Sharing iP code quality feedback [for @chengseong] - Round 2 #4
Description
We did an automated analysis of your code to detect potential areas to improve the code quality. We are sharing the results below, so that you can avoid similar problems in your tP code (which will be graded more strictly for code quality).
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
No easy-to-detect issues 👍
Aspect: Recent Git Commit Message (Subject Only)
possible problems in commit e7c6ad5:
Added User Guide and User Interface Picture
- Not in imperative mood (?)
possible problems in commit bb87a6d:
Improved GUI
- Not in imperative mood (?)
possible problems in commit 2b64966:
Added new Exceptions
- Not in imperative mood (?)
Suggestion: Follow the given conventions for Git commit messages for future commits (no need to modify past commit messages).
Aspect: Binary files in repo
Suggestion: Avoid committing binary files (e.g., *.class, *.jar, *.exe) or third-party library files in to the repo.
❗ You are not required to (but you are welcome to) fix the above problems in your iP, unless you have been separately asked to resubmit the iP due to code quality issues.
ℹ️ The bot account @nus-se-bot 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.