Sharing iP code quality feedback [for @wrjgold] #4
Description
@wrjgold We did an automated analysis of your code to detect potential areas to improve the code quality. We are sharing the results below, to help you improve the iP code further.
IMPORTANT: Note that the script looked for just a few easy-to-detect problems only, and at-most three example are given i.e., there can be other areas/places to improve.
Aspect: Tab Usage
No easy-to-detect issues 👍
Aspect: Naming boolean variables/methods
No easy-to-detect issues 👍
Aspect: Brace Style
No easy-to-detect issues 👍
Aspect: Package Name Style
No easy-to-detect issues 👍
Aspect: Class Name Style
No easy-to-detect issues 👍
Aspect: Dead Code
No easy-to-detect issues 👍
Aspect: Method Length
No easy-to-detect issues 👍
Aspect: Class size
No easy-to-detect issues 👍
Aspect: Header Comments
Example from src/main/java/tick/commands/UnmarkCommand.java lines 15-19:
/**
* Construct a UnmarkCommand with index of task to unmark.
*
* @param taskNumber The task number to unmark.
*/Suggestion: Ensure method/class header comments follow the format specified in the coding standard, in particular, the phrasing of the overview statement.
Aspect: Recent Git Commit Message
No easy-to-detect issues 👍
Aspect: Binary files in repo
No easy-to-detect issues 👍
ℹ️ The bot account used to post this issue is un-manned. Do not reply to this post (as those replies will not be read). Instead, contact cs2103@comp.nus.edu.sg if you want to follow up on this post.