Showing 2,171 of 2,171 total issues
Function matchCodes
has 60 lines of code (exceeds 25 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
export function matchCodes(eIn, context) {
let e = eIn || {}
const language_tree = {
ру: ['РУ', 'РО'],
Cyclomatic complexity for validate_each is too high. [12/6] Open
def validate_each(record, attribute, value)
o = plain_options
code = record.alphabeth_code.to_s.to_sym
res = Languageble::MATCH_TABLE[ code ]
if res
- Read upRead up
- Exclude checks
This cop checks that the cyclomatic complexity of methods is not higher than the configured maximum. The cyclomatic complexity is the number of linearly independent paths through a method. The algorithm counts decision points and adds one.
An if statement (or unless or ?:) increases the complexity by one. An else branch does not, since it doesn't add a decision point. The && operator (or keyword and) can be converted to a nested if statement, and ||/or is shorthand for a sequence of ifs, so they also add one. Loops can be said to have an exit condition, so they add one.
Function render
has 59 lines of code (exceeds 25 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
render() {
console.log("[render] *", { 'this.props': this.props, 'this.state': this.state })
return (
<div className='row'>
Function render
has 59 lines of code (exceeds 25 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
render() {
console.log("[render] *", { 'this.props': this.props, 'this.state': this.state })
return (
<div className='row'>
Consider simplifying this complex logical expression. Open
} else if (m[3]) {
year = this.fixedYearForYearDate(m[3], yearIn),
datePre = new Date(Date.parse((m[3].concat("." + year)).split('.').reverse().join('-'))),
gapIn = parseInt(m[5]) - datePre.getDay()
PickMeUpCalendar
has 22 functions (exceeds 20 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
export default class PickMeUpCalendar extends Component {
static defaultProps = {
withDate: null,
calendarStyle: 'neojulian',
calendary: {},
Block has too many lines. [49/25] Open
scope :with_titles, -> context do
as = table.table_alias || table.name
language_codes = [ context[:locales] ].flatten
alphabeth_codes = Languageble.alphabeth_list_for( language_codes ).flatten
selector = self.select_values.dup
- Read upRead up
- Exclude checks
This cop checks if the length of a block exceeds some maximum value. Comment lines can optionally be ignored. The maximum allowed length is configurable. The cop can be configured to ignore blocks passed to certain methods.
Method validate_each
has a Cognitive Complexity of 17 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def validate_each(record, attribute, value)
# if a local link just return true
return true if value =~ %r{^/}
response = Net::HTTP.get_response(URI(value && Addressable::URI.encode(value)))
- 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
Block has too many lines. [48/25] Open
base.class_eval do
has_many :links, as: :info, dependent: :destroy
scope :with_links, -> context do
join_name = table.table_alias || table.name
- Read upRead up
- Exclude checks
This cop checks if the length of a block exceeds some maximum value. Comment lines can optionally be ignored. The maximum allowed length is configurable. The cop can be configured to ignore blocks passed to certain methods.
Assignment Branch Condition size for included is too high. [35.64/30] Open
def self.included base
base.class_eval do
has_many :links, as: :info, dependent: :destroy
scope :with_links, -> context do
- Read upRead up
- Exclude checks
This cop checks that the ABC size of methods is not higher than the configured maximum. The ABC size is based on assignments, branches (method calls), and conditions. See http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?AbcMetric
Method has too many lines. [20/15] Open
def base= value
digits = value.mb_chars.downcase.to_s.gsub(/[^0-9]+/, '')
words = value.gsub(/[0-9]+/, '').split(/\s+/).select do |x|
x.mb_chars.downcase.to_s != x ;end
.map do |x|
- Read upRead up
- Exclude checks
This cop checks if the length of a method exceeds some maximum value. Comment lines can optionally be ignored. The maximum allowed length is configurable.
Perceived complexity for validate_each is too high. [12/7] Open
def validate_each(record, attribute, value)
o = plain_options
code = record.alphabeth_code.to_s.to_sym
res = Languageble::MATCH_TABLE[ code ]
if res
- Read upRead up
- Exclude checks
This cop tries to produce a complexity score that's a measure of the
complexity the reader experiences when looking at a method. For that
reason it considers when
nodes as something that doesn't add as much
complexity as an if
or a &&
. Except if it's one of those special
case
/when
constructs where there's no expression after case
. Then
the cop treats it as an if
/elsif
/elsif
... and lets all the when
nodes count. In contrast to the CyclomaticComplexity cop, this cop
considers else
nodes as adding complexity.
Example:
def my_method # 1
if cond # 1
case var # 2 (0.8 + 4 * 0.2, rounded)
when 1 then func_one
when 2 then func_two
when 3 then func_three
when 4..10 then func_other
end
else # 1
do_something until a && b # 2
end # ===
end # 7 complexity points
Method fix_year_date
has 54 lines of code (exceeds 25 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def fix_year_date
self.year_date =
case self.year_date
when /пасха/
"+0"
Identical blocks of code found in 2 locations. Consider refactoring. Open
static getOrder(props) {
return props.memoes.reduce((order, m) => {
return order || this.isInCalendaries(props, m) && Object.values(m.orders)[0]
}, null) || props.order
}
- 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 78.
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
static getOrder(props) {
return props.memoes.reduce((order, m) => {
return order || this.isInCalendaries(props, m) && Object.values(m.orders)[0]
}, null) || props.order
}
- 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 78.
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
Perceived complexity for find is too high. [11/7] Open
def find *args
if self.respond_to?( :default_key )
new_args = args.flatten.reject { |a| a.blank? }
rel = self.where(self.default_key => new_args)
if rel.size < new_args.size
- Read upRead up
- Exclude checks
This cop tries to produce a complexity score that's a measure of the
complexity the reader experiences when looking at a method. For that
reason it considers when
nodes as something that doesn't add as much
complexity as an if
or a &&
. Except if it's one of those special
case
/when
constructs where there's no expression after case
. Then
the cop treats it as an if
/elsif
/elsif
... and lets all the when
nodes count. In contrast to the CyclomaticComplexity cop, this cop
considers else
nodes as adding complexity.
Example:
def my_method # 1
if cond # 1
case var # 2 (0.8 + 4 * 0.2, rounded)
when 1 then func_one
when 2 then func_two
when 3 then func_three
when 4..10 then func_other
end
else # 1
do_something until a && b # 2
end # ===
end # 7 complexity points
Perceived complexity for year_date_for is too high. [11/7] Open
def self.year_date_for year_date, date_in, julian
return nil if date_in.blank?
date = [ Time, Date, DateTime ].any? {|c| date_in.is_a?(c) } && date_in || Time.parse(date_in)
if /(?<day>\d+)\.(?<month>\d+)%(?<weekday>\d+)$/ =~ year_date
- Read upRead up
- Exclude checks
This cop tries to produce a complexity score that's a measure of the
complexity the reader experiences when looking at a method. For that
reason it considers when
nodes as something that doesn't add as much
complexity as an if
or a &&
. Except if it's one of those special
case
/when
constructs where there's no expression after case
. Then
the cop treats it as an if
/elsif
/elsif
... and lets all the when
nodes count. In contrast to the CyclomaticComplexity cop, this cop
considers else
nodes as adding complexity.
Example:
def my_method # 1
if cond # 1
case var # 2 (0.8 + 4 * 0.2, rounded)
when 1 then func_one
when 2 then func_two
when 3 then func_three
when 4..10 then func_other
end
else # 1
do_something until a && b # 2
end # ===
end # 7 complexity points
Cyclomatic complexity for year_date_for is too high. [10/6] Open
def self.year_date_for year_date, date_in, julian
return nil if date_in.blank?
date = [ Time, Date, DateTime ].any? {|c| date_in.is_a?(c) } && date_in || Time.parse(date_in)
if /(?<day>\d+)\.(?<month>\d+)%(?<weekday>\d+)$/ =~ year_date
- Read upRead up
- Exclude checks
This cop checks that the cyclomatic complexity of methods is not higher than the configured maximum. The cyclomatic complexity is the number of linearly independent paths through a method. The algorithm counts decision points and adds one.
An if statement (or unless or ?:) increases the complexity by one. An else branch does not, since it doesn't add a decision point. The && operator (or keyword and) can be converted to a nested if statement, and ||/or is shorthand for a sequence of ifs, so they also add one. Loops can be said to have an exit condition, so they add one.
Cyclomatic complexity for set_base_year is too high. [10/6] Open
def set_base_year
types = %w(Resurrection Repose Writing Appearance Translation Sanctification)
event = self.events.to_a.sort_by { |x| (types.index(x.kind) || 100) }.first
- Read upRead up
- Exclude checks
This cop checks that the cyclomatic complexity of methods is not higher than the configured maximum. The cyclomatic complexity is the number of linearly independent paths through a method. The algorithm counts decision points and adds one.
An if statement (or unless or ?:) increases the complexity by one. An else branch does not, since it doesn't add a decision point. The && operator (or keyword and) can be converted to a nested if statement, and ||/or is shorthand for a sequence of ifs, so they also add one. Loops can be said to have an exit condition, so they add one.
File subjectMeta.jsx
has 255 lines of code (exceeds 250 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
import { matchLanguages, matchAlphabeths, matchLetters, matchEmptyObject,
matchCodes, matchEmptyCollection, matchValidJson } from 'matchers'
import { makeName, makeDescription } from 'makers'
import UrlRegexp from 'UrlRegexp'