← Overview | Software Smells →

groovy/jsHelper.groovy - SRP Violation Analysis

JS Pipeline Dedicated File - CI/CD dedicated functions mixed (50% cohesion) (356 lines)

1. SRP Violation Analysis Criteria

1.1. Why This Criteria?

SRP asks "who requests changes to this code?" For a JS-dedicated helper file, the answer should be "both JS CI and JS CD equally." If only one pipeline uses a function, it should be in that pipeline's code or a CI/CD-specific helper.

1.2. SOLID Principles References

Sources

  1. 97 Things Every Programmer Should Know (O'Reilly, 2010)

  2. Chapter 76: "The Single Responsibility Principle" by Uncle Bob

  3. Agile Principles, Patterns, and Practices in C# by Robert C. Martin (2006)

  4. Chapter 8: "The Single-Responsibility Principle (SRP)"

2. Cohesion and Change Reasons per Function

# Function Name JS CI JS CD Internal Change Reason
1 logMessage 9 When logging output format/style changes
2 findTestingDirs 1 1 When directory scanning logic changes
3 getPackageJsonVersion 2 When package.json version extraction changes
4 installNpmInTestingDirs 1 1 3 reasons:
When npm audit policy changes
When Python script interface changes
When npm install policy changes
5 runUnitTestsInTestingDirs 1 1 When test execution process changes
6 checkNodeVersion 1 When Node.js version check logic changes
7 runCommandReturnStatus 4 When OS-specific command execution changes
8 executeLintingInTestingDirs 1 1 When linting process changes
9 versionCompare 2 1 When version comparison logic changes
10 retrieveReportSummaryDirs 2 When report file search logic changes

Note on Call Counts: Unlike generalHelper where we count cross-pipeline usage, jsHelper serves only 2 pipelines. The key metric is whether a function is used in both CI and CD.

3. Module Level SRP Violation Analysis - Cohesion Analysis Results

SRP Violation: Meets design intent of JS-dedicated file, but 50% of external functions are CI-only or CD-only (4 out of 8 external functions).

4. Function Level SRP Violation Analysis - Functions with Multiple Change Reasons

Multi-responsibility Function: installNpmInTestingDirs() (3 change reasons) 
void installNpmInTestingDirs(String testingDirs) {
    if (testingDirs == null || testingDirs.isEmpty()) {
        echo "Testing directories don't exist."
        return
    }
    List<String> testDirs = testingDirs.split(',') as List<String>
    for (String dirPath : testDirs) {
        File dir = new File(dirPath)
        if (!dir.exists() || !dir.isDirectory()) {
            echo "Directory does not exist: ${dirPath}. Skipping..."
            continue
        }

        // Change reason 1: npm audit policy
        String npmAuditCommand = "cd '${dirPath}' && npm audit --json > audit-report.json"
        echo "Running command: ${npmAuditCommand}"
        int exitCode = runCommandReturnStatus(npmAuditCommand)
        if (exitCode != 0) {
            echo "npm audit failed in directory: ${dirPath} with exit code: ${exitCode}. Proceeding with caution."
        }

        // Change reason 2: Python script interface
        File reportFile = new File("${dirPath}/audit-report.json")
        if (reportFile.exists()) {
            String pythonCommand = """python '${WORKSPACE}/python/npm_audit.py'
            '${COMMIT_HASH}' '${dirPath}/audit-report.json'
            """
            exitCode = sh(script: pythonCommand, returnStatus: true)
            // ...
        }

        // Change reason 3: npm install command
        String npmCommand = "cd '${dirPath}' && npm install"
        exitCode = runCommandReturnStatus(npmCommand)
        // ...
    }
}

Change Reason Analysis: 1. When npm audit policy changes: audit command, options, report format 2. When Python script interface changes: npm_audit.py argument format 3. When npm install command changes: install options, error handling

Conclusion

SRP Violation: - Module Level: JS-dedicated but CI/CD-specific functions mixed (50% cohesion for external functions) - Function Level: 1 function has multiple change reasons (installNpmInTestingDirs(3)) - logMessage() is an exact copy of generalHelper (DRY violation)

Next: Why Software Smells Analysis?

SRP analysis identified what violates design intent. The next document classifies these violations using industry-standard taxonomy (Fowler, Suryanarayana) to provide shared vocabulary for discussing the problems.

← Overview | Software Smells →