Closed brentyi closed 1 year ago
Merging this PR leaves code quality unchanged.
Quality metrics | Before | After | Change |
---|---|---|---|
Complexity | 47.11 β | 47.11 β | 0.00 |
Method Length | 136.70 π | 136.70 π | 0.00 |
Working memory | 1.67 β | 1.67 β | 0.00 |
Quality | 25.93% π | 25.93% π | 0.00% |
Other metrics | Before | After | Change |
---|---|---|---|
Lines | 763 | 764 | 1 |
Changed files | Quality Before | Quality After | Quality Change |
---|---|---|---|
shtab/init.py | 25.93% π | 25.93% π | 0.00% |
Here are some functions in these files that still need a tune-up:
File | Function | Complexity | Length | Working Memory | Quality | Recommendation |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
shtab/init.py | get_bash_commands | 78 β | 589 β | 1.22% β | Refactor to reduce nesting. Try splitting into smaller methods | |
shtab/init.py | complete_zsh | 62 β | 909 β | 2.38% β | Refactor to reduce nesting. Try splitting into smaller methods | |
shtab/init.py | complete_tcsh | 53 β | 470 β | 4.99% β | Refactor to reduce nesting. Try splitting into smaller methods | |
shtab/init.py | complete_bash | 2 β | 106 π | 11 π | 64.30% π | Extract out complex expressions |
shtab/init.py | add_argument_to | 4 β | 89 π | 11 π | 64.67% π | Extract out complex expressions |
The emojis denote the absolute quality of the code:
The π and π indicate whether the quality has improved or gotten worse with this pull request.
Please see our documentation here for details on how these metrics are calculated.
We are actively working on this report - lots more documentation and extra metrics to come!
Help us improve this quality report!
Base: 74.46% // Head: 74.46% // No change to project coverage :thumbsup:
Coverage data is based on head (
9bfda44
) compared to base (13de419
). Patch has no changes to coverable lines.
:umbrella: View full report at Codecov.
:loudspeaker: Do you have feedback about the report comment? Let us know in this issue.
/tag v1.5.6 f8203d9
Thanks @casperdcl!!
Ah, unsetting IFS in between did the trick! Thanks for fixing this!
Yep was unreasonably hard to figure out. Can't tell what's worse about shells - the language itself, or the (lack of) good documentation. π€Ίπ
local IFS=$'\\n'
fixed some issues as well. Wasn't totally following why this was needed.