2. Code Quality & Architecture

Code Quality Metrics

Error Handling Consistency60 / 100
Code Reusability50 / 100
State Management Quality70 / 100

2.1 Code Structure & Organization

Status: ⚠️Warning

Findings:

  • Project uses GitFlow branching strategy which creates complexity
  • Multiple long-lived branches (develop, feature branches, release branches) make it difficult to track current state
  • Hard to identify pending changes and what's currently deployed
  • GitFlow model increases merge conflict risk and slows down development velocity
  • No clear single source of truth for current production code

Evidence:

  • GitFlow workflow in use (based on audit finding)
  • Multiple branches likely exist (develop, feature/, release/, hotfix/*)
  • Complex branching model makes code review and tracking difficult

Risk Level: Medium Risk

Recommendation:

  • Migrate to trunk-based development (main/master as primary branch)
  • Use short-lived feature branches that merge directly to main
  • Implement feature flags for incomplete features instead of long-lived branches
  • Finish and merge all hanging changes from existing feature branches
  • Simplify workflow: main → feature branch → PR → main → deploy
  • Use branch protection rules to enforce code review before merging to main

2.2 Error Handling

Status: ⚠️Warning

Findings:

  • Centralized error handling helper exists (handleDioError) but usage is inconsistent
  • Errors logged to Firebase Crashlytics for monitoring
  • Inconsistent error handling: Some routes use handleDioError helper, others implement inline error handling
  • Error messages hardcoded in Dutch, not internationalized
  • Some async operations lack proper error handling (e.g., .then() without .catchError())
  • Generic error messages don't provide specific feedback to users
  • Error handling in token refresh flow logs to Crashlytics but may not provide user feedback
  • Some error cases navigate to server issue route without user confirmation

Evidence:

  • lib/helpers/error_helpers.dart: Centralized handleDioError function exists
  • lib/routes/login_route.dart: Inline error handling duplicates helper logic (lines 393-444)
  • lib/routes/intro_route.dart: Uses handleDioError helper (line 48) - good example
  • lib/base_singleton.dart: Token refresh error handling (lines 146-151) only logs, doesn't notify user
  • lib/routes/register_route.dart: Uses .catchError() but may not handle all error types
  • Error messages hardcoded: "Er ging iets mis", "Controleer je internetverbinding"
  • lib/base_singleton.dart: Some errors only logged to Crashlytics without user notification (lines 202-216)

Risk Level: Medium Risk

Recommendation:

  • Immediate actions:
    • Standardize error handling across all routes to use handleDioError helper
    • Remove duplicate inline error handling code
    • Add error handling to all async operations (ensure all .then() have .catchError())
    • Internationalize error messages
  • Short-term:
    • Create error handling base class or mixin for routes
    • Add specific error types and user-friendly messages
    • Implement retry mechanisms for transient errors
    • Add error boundaries for widget tree errors

2.3 State Management

Status: ⚠️Warning

Findings:

  • Provider pattern with ChangeNotifier implemented for state management
  • Multiple state classes follow similar patterns: SessionState, ConnectivityState, SavingState, etc.
  • BaseSingleton pattern used for global state access
  • State synchronization issues: State stored in both memory and database, potential for inconsistency
  • Direct database access in some places bypasses state management layer
  • Async state initialization pattern (init() method) used across state classes
  • State persistence to database happens on every state change (potential performance issue)
  • No clear separation between UI state and business logic state
  • Global singleton access (base.sessionState, base.database) used throughout codebase

Evidence:

  • lib/state_models/session_state.dart: Uses ChangeNotifier, stores state in both memory and database
  • lib/state_models/connectivity_state.dart: Similar pattern with ChangeNotifier
  • lib/base_singleton.dart: Global singleton with state objects (lines 44-45)
  • lib/state_models/session_state.dart: Every setter saves to database immediately (lines 61-123)
  • lib/routes/register_route.dart: Direct state manipulation (lines 224-229)
  • lib/routes/account_route.dart: Direct database access and state manipulation
  • State initialization: sessionState.init() called separately (async pattern)
  • Multiple state classes: 6 state model files in lib/state_models/

Risk Level: Medium Risk

Recommendation:

  • Immediate actions:
    • Review state synchronization between memory and database
    • Add state validation to prevent inconsistencies
    • Consider using flutter_secure_storage for sensitive state instead of database
  • Short-term:
    • Implement state management best practices (single source of truth)
    • Add state change notifications and observers
    • Consider using Bloc for more robust state management
    • Separate UI state from business logic state

2.4 Code Duplication

Status: ⚠️Warning

Findings:

  • Route patterns duplicated: Multiple routes implement similar patterns for loading mobile content, FutureBuilder usage, and error handling
  • State management pattern repeated: Similar getter/setter patterns across all state classes
  • BaseSingleton access pattern: static var base = BaseSingleton() repeated in every route file
  • Firebase Performance tracing: Similar tracing code duplicated across routes
  • Error handling duplicated: Some routes have inline error handling that duplicates handleDioError logic
  • Dialog patterns repeated: Similar AlertDialog creation code in multiple places
  • Session state checks: base.sessionState.getLoggedIn() checks repeated throughout routes
  • API call patterns: Similar .then().catchError() patterns repeated across routes

Evidence:

  • Multiple routes with similar structure:
    • lib/routes/generic_route.dart: Mobile content loading pattern
    • lib/routes/intro_route.dart: Similar mobile content loading
    • lib/routes/webview_route.dart: Similar pattern
    • lib/routes/register_route.dart: Similar FutureBuilder and error handling
  • State classes: All follow same pattern (getter, setter, notifyListeners, database save)
  • lib/routes/login_route.dart: Inline error handling (lines 402-428) duplicates helper
  • lib/routes/generic_route.dart and lib/routes/intro_route.dart: Similar Firebase Performance tracing (lines 34-39, 26-31)
  • BaseSingleton access: static var base = BaseSingleton() in multiple route files
  • Session checks: base.sessionState.getLoggedIn() appears in multiple routes

Risk Level: Medium Risk

Recommendation:

  • Immediate actions:
    • Extract common route patterns into base classes or mixins
    • Create reusable widgets for common UI patterns (loading states, error states)
    • Consolidate Firebase Performance tracing into a helper or mixin
    • Create base route class with common functionality
  • Short-term:
    • Refactor state management classes to use inheritance or composition
    • Extract common API call patterns into service classes
    • Create reusable error handling widgets
    • Implement route factory pattern for common route structures

2.6 Dead Code & Unused Files

Status: ⚠️Warning

Findings:

  • Unused CI/CD pipeline configuration files present in repository
  • jenkins/pipeline.groovy contains placeholder Jenkins pipeline code but project uses Codemagic
  • No references to Jenkins in codebase, documentation, or active CI/CD setup
  • Repository contains dead code that should be removed to reduce confusion and bloat

Evidence:

  • jenkins/pipeline.groovy exists but is not referenced anywhere
  • Project uses Codemagic for CI/CD (evident from codemagic.yaml)
  • No Jenkins configuration or references found in codebase
  • Jenkins pipeline file contains only placeholder code

Risk Level: Low Risk

Recommendation:

  • Remove jenkins/ directory and all Jenkins-related files
  • Document current CI/CD setup (Codemagic) in README
  • Audit repository for other unused configuration files
  • Establish process for removing obsolete files during refactoring
  • Keep repository clean by removing dead code and unused configurations

2.5 Best Practices & Patterns

Status: ⚠️Warning

Findings:

  • No clear refactoring strategy defined
  • Refactoring efforts should be aligned with redesign initiatives to maximize value
  • Risk of refactoring without addressing underlying design issues
  • Need strategic approach to combine code improvements with UI/UX redesign

Evidence:

  • Multiple technical debt items identified (deprecated packages, missing tests, GitFlow complexity)
  • Refactoring will be necessary to address audit findings
  • Redesign opportunity should be leveraged during refactoring phase

Risk Level: Medium Risk

Recommendation:

  • Strategic Approach: Focus on redesign when starting code refactoring
  • Align refactoring efforts with UI/UX redesign to avoid duplicate work
  • Use redesign as opportunity to implement modern architecture patterns
  • Combine technical debt resolution with user experience improvements
  • Plan refactoring sprints to coincide with redesign milestones
  • Leverage redesign to introduce better state management, navigation, and component architecture
  • Document refactoring strategy and align with product roadmap