Refactor method complexity reduce

Refactor Method to Reduce Cognitive Complexity

Objective

Refactor the method ${input:methodName}, to reduce its cognitive complexity to ${input:complexityThreshold} or below, by extracting logic into focused helper methods.

Instructions

1. Analyze the current method to identify sources of cognitive complexity:

   • Nested conditional statements
   • Multiple if-else or switch chains
   • Repeated code blocks
   • Multiple loops with conditions
   • Complex boolean expressions

2. Identify extraction opportunities:

   • Validation logic that can be extracted into a separate method
   • Type-specific or case-specific processing that repeats
   • Complex transformations or calculations
   • Common patterns that appear multiple times

3. Extract focused helper methods:

   • Each helper should have a single, clear responsibility
   • Extract validation into separate Validate* methods
   • Extract type-specific logic into handler methods
   • Create utility methods for common operations
   • Use appropriate access levels (static, private, async)

4. Simplify the main method:

   • Reduce nesting depth
   • Replace massive if-else chains with smaller orchestrated calls
   • Use switch statements where appropriate for cleaner dispatch
   • Ensure the main method reads as a high-level flow

5. Preserve functionality:

   • Maintain the same input/output behavior
   • Keep all validation and error handling
   • Preserve exception types and error messages
   • Ensure all parameters are properly passed to helpers

6. Best practices:

   • Make helper methods static when they don't need instance state
   • Use null checks and guard clauses early
   • Avoid creating unnecessary local variables
   • Consider using tuples for multiple return values
   • Group related helper methods together

Implementation Approach

• Extract helper methods before refactoring the main flow
• Test incrementally to ensure no regressions
• Use meaningful names that describe the extracted responsibility
• Keep extracted methods close to where they're used
• Consider making repeated code patterns into generic methods

Result

The refactored method should:

• Have cognitive complexity reduced to the target threshold of ${input:complexityThreshold} or below
• Be more readable and maintainable
• Have clear separation of concerns
• Be easier to test and debug
• Retain all original functionality

Testing and Validation

CRITICAL: After completing the refactoring, you MUST:

1. Run all existing tests related to the refactored method and its surrounding functionality
2. MANDATORY: Explicitly verify test results show "failed=0"
   • NEVER assume tests passed - always examine the actual test output
   • Search for the summary line containing pass/fail counts (e.g., "passed=X failed=Y")
   • If the summary shows any number other than "failed=0", tests have FAILED
   • If test output is in a file, read the entire file to locate and verify the failure count
   • Running tests is NOT the same as verifying tests passed
   • Do not proceed until you have explicitly confirmed zero failures
3. If any tests fail (failed > 0):
   • State clearly how many tests failed
   • Analyze each failure to understand what functionality was broken
   • Common causes: null handling, empty collection checks, condition logic errors
   • Identify the root cause in the refactored code
   • Correct the refactored code to restore the original behavior
   • Re-run tests and verify "failed=0" in the output
   • Repeat until all tests pass (failed=0)
4. Verify compilation - Ensure there are no compilation errors
5. Check cognitive complexity - Confirm the metric is at or below the target threshold of ${input:complexityThreshold}

Confirmation Checklist

• Code compiles without errors
• Test results explicitly state "failed=0" (verified by reading the output)
• All test failures analyzed and corrected (if any occurred)
• Cognitive complexity is at or below the target threshold of ${input:complexityThreshold}
• All original functionality is preserved
• Code follows project conventions and standards

---

AdvPL/TLPP Complexity Reduction Patterns

When reducing complexity in AdvPL/TLPP functions, apply these ecosystem-specific extraction patterns.

Typical High-Complexity AdvPL Functions

Protheus legacy routines (e.g., MATA010, FINA010, COMA010) often contain monolithic User Function implementations exceeding 500 lines with deeply nested conditionals. Common complexity sources:

• Nested If/ElseIf/Else/EndIf chains for business rules
• Do Case / Case / EndCase with many branches
• While loops with multiple embedded conditions for workarea processing
• Mixed validation, processing, and UI logic in a single function

Extraction Strategy for AdvPL/TLPP

// BEFORE: Monolithic function with high complexity
- User Function FINA010()
-   If cAction == "INCLUDE"
-     If ValidateHeader()
-       // 50 lines of inclusion logic
-       For nI := 1 To Len(aItems)
-         If aItems[nI][1] > 0
-           // 30 lines of item processing
-           If lTaxRequired
-             // 20 lines of tax calculation
-           EndIf
-         EndIf
-       Next nI
-     EndIf
-   ElseIf cAction == "ALTER"
-     // 80 lines of update logic
-   ElseIf cAction == "DELETE"
-     // 40 lines of delete logic
-   EndIf
- Return

// AFTER: Orchestrator + focused helpers
+ User Function FINA010()
+   Do Case
+     Case cAction == "INCLUDE"
+       ProcessInclusion()
+     Case cAction == "ALTER"
+       ProcessUpdate()
+     Case cAction == "DELETE"
+       ProcessDeletion()
+   EndCase
+ Return
+
+ Static Function ProcessInclusion() as Logical
+   If !ValidateHeader()
+     Return .F.
+   EndIf
+   Return ProcessItems(aItems)
+
+ Static Function ProcessItems(aItems as Array) as Logical
+   Local nI as Numeric
+   For nI := 1 To Len(aItems)
+     If aItems[nI][1] > 0
+       ProcessSingleItem(aItems[nI])
+     EndIf
+   Next nI
+ Return .T.
+
+ Static Function ProcessSingleItem(aItem as Array) as Logical
+   // focused item logic
+   If IsTaxRequired(aItem)
+     CalculateItemTax(aItem)
+   EndIf
+ Return .T.

AdvPL/TLPP Helper Method Guidelines

Guideline	AdvPL/TLPP Application
Make helpers static	Use Static Function — invisible outside the source file
Use guard clauses	Early Return to reduce nesting depth
Meaningful names	TLPP allows long identifiers; use them (e.g., ValidateCustomerCredit)
Type annotations (TLPP)	Add as Type to all parameters and return values
Avoid Private vars	Extracted helpers should use Local variables only
Preserve PARAMIXB	If the original function reads PARAMIXB, pass values explicitly to helpers