Sonarqube interpretation of code metrrics

[mishr...@gmail.com]

I would like to know more details on the SonarQube Interpretation of 

1. Cyclomatic complexity details ,How these results are arrived? and relation with issues mentioned in the pane? The count of issues does not match with the cyclomatic complexity number. How do we infer this?

2. Maintainability details, How these results are arrived? and relation with issues mentioned in the pane? 

3. More details on SQALE rating.

Please help.

[Scott B.]

Hi.

It's all documented.

1. https://docs.sonarqube.org/display/SONAR/Metrics+-+Complexity and https://www.sonarsource.com/docs/CognitiveComplexity.pdf
2. https://docs.sonarqube.org/display/SONAR/Metric+Definitions#MetricDefinitions-Maintainability
3. SQALE rating (as defined in http://www.sqale.org/) was replaced by the "SonarQube Quality Model" back in SonarQube 5.5 IIRC. https://blog.sonarsource.com/bugs-and-vulnerabilities-are-1st-class-citizens-in-sonarqube-quality-model-along-with-code-smells

[mishr...@gmail.com]

Thanks for your response scott. Is there a way to drill down to cyclomatic complexity in sonar? I would like to see how sonar points to the complexity (+1 counter for exact code splits). This would help to check the complexity in large files.

Can i also calculate back the whole SQALE ratings in reverse by checking each file details. Is there an option to export the details so that  we can check the SQALE ratings?

Please let me know.

Thanks,
Deepak

[G. Ann Campbell]

Hi Deepak,

Metrics are reported at file level and above. You're not going to find anything below file level unless an issue is raised. For Cyclomatic Complexity, the default rule threshold is 15, so you'd only get method-level counts for methods with Cyclomatic Complexity >15 (assuming the relevant rule is activated in your profiles). If you wanted to see the complexity of each method then you could set the rule threshold to 0, but that would come at the expense of having an issue raised on each and every method.

Regarding SQALE, we evolved from that model a couple years ago.

Ann