Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Sourcery refactored main branch #3

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Mar 24, 2021
Merged

Sourcery refactored main branch #3

merged 1 commit into from
Mar 24, 2021

Conversation

sourcery-ai[bot]
Copy link

@sourcery-ai sourcery-ai bot commented Mar 24, 2021

Branch main refactored by Sourcery.

If you're happy with these changes, merge this Pull Request using the Squash and merge strategy.

See our documentation here.

Run Sourcery locally

Reduce the feedback loop during development by using the Sourcery editor plugin:

Review changes via command line

To manually merge these changes, make sure you're on the main branch, then run:

git fetch origin sourcery/main
git merge --ff-only FETCH_HEAD
git reset HEAD^

@sourcery-ai sourcery-ai bot requested a review from avendesora March 24, 2021 21:57
Comment on lines -53 to -56
verse_relations = []
verse_relations = [
VerseRelation(content_object=self, verse=verse_id)
for verse_id in verse_ids
]

for verse_id in verse_ids:
verse_relations.append(VerseRelation(content_object=self, verse=verse_id))
Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Function ScriptureIndexedModel.set_verses refactored with the following changes:

if len(references) == 0:
if not references:
Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Function validate_verse refactored with the following changes:

for i in range(0, 10):
for i in range(10):
Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Function test_objects refactored with the following changes:

for i in range(0, 10):
for i in range(10):
Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Function test_single_verse_objects refactored with the following changes:

@sourcery-ai
Copy link
Author

sourcery-ai bot commented Mar 24, 2021

Sourcery Code Quality Report

✅  Merging this PR will increase code quality in the affected files by 0.20%.

Quality metrics Before After Change
Complexity 0.97 ⭐ 0.92 ⭐ -0.05 👍
Method Length 21.63 ⭐ 21.19 ⭐ -0.44 👍
Working memory 6.34 🙂 6.37 🙂 0.03 👎
Quality 88.22% 88.42% 0.20% 👍
Other metrics Before After Change
Lines 218 219 1
Changed files Quality Before Quality After Quality Change
djangobible/models.py 89.58% ⭐ 89.95% ⭐ 0.37% 👍
djangobible/validators.py 81.43% ⭐ 82.37% ⭐ 0.94% 👍
test_django_app/tests/conftest.py 89.21% ⭐ 89.25% ⭐ 0.04% 👍

Here are some functions in these files that still need a tune-up:

File Function Complexity Length Working Memory Quality Recommendation
test_django_app/tests/conftest.py expected_verse_ids 0 ⭐ 51 ⭐ 43 ⛔ 60.04% 🙂 Extract out complex expressions
test_django_app/tests/conftest.py test_objects 1 ⭐ 59 ⭐ 13 😞 68.86% 🙂 Extract out complex expressions
test_django_app/tests/conftest.py test_single_verse_objects 1 ⭐ 56 ⭐ 13 😞 69.33% 🙂 Extract out complex expressions

Legend and Explanation

The emojis denote the absolute quality of the code:

  • ⭐ excellent
  • 🙂 good
  • 😞 poor
  • ⛔ very poor

The 👍 and 👎 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!

Let us know what you think of it by mentioning @sourcery-ai in a comment.

@avendesora avendesora merged commit e612624 into main Mar 24, 2021
@avendesora avendesora deleted the sourcery/main branch March 25, 2021 15:45
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

1 participant