Include erb files for analysis, following Flay

[ABaldwinHunter]

This erb-processing code is lifted directly from flay:
https://github.com/seattlerb/flay/blob/master/lib/flay_erb.rb#L13

@codeclimate/review @noahd1

[wfleming]

💄 The nodoc comment is extraneous since don't use rdoc.

[ABaldwinHunter]

👍 thanks

[wfleming]

WDYT think about extracting all of this into a Parser class like the other languages have? Keeping that logic here made sense when it was one-liner, but I think this is complex enough that extracting makes sense.

[ABaldwinHunter]

I actually prefer the single file because I think the main class is fairly small (< 5 methods), and adding encapsulating parser files might be adding needless encapsulation.

Let me know if you feel strongly though - and I can make a change.

[ABaldwinHunter]

For the CC duplication issue, I considered extracting part of the method, but I think it adds more lines and complexity in this case. More readable as is.

[ABaldwinHunter]

ping @wfleming @codeclimate/review Ready for re-review!

[wfleming]

💄 extra line

[ABaldwinHunter]

👍

[wfleming]

Noticed 2 more small things. If we're going to exclude the duplication issue, maybe we should add it to the ignored fingerprints in config?

Otherwise, LGTM.

[ABaldwinHunter]

@codeclimate/review

Ready for re-review!

@wfleming I

• removed the begin/rescue clause and output to stderr here, as suggested
• added codeclimate issue to finger_print excludes

[wfleming]

This is a minor pondering that just occurred to me: we use binread above but just use read here. I suspect this is down to file encodings. You comfortable having these be different?

[ABaldwinHunter]

Thanks for the catch, binread sounds good to me.

I pulled the code from flay and tested it out locally without an issue, and didn't realize the intention behind using File.binread. Making switch

[wfleming]

One small question, but LGTM.