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

Sharing iP code quality feedback [for @howardwhw2] - Round 2 #4

Open
nus-se-bot opened this issue Mar 15, 2022 · 0 comments
Open

Sharing iP code quality feedback [for @howardwhw2] - Round 2 #4

nus-se-bot opened this issue Mar 15, 2022 · 0 comments

Comments

@nus-se-bot
Copy link

@howardwhw2 We did an automated analysis of your code to detect potential areas to improve the code quality. The script did not detect any issues in your code (nice!).

IMPORTANT: Note that the script looked for just a few easy-to-detect problems only 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)

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 [email protected] if you want to follow up on this post.

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

No branches or pull requests

1 participant