Negative distance (Sourcery refactored)

[sourcery-ai]

Pull Request #413 refactored by Sourcery.

If you're happy with these changes, merge this Pull Request using the Squash and merge strategy.

NOTE: As code is pushed to the original Pull Request, Sourcery will
re-run and update (force-push) this Pull Request with new refactorings as
necessary. If Sourcery finds no refactorings at any point, this Pull Request
will be closed automatically.

See our documentation here.

Run Sourcery locally

Reduce the feedback loop during development by using the Sourcery editor plugin:

• VS Code
• PyCharm

Review changes via command line

To manually merge these changes, make sure you're on the negative-distance branch, then run:

git fetch origin sourcery/negative-distance
git merge --ff-only FETCH_HEAD
git reset HEAD^

Help us improve this pull request!

[sourcery-ai]

Function distance_rectangle_point refactored with the following changes:

• Replace comparison with min/max call (min-max-identity)

[sourcery-ai]

Function ItemHandleMove.start_move refactored with the following changes:

• Use named expression to simplify assignment and conditional (use-named-expression)

[sourcery-ai]

Function ItemHandleMove.connect refactored with the following changes:

• Use named expression to simplify assignment and conditional (use-named-expression)

This removes the following comments ( why? ):

# find connectable item and its port
# no new connectable item, then diconnect and exit

[sourcery-ai]

Function Line._update_ports refactored with the following changes:

• Move assignment closer to its usage within a block (move-assign-in-block)
• Convert for loop into list comprehension (list-comprehension)

[sourcery-ai]

Sourcery Code Quality Report

❌  Merging this PR will decrease code quality in the affected files by 0.18%.

Quality metrics	Before	After	Change
Complexity	2.65 ⭐	2.64 ⭐	-0.01 👍
Method Length	36.73 ⭐	36.63 ⭐	-0.10 👍
Working memory	7.72 🙂	7.80 🙂	0.08 👎
Quality	76.36% ⭐	76.18% ⭐	-0.18% 👎

Other metrics	Before	After	Change
Lines	1057	1052	-5

Changed files	Quality Before	Quality After	Quality Change
gaphas/geometry.py	68.06% 🙂	68.08% 🙂	0.02% 👍
gaphas/handlemove.py	78.85% ⭐	78.39% ⭐	-0.46% 👎
gaphas/item.py	83.27% ⭐	83.15% ⭐	-0.12% 👎

Here are some functions in these files that still need a tune-up:

File	Function	Complexity	Length	Working Memory	Quality	Recommendation
gaphas/geometry.py	intersect_line_line	7 ⭐	203 😞	15 😞	43.41% 😞	Try splitting into smaller methods. Extract out complex expressions
gaphas/geometry.py	point_on_rectangle	17 🙂	136 😞	10 😞	48.80% 😞	Try splitting into smaller methods. Extract out complex expressions
gaphas/item.py	Element.__init__	0 ⭐	200 😞	13 😞	53.21% 🙂	Try splitting into smaller methods. Extract out complex expressions
gaphas/geometry.py	distance_line_point	4 ⭐	176 😞	8 🙂	60.67% 🙂	Try splitting into smaller methods
gaphas/geometry.py	Rectangle.__iadd__	3 ⭐	101 🙂	13 😞	60.67% 🙂	Extract out complex expressions

Legend and Explanation

The emojis denote the absolute quality of the code:

• ⭐ excellent
• 🙂 good
• 😞 poor
• ⛔ very poor

The 👍 and 👎 indicate whether the quality has improved or gotten worse with this pull request.

---

Please see our documentation here for details on how these metrics are calculated.

We are actively working on this report - lots more documentation and extra metrics to come!

Help us improve this quality report!