82 lines
3.6 KiB
Plaintext
82 lines
3.6 KiB
Plaintext
DeepSeek Antwort
|
|
##################################################################################################################
|
|
|
|
**Code Quality Evaluation Report**
|
|
|
|
The provided code implements a Red-Black Tree (RBT) with visualization. Below is an assessment of code quality, potential bugs, and areas for improvement.
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
### **1. Code Metrics & Quality Indicators**
|
|
- **Cognitive Complexity**:
|
|
- The `fix_insert` method is highly complex (nested loops/conditionals), making it error-prone and hard to maintain. This is a critical issue per SonarQube standards.
|
|
- **Recommendation**: Refactor into helper methods (e.g., `_handle_uncle_red`, `_handle_left_case`).
|
|
|
|
- **Code Smells**:
|
|
- **Magic Strings**: Use of `'red'`/`'black'` increases typo risk.
|
|
- **Recommendation**: Replace with `Enum` or class-level constants.
|
|
- **Side Effects**: `_assign_positions` mutates an external `pos_map` instead of returning a value.
|
|
- **Inadequate Encapsulation**: `Node` fields (e.g., `color`) are public and modifiable outside the RBT class, risking invalid states.
|
|
|
|
- **Potential Bugs**:
|
|
- **Duplicates Allowed**: The tree permits duplicate values, which may violate RBT assumptions if uniqueness is required.
|
|
- **Visualization Overlap**: `_assign_positions` uses in-order traversal for horizontal placement, which may misrepresent parent-child relationships (e.g., parent not centered over children).
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
### **2. Alternative Evaluation Methodologies**
|
|
- **Static Analysis**: Tools like Pylint/Flake8 can enforce PEP8 compliance (current code is mostly compliant).
|
|
- **Mutation Testing**: Would help validate test robustness (but no tests are included here).
|
|
- **Property-Based Testing**: Verify RBT invariants (root is black, no double reds, equal black heights).
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
### **3. Critical Issues**
|
|
#### **a. Red-Black Tree Implementation**
|
|
- **Rotation Edge Cases**:
|
|
- Rotations correctly update parent/child pointers, but lack tests for edge cases (e.g., root rotation).
|
|
- **Color Enforcement**:
|
|
- The `fix_insert` logic generally maintains RBT properties, but untested scenarios (e.g., uncle is black with a red child) could hide bugs.
|
|
|
|
#### **b. Visualization**
|
|
- **Positioning Flaw**: Using in-order traversal for `x` coordinates may misalign nodes (e.g., parent not centered between children).
|
|
- **Recommendation**: Use hierarchical coordinates (e.g., root at center, children spaced proportionally).
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
### **4. Recommendations**
|
|
1. **Refactor `fix_insert`**:
|
|
- Split into helper methods to reduce cognitive complexity.
|
|
- Example:
|
|
```python
|
|
def fix_insert(self, node):
|
|
while node.parent.color == 'red':
|
|
if self._is_parent_left_child(node):
|
|
self._fix_left_case(node)
|
|
else:
|
|
self._fix_right_case(node)
|
|
self.root.color = 'black'
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
2. **Replace Magic Strings**:
|
|
```python
|
|
class Color(Enum):
|
|
RED = 'red'
|
|
BLACK = 'black'
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
3. **Improve Visualization**:
|
|
- Calculate `x` positions based on subtree width to center parents over children.
|
|
|
|
4. **Add Validation**:
|
|
- Ensure inserted values are comparable (e.g., raise `TypeError` for invalid types).
|
|
- Optionally enforce uniqueness.
|
|
|
|
5. **Testing**:
|
|
- Write unit tests for RBT invariants and edge cases (e.g., insertion, rotation, color changes).
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
### **5. Conclusion**
|
|
The code correctly implements core RBT operations but has significant maintainability and robustness concerns. Prioritize refactoring `fix_insert`, replacing magic strings, and adding tests. The visualization works for small trees but may misrepresent structure for larger/complex cases.
|