmultiline
# The `require_no_parentheses_except_multiline` style prefers no
# parantheses when method definition arguments fit on single line,
# but prefers parantheses when arguments span multiple lines.
# bad
def bar(num1, num2)
num1 + num2
end
def foo descriptive_var_name,
another_descriptive_var_name,
last_descriptive_var_name
do_something
end
# good
def bar num1, num2
num1 + num2
end
def foo(descriptive_var_name,
another_descriptive_var_name,
last_descriptive_var_name)
do_something
end
Dependencies should be sorted in an alphabetical order within their section of the gemspec. Dependency appraisal
should appear before rspec
. Open
s.add_development_dependency('appraisal')
- Read upRead up
- Exclude checks
Dependencies in the gemspec should be alphabetically sorted.
Example:
# bad
spec.add_dependency 'rubocop'
spec.add_dependency 'rspec'
# good
spec.add_dependency 'rspec'
spec.add_dependency 'rubocop'
# good
spec.add_dependency 'rubocop'
spec.add_dependency 'rspec'
# bad
spec.add_development_dependency 'rubocop'
spec.add_development_dependency 'rspec'
# good
spec.add_development_dependency 'rspec'
spec.add_development_dependency 'rubocop'
# good
spec.add_development_dependency 'rubocop'
spec.add_development_dependency 'rspec'
# bad
spec.add_runtime_dependency 'rubocop'
spec.add_runtime_dependency 'rspec'
# good
spec.add_runtime_dependency 'rspec'
spec.add_runtime_dependency 'rubocop'
# good
spec.add_runtime_dependency 'rubocop'
spec.add_runtime_dependency 'rspec'
# good only if TreatCommentsAsGroupSeparators is true
# For code quality
spec.add_dependency 'rubocop'
# For tests
spec.add_dependency 'rspec'
Prefer double-quoted strings unless you need single quotes to avoid extra backslashes for escaping. Open
s.add_dependency('terrapin', '~> 0.6.0')
- Read upRead up
- Exclude checks
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('aruba', '~> 0.9.0')
- Read upRead up
- Exclude checks
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"