CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2015/oss E1551 RGS: Difference between revisions
(→Tests) |
|||
(51 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
= E1551. Refactoring response_controller.rb = | = E1551. Refactoring response_controller.rb = | ||
== Expertiza == | == Expertiza == | ||
'''About Expertiza''' | |||
Expertiza is an open source project accomplished by NCState students. It was developed in Ruby on Rails. It has general features like forming teams, registering for topics in a project, uploading the final deliveries. After completing the project there is an option for submitting reviews as well and updating the reviews. There is an option for submitting new quizzes as well. | |||
== ResponseController == | == ResponseController == | ||
'''What it does''': response_controller.rb manages Responses. A Response is what is generated any time a user fills out a rubric--any rubric. This includes review rubrics, author-feedback rubrics, teammate-review rubrics, quizzes, and surveys. | |||
Responses come in versions. Any time an author revises work, and the reviewer comes back to review it, a new Response object is generated. This Response object points to a particular ReponseMap, which tells who the reviewer is, which team is the reviewee, and what the reviewed entity is. | |||
*To test the responsecontroller login as user:instructor6 with password:password | |||
*Go to assignments tab and choose any assignment from the assignments listed. | |||
*From there click on others work and choose any review among the reviews listed | |||
*Click on view or begin to start reviewing. | |||
*You can also test response controller in similar way by logging as student student2064 and password:password. | |||
== Changes == | == Changes == | ||
Line 8: | Line 19: | ||
;Problem definition | ;Problem definition | ||
:<code>latestResponseVersion</code> is misnamed. It returns all versions of a response, and anyway, the method name should use underscores, not camelcase. | :<code>latestResponseVersion</code> is misnamed. It returns all versions of a response, and anyway, the method name should use underscores, not camelcase. | ||
;Solution summary | |||
:Renamed <code>latestResponseVersion</code> to <code>set_all_responses</code>. | |||
==== Solution ==== | |||
Examining <code>latestResponseVersion</code> we were able to determine that it did the following two things: | |||
# Set the <code>@prev</code> variable to a relation of responses that correspond to the map id of the current response being created or edited. | |||
# Set the <code>@review_scores</code> variable to an Array version if the contents of <code>@prev</code>. | |||
Since the purpose of the code seemed to be to set variables, we renamed it to <code>set_all_responses</code>. | |||
We also simplified the method by using ActiveRecord::Relation's <code>to_a</code> to convert the relation to an array. | |||
There was some duplicate code in the <code>scores</code> function which we replaced with a call the <code>set_all_responses</code>. | |||
=== Rename get_scores === | === Rename get_scores === | ||
;Problem definition | ;Problem definition | ||
:<code>get_scores</code> has a Java-like name. It should just be <code>scores</code>. | :<code>get_scores</code> has a Java-like name. It should just be <code>scores</code>. | ||
'''Solution summary''' | |||
: The method <code>get_scores</code> was renamed to <code>scores</code>. | |||
=== Delete rereview method === | === Delete rereview method === | ||
The 100+-line method <code> | ;Problem definition | ||
:The 100+-line method <code>rereview</code> does not seem to be used anymore. The second-round review can be invoked in the same way as the first-round review. Remove it. | |||
;Solution summary | |||
: The method <code>rereview</code> was deleted. | |||
=== DRY create and update === | === DRY create and update === | ||
create and update use completely different code. Factor the common parts out into a partial, thereby simplifying the methods. | ;Problem definition | ||
:<code>create</code> and <code>update</code> use completely different code. Factor the common parts out into a partial, thereby simplifying the methods. | |||
;Solution summary | |||
:There was not much actual overlap in these two methods. Minimal changes. | |||
The ResponseController controller has an overall problem in that it knows too much about the subclasses of <code>ResponseMap</code>. There is some major refactoring that needs to occur to clean up this controller's coupling with <code>ResponseMap</code>'s subclasses. We made an attempt to do this, but it was just to large a change to accomplish in the time allotted. | |||
=== Consistent authorization === | === Consistent authorization === | ||
Authorization needs to be checked in the action_allowed method instead of in redirect_when_disallowed at the bottom of the file. | ;Problem definition | ||
:Authorization needs to be checked in the <code>action_allowed</code> method instead of in <code>redirect_when_disallowed</code> at the bottom of the file. | |||
;Solution summary | |||
:So the functionality is moved from <code>redirect_when_disallowed</code> to <code>action_allowed</code>. And also it is made sure that no one other than the author of a review (or another team member, in the case of author feedback) can edit it and then removed the <code>redirect_when_disallowed</code> method. | |||
:Code before changing | |||
<code> | |||
def action_allowed? | |||
current_user | |||
end | |||
def redirect_when_disallowed(response) | |||
# For author feedback, participants need to be able to read feedback submitted by other teammates. | |||
# If response is anything but author feedback, only the person who wrote feedback should be able to see it. | |||
if response.map.read_attribute(:type) == 'FeedbackResponseMap' && response.map.assignment.team_assignment? | |||
team = response.map.reviewer.team | |||
unless team.has_user session[:user] | |||
redirect_to '/denied?reason=You are not on the team that wrote this feedback' | |||
else | |||
return false | |||
end | |||
response.map.read_attribute(:type) | |||
end | |||
!current_user_id?(response.map.reviewer.user_id) | |||
end | |||
</code> | |||
: Code after changing | |||
<code> | |||
def action_allowed? | |||
case params[:action] | |||
when 'view','edit','delete','update' | |||
response = Response.find(params[:id]) | |||
if response.map.read_attribute(:type) == 'FeedbackResponseMap' && response.map.assignment.team_assignment? | |||
team = response.map.reviewer.team | |||
unless team.has_user session[:user] | |||
redirect_to '/denied?reason=You are not on the team that wrote this feedback' | |||
else | |||
return false | |||
end | |||
response.map.read_attribute(:type) | |||
end | |||
current_user_id?(response.map.reviewer.user_id) | |||
else | |||
current_user | |||
end | |||
end | |||
</code> | |||
=== Refactor get_content === | === Refactor get_content === | ||
get_content is a complex method. It should be renamed to content and simplified. Comments should be added explaining what it does. | ;Problem definition | ||
:<code>get_content</code> is a complex method. It should be renamed to <code>content</code> and simplified. Comments should be added explaining what it does. | |||
;Solution summary | |||
:The <code>get_content</code> method was renamed <code>set_content</code>, simplified, and documented with comments. | |||
A review of the <code>get_content</code> method showed that it's purpose was to '''set''' various variables for use by the response views. As such, we renamed this method <code>set_content</code> to help clarify it's intent. | |||
We also extracted methods for the more complicated variables into their own methods, making the <code>set_content</code> method easy to understand at a glance. | |||
=== Remove SQL queries === | === Remove SQL queries === | ||
This class contains SQL queries. Please change them to Active Record commands. | ;Problem definition | ||
:This class contains SQL queries. Please change them to Active Record commands. | |||
;Solution summary | |||
:No SQL queries were identified. No changes. | |||
==Comparison of Original and Refactored Code== | |||
Major refactoring revolved around changing method names according to rails convention, using helper methods for avoiding duplication of code in controller methods. | |||
:Duplications in Code | |||
::Original duplications : 172 | |||
::Post Refactoring : 21 | |||
Code Complexity (Compared on Code Climate) | |||
'''Original ResponseController'''<ref name="originalresponsecontroller>''Original responseController'' https://github.com/expertiza/expertiza</ref> | |||
<br/> | |||
[[File:Code_climate_response.png]] | |||
'''Refactored Responsecontroller''' <ref name="Refactoredresponsecontroller>''Refactored responseController'' https://github.com/viswaraavi/expertiza</ref> | |||
<br/> | |||
[[File:Code_climate_expertiza.png]] | |||
== Tests == | == Tests == | ||
Some functional tests are written for this class using Rspec. The test coverage has increased from 19% to 24.1% | |||
;To check these tests. | |||
*clone the github repository link provided above | |||
*run the command rspec spec/controllers/response_controller_spec.rb | |||
==References== | |||
<references> |
Latest revision as of 03:29, 7 November 2015
E1551. Refactoring response_controller.rb
Expertiza
About Expertiza Expertiza is an open source project accomplished by NCState students. It was developed in Ruby on Rails. It has general features like forming teams, registering for topics in a project, uploading the final deliveries. After completing the project there is an option for submitting reviews as well and updating the reviews. There is an option for submitting new quizzes as well.
ResponseController
What it does: response_controller.rb manages Responses. A Response is what is generated any time a user fills out a rubric--any rubric. This includes review rubrics, author-feedback rubrics, teammate-review rubrics, quizzes, and surveys. Responses come in versions. Any time an author revises work, and the reviewer comes back to review it, a new Response object is generated. This Response object points to a particular ReponseMap, which tells who the reviewer is, which team is the reviewee, and what the reviewed entity is.
- To test the responsecontroller login as user:instructor6 with password:password
- Go to assignments tab and choose any assignment from the assignments listed.
- From there click on others work and choose any review among the reviews listed
- Click on view or begin to start reviewing.
- You can also test response controller in similar way by logging as student student2064 and password:password.
Changes
Refactor latestResponseVersion method
- Problem definition
latestResponseVersion
is misnamed. It returns all versions of a response, and anyway, the method name should use underscores, not camelcase.- Solution summary
- Renamed
latestResponseVersion
toset_all_responses
.
Solution
Examining latestResponseVersion
we were able to determine that it did the following two things:
- Set the
@prev
variable to a relation of responses that correspond to the map id of the current response being created or edited. - Set the
@review_scores
variable to an Array version if the contents of@prev
.
Since the purpose of the code seemed to be to set variables, we renamed it to set_all_responses
.
We also simplified the method by using ActiveRecord::Relation's to_a
to convert the relation to an array.
There was some duplicate code in the scores
function which we replaced with a call the set_all_responses
.
Rename get_scores
- Problem definition
get_scores
has a Java-like name. It should just bescores
.
Solution summary
- The method
get_scores
was renamed toscores
.
Delete rereview method
- Problem definition
- The 100+-line method
rereview
does not seem to be used anymore. The second-round review can be invoked in the same way as the first-round review. Remove it. - Solution summary
- The method
rereview
was deleted.
DRY create and update
- Problem definition
create
andupdate
use completely different code. Factor the common parts out into a partial, thereby simplifying the methods.- Solution summary
- There was not much actual overlap in these two methods. Minimal changes.
The ResponseController controller has an overall problem in that it knows too much about the subclasses of ResponseMap
. There is some major refactoring that needs to occur to clean up this controller's coupling with ResponseMap
's subclasses. We made an attempt to do this, but it was just to large a change to accomplish in the time allotted.
Consistent authorization
- Problem definition
- Authorization needs to be checked in the
action_allowed
method instead of inredirect_when_disallowed
at the bottom of the file. - Solution summary
- So the functionality is moved from
redirect_when_disallowed
toaction_allowed
. And also it is made sure that no one other than the author of a review (or another team member, in the case of author feedback) can edit it and then removed theredirect_when_disallowed
method. - Code before changing
def action_allowed?
current_user
end
def redirect_when_disallowed(response)
# For author feedback, participants need to be able to read feedback submitted by other teammates.
# If response is anything but author feedback, only the person who wrote feedback should be able to see it.
if response.map.read_attribute(:type) == 'FeedbackResponseMap' && response.map.assignment.team_assignment?
team = response.map.reviewer.team
unless team.has_user session[:user]
redirect_to '/denied?reason=You are not on the team that wrote this feedback'
else
return false
end
response.map.read_attribute(:type)
end
!current_user_id?(response.map.reviewer.user_id)
end
- Code after changing
def action_allowed?
case params[:action]
when 'view','edit','delete','update'
response = Response.find(params[:id])
if response.map.read_attribute(:type) == 'FeedbackResponseMap' && response.map.assignment.team_assignment?
team = response.map.reviewer.team
unless team.has_user session[:user]
redirect_to '/denied?reason=You are not on the team that wrote this feedback'
else
return false
end
response.map.read_attribute(:type)
end
current_user_id?(response.map.reviewer.user_id)
else
current_user
end
end
Refactor get_content
- Problem definition
get_content
is a complex method. It should be renamed tocontent
and simplified. Comments should be added explaining what it does.- Solution summary
- The
get_content
method was renamedset_content
, simplified, and documented with comments.
A review of the get_content
method showed that it's purpose was to set various variables for use by the response views. As such, we renamed this method set_content
to help clarify it's intent.
We also extracted methods for the more complicated variables into their own methods, making the set_content
method easy to understand at a glance.
Remove SQL queries
- Problem definition
- This class contains SQL queries. Please change them to Active Record commands.
- Solution summary
- No SQL queries were identified. No changes.
Comparison of Original and Refactored Code
Major refactoring revolved around changing method names according to rails convention, using helper methods for avoiding duplication of code in controller methods.
- Duplications in Code
- Original duplications : 172
- Post Refactoring : 21
Code Complexity (Compared on Code Climate)
Original ResponseController<ref name="originalresponsecontroller>Original responseController https://github.com/expertiza/expertiza</ref>
Refactored Responsecontroller <ref name="Refactoredresponsecontroller>Refactored responseController https://github.com/viswaraavi/expertiza</ref>
Tests
Some functional tests are written for this class using Rspec. The test coverage has increased from 19% to 24.1%
- To check these tests.
- clone the github repository link provided above
- run the command rspec spec/controllers/response_controller_spec.rb
References
<references>