Sharing iP code quality feedback [for @benedict733]

[nus-se-script]

@benedict733 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

Example from src/main/java/Duke.java lines 18-18:

//            echo(sc.nextLine());

Suggestion: Remove dead code from the codebase.

Aspect: Method Length

No easy-to-detect issues 👍

Aspect: Class size

No easy-to-detect issues 👍

Aspect: Header Comments

Example from src/main/java/Duke.java lines 99-101:

    /**
     * Used to print out any reply with the correct formatting
     */

Example from src/main/java/Duke.java lines 107-109:

    /**
     * Used in Level-1 to echo
     */

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 (Subject Only)

possible problems in commit 6fe77ee:

Included EXPECTED output with input.txt, updated Duke and Events

• Not in imperative mood (?)

possible problems in commit 60f64cb:

updating Duke for level 1

• 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

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.