Public report of Buizz/EUD-Editor-3, published 26 October 2026. It has the same score, grades and number of
findings as the full report. The details of security findings (where they are in the code, which known
vulnerabilities and which passwords or keys were found) are left out, so nobody can use them against the project.
Public
Executive reportMeasured under the Code Assurance Index, an open standard for code quality, using its published scoring rules (rubric version 2026.10.5). Watchdog signed this survey and filed it in the standard's public register, where anyone can look it up by its survey ID. Check this survey →
Signed and filed in the standard's public register, 26 October 2026, 17:27 UTC · Survey ID cd_fb604f7f95a24649ba1a373b4fd6816f
Buizz/EUD-Editor-3
Measured 26 October 2026, 17:24 UTC, at code version 8994429
A regression is a drop of 0.5 points or more in the score, or of 2.5 or more out of 10 in a dimension, since the last survey.
Code coverage is not measured: No coverage collector is wired up.
IL efficiency is not measured: The target did not build.
CAI scoreWeak
CriticalWeakAdequateStrongExemplary
Up 2 since the last survey
The score is built from these lenses. Each lens grades one area of the code, such as how easy it is to change or how well it is protected. The weakest lens counts most, so one weak area pulls the score down instead of being averaged away.
A medium codebase: 50,895 lines of product code in 1 project, tests not counted · Estimated rebuild effort: about 0.3 person-years · Weakest lens: Production Readiness, 17
Findings by how serious they are
68 critical474 serious14 minor
38 dimensions are left out of the score. For each one, Watchdog either couldn't measure it in this code, or found no evidence of the safeguard it looks for, such as a tested backup restore. They count neither for nor against the score, and Limitations lists each one with its reason.
This survey was produced by
Watchdog
Producer
Canine Development
Analyzer
Watchdog engine 1.0.0
Measured
26 October 2026, 17:24 UTC
A measurement, not a certificate. The Code Assurance Index records a number
together with the evidence it was worked out from, so anyone can recalculate it, but it doesn't certify or guarantee
the code. The standard was written by Canine Development, which also builds Watchdog. It is open to any tool that
implements it, and today Watchdog is the only one that does.
The score is deterministic, which means the same code always gets the same score. Watchdog works it out with tools that follow published rules, and an AI model never decides it, so anyone who applies the same rules to the same code gets the same number. How it is done is explained under Methodology ▸
34of 34 dimensions measured by tools.
541of 556 findings point to an exact file and line, so you can open each one in the code. The other 15 concern the repository as a whole, such as missing documentation.
34dimensions across 5 lenses, read from 50,895 lines of product code in 1 project.
Buizz/EUD-Editor-3 falls short of our standard for a preview release because we found no working pipeline that builds or tests changes to the code and no logging, tracing or health checks in the code. It scores 38 out of 100 and is rated Weak, and 13 of its 68 critical findings are security problems.
Production Readiness, at 17, is the weakest lens and counts most in the score. The best first step for the work it takes is recording design decisions, worth about 6 points. Adding an automated build and test pipeline would lift Production Readiness itself, worth about 8 points. Raising Production Readiness to 62 would lift the score to about 56.
Nine weaknesses in the code could be used by an attacker. Four passwords or keys are open to anyone who can read the repository, and fifty-five errors are caught and ignored, so failures can go unnoticed. Fixing the weaknesses the scanner points to, replacing each exposed password or key and handling or logging the ignored errors would close these risks.
The product code is 50,895 lines, about €46,000 to rebuild.
A lens is capped at Adequate while one of its dimensions scores below 4 out of 10, however well the rest of the lens does. That way a serious problem in one place always shows in the lens's rating.
How the score is built: what each lens counts forThe lenses don't count equally. The weakest lens counts most, the next weakest a little less, and so on, so a weak area pulls the score down instead of being averaged away. In the bar below, each part's width shows how much that lens counts and its colour shows its rating. Improving the widest part moves the score most, and as that lens improves, it counts for less, because another lens becomes the weakest.
If Production Readiness rose from 17 to 62, the lowest score rated Strong, the score would rise from 38 to about 56.
Code composition: what the lines of code are
Product code 99%Tests 1%
Rebuild cost: about €46,000 · Estimate
Cost to rebuild
€15,000 to €76,000, for 253 to 804 hours of work, about 0.3 person-years for one engineer
Difficulty of the problem
Standard, judged from the kind of software and how it is built. Code that solves a harder problem, such as payments or medical bookings, costs more per line to write.
Quality factor
×0.7 at a score of 38. Better code takes more work to write, so the factor is ×1.0 at a score of 70, lower below it and higher above it.
Size
Medium: 50,895 lines of product code
What it is not
Not a quotation: nobody has offered to build it for that. Not a valuation: it says nothing about what the business is worth. Not a certified figure: no professional has signed it as one.
How the estimate is made: Watchdog prices the hours a team would need to write this code again, at €60 to €95 an hour. Declarations and boilerplate are priced at a fast rate and logic at a slower one, and the logic is then multiplied by the difficulty of the problem and by the quality factor. The estimate can be about 30% off either way, and it moves most with the hourly rate and the difficulty. For this code, every line is priced as straight logic, which keeps the estimate on the low side.
Top priorities
The three actions that raise the score most for the work they take. The full ranked list is in the Roadmap.
1
Resolve the 1 No ADRs found finding(s) in ADR Quality.
Raises the score by about 6 points · Low effort · ADR Quality
2
Add a CI workflow that builds and runs the test suite on every push/PR.
Raises the score by about 8 points · Medium effort · CI/CD gates
3
Write a diagnostic trail the user can hand back with a bug report: a log file under the platform's per-user data directory, switchable with a `--verbose`/`--debug` flag.
Start with the `catch` blocks that emit nothing — a discarded exception is the failure the user cannot describe and you cannot reproduce.
Raises the score by about 8 points · Medium effort · Observability
Diagnosis: what the measurements show together
Each conclusion below combines several dimensions into one point that no single dimension shows, and lists the measurements it rests on.
Where the investment is most exposed · Value at risk
This code would cost about €46,000 to build again, about 0.3 person-years of work. Its weakest lens is Production Readiness, at 17 (Critical). Production Readiness is about whether the product is ready to run in production and to change without breaking. Because the weakest lens counts most in the score, work on Production Readiness also moves the score most.
Based on: the rebuild estimate · the Production Readiness grade · how much each lens counts
What to do: Start with the Production Readiness actions in Top priorities.
If you do one thing first · First action
Resolve the 1 No ADRs found finding(s) in ADR Quality. Of all the actions in this report, it raises the score most for the work it takes: about 6 points for low effort, because it clears the 1 ADR Quality findings. The next survey will show the change in the score.
Based on: the ranked actions in Top priorities, by score gain and effort
What hard-to-read code costs each year · Cost
Four dimensions measure how easy the code is to work in: two measure how tangled its logic is, one how much of it is copied, and one how well each part sticks to a single job. In this codebase they average 6.2 out of 10. Code at that level is slower to change than clean code, and Watchdog estimates the extra work at 4% to 10% on every change. The history of the code shows how much it changes: about 22 lines over the last 90 days, which is about 89 lines a year. At that pace, the extra work comes to an estimated 0 to 0.1 engineer-days a year, and it grows as more code changes.
How this is estimated: The number of changed lines is measured from the history of the code. The rest rests on two assumptions of Watchdog's own: code scoring 8 out of 10 or more adds no extra work, and each point below 8 adds 2.5% to 5.6% to every change, never less than 2% to 5% and never more than 40% to 60% in all; and an engineer changes 150 to 400 lines in a day. The result is a range for planning, not a measurement.
Based on: Cyclomatic Complexity · Cognitive Complexity · Code Duplication · Cohesion (LCOM4) · the code's change history
What to do: Start with the files listed under Churn × Complexity Hotspots, which change often and are hard to read, because that is where the extra work is paid most often.
Architecture: which parts of the code depend on which
The code is divided into modules, groups of code that each handle one part of the product, and a module depends on another when it uses code from it. The table lists the modules both down the side and across the top, in an order where each module should only use modules listed above it. A number in a cell means the module on that row uses the module in that column, and it counts the pairs of building blocks (types) that connect them. The one thing to look for is a mark above the diagonal line. It means two or more modules use each other in a loop (a dependency cycle), so none of them can be changed, tested or released on its own.
9 modules, with 7 dependencies between them. One loop runs through 3 of the modules, marked above the diagonal.
Which modules use which. The module on each row uses the module in each column, and the number counts the pairs of types that connect them. A cell above the diagonal is part of a loop.
EUD_Editor_3.IScript uses EUD_Editor_3, so a change to EUD_Editor_3 can break EUD_Editor_3.IScript, while a change to EUD_Editor_3.IScript can't break EUD_Editor_3.
Position
Above the diagonal, so it is part of a loop. Neither module can be changed, tested or released on its own until one of these dependencies is removed.
5→6 EUD_Editor_3.MGRP uses EUD_Editor_3part of a loop✕
Connections
1 pair of types, where a type in EUD_Editor_3.MGRP uses a type in EUD_Editor_3.
EUD_Editor_3.MGRP uses EUD_Editor_3, so a change to EUD_Editor_3 can break EUD_Editor_3.MGRP, while a change to EUD_Editor_3.MGRP can't break EUD_Editor_3.
Position
Above the diagonal, so it is part of a loop. Neither module can be changed, tested or released on its own until one of these dependencies is removed.
EUD_Editor_3 uses EUD_Editor_3.IScript, so a change to EUD_Editor_3.IScript can break EUD_Editor_3, while a change to EUD_Editor_3 can't break EUD_Editor_3.IScript.
Position
Below the diagonal: EUD_Editor_3 uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
1 pair of types, where a type in EUD_Editor_3 uses a type in EUD_Editor_3.MGRP.
The types involved
EUD_Editor_3.GRP → EUD_Editor_3.MGRP.CPCX
Direction
EUD_Editor_3 uses EUD_Editor_3.MGRP, so a change to EUD_Editor_3.MGRP can break EUD_Editor_3, while a change to EUD_Editor_3 can't break EUD_Editor_3.MGRP.
Position
Below the diagonal: EUD_Editor_3 uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
EUD_Editor_3.TabItemTool uses EUD_Editor_3, so a change to EUD_Editor_3 can break EUD_Editor_3.TabItemTool, while a change to EUD_Editor_3.TabItemTool can't break EUD_Editor_3.
Position
Below the diagonal: EUD_Editor_3.TabItemTool uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
EUD_Editor_3.Tool uses EUD_Editor_3, so a change to EUD_Editor_3 can break EUD_Editor_3.Tool, while a change to EUD_Editor_3.Tool can't break EUD_Editor_3.
Position
Below the diagonal: EUD_Editor_3.Tool uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
At a glance — Code Health · 68% · Adequate · gated by D2 ·
Findings mapped to OWASP categories; the specific CVEs/secrets are in the Security dimension cards below and findings.md (redacted only on the public version of this report).
OWASP category
Findings
Severity
A05:2025 — Injection
9
High / Critical
A07:2025 — Authentication Failures
5
High / Critical
Roadmap
First, establish a CI workflow to automatically build and test every change, ensuring immediate feedback on code quality. Second, implement detailed logging with a debug flag to capture diagnostic trails, starting with previously silent error handlers to aid in reproducing bugs. Third, document significant design decisions in a dedicated ADR folder to preserve architectural context and rationale. Finally, maintain a changelog to clearly record what is shipped in each release, improving transparency and release hygiene.
Ranked by impact ÷ effort. "Helps" is the estimated gain on the 0–100 health score.
Do this
Helps
Effort
Dimension
Resolve the 1 No ADRs found finding(s) in ADR Quality.
Write a diagnostic trail the user can hand back with a bug report: a log file under the platform's per-user data directory, switchable with a `--verbose`/`--debug` flag. Start with the `catch` blocks that emit nothing — a discarded exception is the failure the user cannot describe and you cannot reproduce.
Record your significant design decisions. Write one short document per decision, giving its date, the situation, the decision and its consequences, and keep them together with your other design documents. A docs/adr folder with each file named by number and title is the easiest place to find them.
Every finding carries one of four grades. Three say how serious it is. The fourth says this
survey could not settle it — and it is a grade, not a gap.
Critical — 68
A definite problem that already costs you something and drags the score down: a
missing authorisation check, a dependency with a known exploit, a build that does not reproduce. Failure here
tends to cause failures elsewhere.
Serious — 474
Likely wrong, but not failing yet. It degrades
the codebase over a longer horizon and can cause failures elsewhere — not urgent this week, not something to
carry for two years either.
Minor — 14
Recorded, with no effect on how the codebase functions.
Present so the survey is complete, not because it needs doing.
Could not be resolved — 38
Something this survey could not settle
from the outside, and which could be critical or serious. Either a control was required and no
positive evidence of it exists in the repository — a backup job that nothing shows was ever restored from proves
nothing about restores — or our own analysis could not run over that part of the tree. This is not a clean
result. These are excluded from the score rather than awarded a pass, so the number on the cover neither
rewards nor penalises them: if you act on this survey without resolving them, you carry that risk yourself. Each
one is named under Limitations.
Methodology & how to trust this report
Watchdog is a deep, periodic assessment — run each sprint, monthly, or quarterly, taking the time to go wider and deeper than a quick check and surfacing in one coherent report what you'd otherwise piece together from a dozen separate tools. It scores deterministically: the same commit yields the same score, every run. 34 of 34 evaluated dimensions are computed purely by tools and static analysis (confidence 1.0); none rely on LLM judgement. Overall confidence is 0.8 — the weighted average across measured dimensions; it falls as more of the score leans on LLM-assisted judgement and rises when it's fully tool-backed.
Every figure here is one of three kinds, and we label which: ✓ Measured — a deterministic fact (LoC, complexity, coverage); ~ Modeled — an estimate from a stated model (cost, effort, value-at-risk), always a range with its assumptions, never a precise fact; ◐ Advisory — an LLM prose judgement. We never present a modelled estimate as if it were measured. Perfect or absent scores carry their provenance too (ADR-0011): ✓ Tool-verified means the property itself was measured across the surface; ○ Nothing flagged means the probes came back clean — a claim bounded by what a repository can show; ⊘ Not evidenced means a working control (a tested restore, an automated rollback) showed no positive evidence — absence of evidence is not evidence of a control, so it's excluded from the score rather than awarded a spurious 10; ◐ Sampled · advisory marks an LLM verdict over a bounded sample — advisory, never a deterministic measurement.
What we checked — 34 dimensions across the health lenses
Each chip is a dimension scored from real signals across architecture, testing, dependencies, security & compliance, documentation, git-history and code quality — in one coherent pass. A surface report typically covers a handful.
How to trust any code-health report — three questions
Can you open the finding? Real findings cite a repo-relative file and line you can open at the cited line — never an absolute scratch path. Here, 541 of 556 do; the remainder are repo-wide signals — a dimension-level measurement, not a single line. (Every path in this report is repo-relative by construction: paths are normalized at the producer and the report is rejected if any rooted path leaks through.)
Is there a tool behind the number? Every score below names the method that produced it — Roslyn, git, a scanner, or (for a handful of documentation/naming dimensions) an LLM labelled sampled · advisory — not a narrative.
Does re-running give the same result? Run it again on the same commit and the score — and this report, byte for byte — is identical. A report whose numbers move between runs is describing the run, not the code.
This report answers yes to all three. That's the bar to hold any assessment to.
Tools & methods
The actual versions used this run (captured at analysis time) — re-run on the same commit for the identical score.
Method
Backs
Version
Evaluator
Roslyn static analysis
Complexity, cohesion, coupling, dead code, API surface, layering
What ran differently this time — a tool absent, degraded, or that fell back to an estimate. Named openly, not folded silently into the scores. A degraded run also records its exact cause in diagnostics.md.
D11 Test Reliability — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. Test source is present (.vb) and it is .NET, which this analyzer re-runs through `dotnet test` — but the .NET workspace loaded none of this repository's test projects, so there was no suite to re-run and flakiness couldn't be assessed. The repository commits a project or solution file, so the load had something to read and still produced nothing: the remedy is the restore, the SDK band or the target resolution, not a new runner. Not scored — this is a gap on our side, not a finding about this repository.
D12 Dependency Hygiene — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. `dotnet list package` did not return usable output (restore or query failed); no outdated/vulnerable/deprecated data to assess. The tool said: /usr/share/dotnet/sdk/10.0.400/NuGet.targets(521,5): error MSB3202: The project file "/tmp/BingsuCodeEditor/BingsuCodeEditor/BingsuCodeEditor.csproj" was not found. [EUD Editor 3.sln].
D16 Bus Factor — not measured this run — This is a true statement about the repository that carries nothing for its owner to act on, so it is reported here rather than as a defect in their code. Single-maintainer repository — bus factor is not applicable (7 contributor(s) across 740 commit(s) sampled, automation and bot accounts excluded). One of them holds 89% of the history; the other 6 hold 1.8% each on average, below the 5% at which there is somebody to hand the work to. That is a single maintainer with drive-by contributors, not a team whose knowledge has concentrated — so the bus factor is not applicable and there is nothing here for the owner to act on.
D17 Explicit Debt — measured, with a gap in what it reached — Watchdog measured this, but not all of it. What it did not reach is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — so the numbers on that dimension cover less than the repository, and the part left out is not evidence that it would have passed. The C# workspace loaded this repository's projects but reported a load failure, and the dead-code reference search is unreliable over a graph that did not load cleanly, so it was skipped. The other debt markers on this row were read; dead symbols were not, and their absence from the score is not a finding that the code has none. First load diagnostic: Failure: Project file not found: '/tmp/BingsuCodeEditor/BingsuCodeEditor/BingsuCodeEditor.csproj'.
D18 Solution Shape — measured, with a gap in what it reached — Watchdog measured this, but not all of it. What it did not reach is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — so the numbers on that dimension cover less than the repository, and the part left out is not evidence that it would have passed. The build did not finish within its budget on this run; structural metrics are reported, build/warning status is unknown.
D21 Naming Consistency — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. D21's deterministic naming rules are gated on C# first (docs/plans/deterministic-engine.md, P5): each other language is switched on only after its own concept suite and A/B gate pass. Until then its declarations carry no naming verdict this run — this says nothing about whether its names are consistent.
D22 Internal API Consistency — not measured this run — This is a true statement about the repository that carries nothing for its owner to act on, so it is reported here rather than as a defect in their code. The loaded project set declares no packable project and no `.Contracts` project, so there is no intentionally-exposed surface for API consistency to be judged over.
D24 Comment Value — measured, with a gap in what it reached — Watchdog measured this, but not all of it. What it did not reach is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — so the numbers on that dimension cover less than the repository, and the part left out is not evidence that it would have passed. D24 compares a comment's words with the identifiers, literals and constructs of the code it annotates, using English function-word and rationale lexicons. Comments in another script or language were left unread rather than counted as clean.
D24 Comment Value — measured, with a gap in what it reached — Watchdog measured this, but not all of it. What it did not reach is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — so the numbers on that dimension cover less than the repository, and the part left out is not evidence that it would have passed. Each source language's comment syntax, and the code a comment annotates in it, needs its own proof before D24 judges it. Until then those comments are left unread, not counted as clean.
D30 Dependency Vulnerabilities — measured, with a gap in what it reached — This is a true statement about the repository that carries nothing for its owner to act on, so it is reported here rather than as a defect in their code. The solution did not restore on the analyzer's .NET SDK (an SDK/target-framework/restore mismatch, common for an older codebase), so there was no restored dependency graph to scan. 1 of 2 declared ecosystem(s) (nuget packages.config) WERE scanned and every vulnerability they reported is included in this result; nuget was not, so this dimension's score covers less than the dependency surface this repository declares, and nothing here is evidence that nuget is free of known-vulnerable dependencies.
D39 IL Efficiency — not measured this run — This is a true statement about the repository that carries nothing for its owner to act on, so it is reported here rather than as a defect in their code. `dotnet build` exited 1 with a compiler/MSBuild diagnostic, so there were no assemblies to read IL from. The build itself is D18's row, with the ask; nothing further is charged here.
D44 Platform End-of-Life — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This dimension reads a project's own statement about the platform it runs on: a TargetFramework in a .NET project file, a .nvmrc or .python-version, a capped requires-python, a Rust toolchain file or Cargo.toml rust-version, a .go-version, .java-version, .ruby-version, .tool-versions or .sdkmanrc, a go.mod go directive, a Maven or Gradle Java level or toolchain, a Gemfile's ruby directive, a mix.exs elixir requirement, a rebar.config minimum_otp_vsn, a pubspec.yaml SDK constraint, a build.sbt scalaVersion, or a framework major pinned by a dependency constraint. This repository carries none of them, so nothing about its platform was established. That is a gap in this analyzer's coverage, NOT a finding that the platform is supported — a language whose runtime is declared elsewhere (Package.swift, a Dockerfile) is simply not read here yet.
AXB1 Runtime evidence locked — no reproducible boot — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. Subject: a native UI project (EUD Editor 3/Application.xaml). The Runtime Evidence tier boots an app only via docker-compose, an Aspire AppHost, a Dockerfile, an npm dev script, a web service's own toolchain entry point (cargo, go, dotnet, Python, Spring Boot), or an Android app's own Gradle wrapper (run on an emulator); an Apple or Flutter app needs a host it lacks. None applied, so no live runtime a11y/egress/header evidence was collected. You can widen what we reach: add a docker-compose.yml (or an Aspire AppHost) that brings the app up with its dependencies. Watchdog then boots it in an isolated sandbox and gathers real runtime evidence — you change nothing in your pipeline (no CI step, no SDK).
C1 Data Protection — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. These personal data controls are read from declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names and guard methods in a C# source model, and none was loaded on this run, so there was nothing to gather. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository lacks personal data controls.
C2 Access Controls — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. These authorization controls are read from declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names and guard methods in a C# source model, and none was loaded on this run, so there was nothing to gather. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository lacks authorization controls.
C3 Audit Trail — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. These audit controls are read from declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names and guard methods in a C# source model, and none was loaded on this run, so there was nothing to gather. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository lacks audit controls.
C4 Data Retention — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. These retention controls are read from declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names and guard methods in a C# source model, and none was loaded on this run, so there was nothing to gather. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository lacks retention controls.
C5 Data-Subject Rights — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. These data-subject rights controls are read from declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names and guard methods in a C# source model, and none was loaded on this run, so there was nothing to gather. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository lacks data-subject rights controls.
IC1 Incompleteness & stubs — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
P5 DR & Backup — not measured this run — This is a true statement about the repository that carries nothing for its owner to act on, so it is reported here rather than as a defect in their code. No backup/snapshot/replication config, RTO/RPO or restore-procedure documentation was found — and no production persistence was detected either (no data-access packages, no data-store services, no database resources), so there is nothing in this repository whose loss a DR control would recover. If this system's data lives in a platform or ops repo we can't see, that's where the DR evidence belongs.
S1 Web-Security Posture — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. These web-security controls are read from declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names and guard methods in a C# source model, and none was loaded on this run, so there was nothing to gather. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository lacks web-security controls.
X1 Async correctness — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X12 Unreachable branch — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X13 Undrained process stream — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X14 Bypassable address classification — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X15 Unvalidated length from an untrusted reader — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X16 Unfloored truncation loop — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X17 Uncapped recursion over a caller-supplied document — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X18 Disposal-pattern correctness — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X19 Unrestored process-global state — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X2 Cancellation propagation — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X20 Mistyped argument guard — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X21 Side-effecting pattern guard — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X22 Contradicted release guard — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X23 Unguarded diagnostic materialisation — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X24 Document value interpolated into markup unescaped — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X25 Inert configuration knob — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X26 Unsynchronised callback handoff — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X27 Collection changed while being enumerated — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X29 Per-element action decided by a fixed element — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X3 Exception handling — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X30 Support guard that admits what it rejects — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X32 Type resolved by simple name across every loaded assembly — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X4 Structured logging — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X5 Nullable reference types — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
Repo exclusion declarations (.gitattributes linguist-generated/vendored, .editorconfig generated_code): none declared — every source file was scored.
Limitations & what we did not check
Watchdog assesses the repository exactly as committed, and only the repository. By design it does not reach outside the source tree: the live cloud account, the running CI/CD pipeline, the host's branch-protection and approval rules, the production configuration, or a restore actually exercised against a backup are all out of scope. That boundary is a feature, not a gap — a repo-relative, deterministic scan re-runs identically on any commit and every finding opens at a real file and line, where a live audit can neither be reproduced nor traced. The visible consequence is that controls which leave no in-repo evidence are reported as "not evidenced" and excluded from the score rather than awarded a number a static scan cannot justify.
Per-dimension blind spots
For each dimension that was measured, what a static, repo-only scan structurally cannot see — the honest edge of the measurement, not a failure of it.
D1 Cyclomatic Complexity: Cyclomatic complexity counts branches statically — it cannot tell an essential decision tree from accidental tangle, nor see complexity that lives in data or configuration (large switch-case token tables, DSL lexers/parsers, data-as-code rule tables) rather than control flow: a tokenizer's many single-character cases read as high complexity though each branch is trivial.
D2 Cognitive Complexity: Cognitive-complexity heuristics approximate how hard code is to follow; genuine domain difficulty and well-named intent that eases reading are not captured.
D3 God Classes: "God class" is sized by members and responsibilities visible in the type — a deliberately broad facade over a coherent subsystem can read the same as an accidental grab-bag. For front-end JS the file-length check is cohesion-aware (a single-responsibility module — one class/IIFE — earns a 3× threshold), but cohesion is approximated from top-level declarations, not true dependency structure.
D4 Code Duplication: Duplication is token-similarity — an in-process token-stream comparison over sliding windows, with type-aware normalization — so it finds copy-paste, not semantic duplication expressed differently. Committed machine-written code (scaffolded migrations, designer/codegen output, protobuf/OpenAPI stubs, model snapshots) is EXCLUDED — its repetition is the tool's, not the team's — so the score reflects hand-written duplication only.
D5 Coupling: Coupling is measured between projects/assemblies — runtime coupling through DI, reflection, messaging or shared databases is invisible to a static reference graph.
D6 Cohesion (LCOM4): LCOM4 cohesion is syntactic — it infers connectivity from which methods touch which fields/methods by name, not from real runtime behaviour or intent.
D13 REDACTED Scanning: REDACTED detection is signature- and entropy-based on the current tree — a secret that does not match a known pattern, or one already rotated, will not be flagged (a clean scan is "nothing matched", not "no secrets exist").
D14 License Compliance: License compatibility is checked against declared package metadata and a policy — mislabelled or missing license metadata, and obligations that depend on how you distribute, are not resolved here.
D15 Churn × Complexity Hotspots: Churn hotspots come from git history — a freshly imported or squashed repository has no churn signal, and recent rewrites can mask a historically risky file.
D17 Explicit Debt: Acknowledged-debt signals (TODO/FIXME, suppressions, dead code) are textual — undocumented debt that nobody marked, and debt that lives in design rather than annotations, is invisible. Committed machine-written code (scaffolded migrations, designer/codegen output, generated stubs) is excluded — it is never the team's dead code to delete.
D18 Solution Shape: Build integrity reflects whether the solution compiled in this environment — a build that needs a private feed, a specific SDK, or a generated file absent from the repo can read as broken when it is merely unreproducible here.
D20 ADR Quality: ADR quality is an LLM read of the decision records present — it cannot know about decisions made and never recorded, and its verdict is sampled and advisory.
D24 Comment Value: Comment value is measured as redundancy only: a comment that repeats its code's words is found, but a paraphrase in other words, a vague comment, or one the code contradicts is not, and whether a comment is valuable is not claimed. Comments in other scripts or languages, and outside C#, are not judged.
D26 Project Cohesion: Project focus is sized from members/namespaces per project — a project that is broad by deliberate design reads the same as one that has sprawled.
D27 Navigability: Indirection/navigability is structural — it measures hops to follow a call, not whether that indirection buys real flexibility or just ceremony.
D28 Secrets (history): Secret-history scanning sweeps the git log for known patterns — a secret that predates the available history, or never matched a signature, is not found (clean means "nothing matched in the history we can see").
D29 Static Analysis (SAST): SAST findings are pattern-based (semgrep) — it finds classes of bug it has rules for; logic flaws, auth/authorization gaps and issues needing runtime context are out of reach (and clean means "no rule matched").
D30 Dependency Vulnerabilities: CVE matching depends on accurate package/version metadata and on the advisory databases — a vulnerability with no published advisory, or in code not declared as a dependency, is not seen. Coverage needs a RESOLVED graph: an unpinned requirements.txt, or a pom without a resolved build, yields partial coverage rather than a clean verdict. An ecosystem the analyzer cannot scan is reported as unmeasured, never as clean.
D34 Knowledge Freshness: Freshness is decayed commit RECENCY, not comprehension — code read often but rarely committed reads as orphaned, and stable code that genuinely needs no changes is penalised the same as forgotten code; bot/squash commits distort it like the bus factor.
D35 Change Coupling: Change coupling is co-change in COMMITS — files split across separate commits, or coupled only through a shared config/build step, read as uncoupled, and a sweeping commit (rename/format) is excluded so it doesn't couple everything. It shows that files change together, not WHY: a high coupling can be a healthy cohesive pair as readily as a hidden leak.
D43 Malicious Dependencies: Only packages some vulnerability database has already NAMED as malicious are seen — a compromise published in the last hours, or never reported at all, is invisible here, and this dimension reading 10 is not evidence that a dependency is trustworthy. There is no typosquat or dependency-confusion analysis: a package nobody has reported is simply absent from the feeds. Coverage is the dependency scan's: an ecosystem that could not be scanned is disclosed as unmeasured, never as clean.
AX10 Code composition: Role is inferred from namespace/folder convention, not semantics — a domain concept living in a folder named "Services" reads as application, and the split is lines-of-code, not business value. The business-logic-share score is a SOFT, FLOORED signal: it contributes to the Architecture lens but is floored at the Critical gate, so an infrastructure-heavy design (a gateway, an ETL, a driver) is legitimately low without being nuked to zero.
P6 Release Hygiene: Rollback/observability controls are inferred from repo artefacts (pipelines, dashboards-as-code) — controls configured in external tooling, with no in-repo trace, cannot be credited.
What it measures: How tangled the control flow is — methods with many branches are hard to test and change.
Method: Cyclomatic complexity per method (1 + decision points), computed exhaustively across production source; test projects separated by convention. Deterministic.
83 method(s) exceeded the cyclomatic complexity threshold of 15; the worst was Parser.GetScriptBlock at 146. A further 8 method(s) were over the threshold but excluded as flat dispatchers (a long switch/match over independent cases: many branches, almost no nesting), the largest being ScriptBlock.New.ctor at 45 — they are counted neither in the figure above nor in this dimension's score. 6 files carry no cyclomatic complexity row at all for this reason — every one of their over-threshold methods was excluded, so the exclusion is disclosed nowhere in the file itself: EUD Editor 3/Compiler/Lexical Analyzer/Token.vb (Token.ToText at 34), EUD Editor 3/Class/GRP/GRP.vb (CPalett.New.ctor at 22), EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/GUIEditorPage/Scripter/ScriptEditer/GUIScriptEditerWindow.xaml.vb (GUIScriptEditerWindow.Init at 22), EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/DataEditor/ButtonData.xaml.vb (ButtonData.TypeSelecterPreviewReset at 19), EUD Editor 3/Class/Data/CButtonData.vb (CButtonSet.AddButtonType at 17), and 1 more not listed here. They are named here because the per-file figures other dimensions report are taken BEFORE this exclusion, so such a file can show a high maximum complexity elsewhere in this report and nothing here, with nothing to reconcile the two.
+ 78 more group(s) — more in Appendix A; the complete list is findings.md.
What to do
Bring the 8 bodies over 60 down to 60 or less in Cyclomatic Complexity — start with Parser.GetScriptBlock (cyclomatic 146), GUIScriptManager.GetItemScriptText (cyclomatic 126), Lexical_Analyzer.DoWork (cyclomatic 102). — This score is capped by its worst body, so a finding fixed alone moves it by almost nothing — the next one down takes its place. Refactoring these 8 together lifts Cyclomatic Complexity from 5.1 to about 6.2/10, projected with the scoring formula itself and assuming each lands exactly at 60; a cleaner split scores higher.
Stand up a CI pipeline, then gate Cyclomatic Complexity in it to reach Verified (currently Documented). — This repository has no CI pipeline, so there is nothing to add a gate to yet — the pipeline comes first. Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.
Detailed fixes: d1_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.
What it measures: How hard the code is for a person to follow, beyond raw branching.
Method: Cognitive complexity per method (Sonar-style nesting-penalized score), computed exhaustively over production code, excluding test projects. Deterministic.
+ 177 more group(s) — more in Appendix A; the complete list is findings.md.
What to do
Bring the 26 bodies over 60 down to 60 or less in Cognitive Complexity — start with Parser.GetScriptBlock (cognitive 495), Lexical_Analyzer.DoWork (cognitive 271), GUIScriptManager.GetItemScriptText (cognitive 239). — This score is capped by its worst body, so a finding fixed alone moves it by almost nothing — the next one down takes its place. Refactoring these 26 together lifts Cognitive Complexity from 2.0 to about 4.1/10, projected with the scoring formula itself and assuming each lands exactly at 60; a cleaner split scores higher.
Stand up a CI pipeline, then gate Cognitive Complexity in it to reach Verified (currently Documented). — This repository has no CI pipeline, so there is nothing to add a gate to yet — the pipeline comes first. Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.
Detailed fixes: d2_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.
Do you agree with this assessment?
D3 · God Classes5.4 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified
What it measures: Over-large classes that try to do too much ("god classes").
Method: God-class detection by line and method-count thresholds per logical type (partial classes unified), filtered for generated code and registration/contract false positives. Deterministic.
Resolve the 42 MethodTooLong finding(s) in God Classes — start with REDACTED (3), Parser.vb (2), WriteSCAData.vb (2). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (42 warning-level).
Resolve the 14 FileTooLong finding(s) in God Classes — start with CodeSelecter.xaml.vb, Parser.vb, REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (14 warning-level).
Resolve the 12 ClassTooLong finding(s) in God Classes — start with ParseTool.vb, GUIScriptManager.vb, Init.vb. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (12 warning-level).
Stand up a CI pipeline, then gate God Classes in it to reach Verified (currently Documented). — This repository has no CI pipeline, so there is nothing to add a gate to yet — the pipeline comes first. Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.
Detailed fixes: d3_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.
What it measures: Copy-pasted code that should be shared instead.
Method: Code duplication via token-stream sliding windows with type-aware normalization (locals masked, type names preserved), density-scored per KLoC of production code. Deterministic.
97 duplicated block group(s) detected. A further 5 rows report members as variants of one another; they aggregate block groups already counted above and are not themselves counted.
+ 57 more group(s) — more in Appendix A; the complete list is findings.md.
What to do
Resolve the 7 Duplicated block (11 lines × 2) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with StarCraftArchive.vb, TrgUnitProperty.xaml.vb, MoveTrigger.vb. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (7 warning-level).
Resolve the 6 Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with RequireListBox.xaml.vb, LuaManager.vb, Tech_Data.xaml.vb. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (6 warning-level).
Resolve the 6 Duplicated block (13 lines × 2) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with ListSelecter.xaml.vb, Tech_Data.xaml.vb, RequireListBox.xaml.vb. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (6 warning-level).
Stand up a CI pipeline, then gate Code Duplication in it to reach Verified (currently Documented). — This repository has no CI pipeline, so there is nothing to add a gate to yet — the pipeline comes first. Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Verified — provenance only; does not change the score.
Detailed fixes: d4_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.
Do you agree with this assessment?
D5 · Coupling10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified
What it measures: Whether volatile projects sit underneath others that depend on them (so their churn ripples upward), and whether project dependencies form cycles. A widely-depended-on but stable shared/kernel project is healthy, not penalised.
Method: Dependency cycles via elementary-DFS over real .csproj references, plus Martin instability (afferent/efferent) per project. Exhaustive over the reference graph, deterministic.
Coverage: Exhaustive · type-level: afferent/efferent coupling + cycles computed over every production type — the population is all types, not a name convention.
What it measures: Whether a class's methods are focused on a single responsibility.
Method: LCOM4 cohesion per production class with at least two methods: connected components of methods sharing state or calls, computed syntactically. Deterministic, not a proxy.
Coverage: Exhaustive · type-level: LCOM4 cohesion computed over every production class — the population is all types, not a name convention.
Resolve the 19 Low cohesion finding(s) in Cohesion (LCOM4) — start with ThemeControl.xaml.vb, SettingWindows.xaml.vb, MacroDefaultFunction.vb. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (19 warning-level).
Stand up a CI pipeline, then gate Cohesion (LCOM4) in it to reach Verified (currently Documented). — This repository has no CI pipeline, so there is nothing to add a gate to yet — the pipeline comes first. Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Verified — provenance only; does not change the score.
Detailed fixes: d6_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.
What it measures: Whether any secrets (keys, tokens, passwords) have leaked into the code.
Method: In-process native secret scanner (entropy plus signature patterns) across all tracked files; no external tool. A clean result is a measured 10, not no-data zero. Deterministic.
What it measures: Whether the licenses of third-party packages are compatible with your policy.
Method: Third-party package licenses resolved from declared package metadata and checked against the configured policy (allow/deny/copyleft). Deterministic; clean = no incompatible license found at metadata depth.
0 of 123 packages use a banned license. The depth of this set was not established for this repository: the graded packages are what this pass resolved, and no lockfile was read, so it is not certified to be the full transitive closure.
What it measures: Files that change often and are also complex — the riskiest hotspots.
Method: Per production file churn times cyclomatic complexity over a rolling window, computed from git and Roslyn/JS/Razor analysis. Exhaustive, deterministic per commit date.
What it measures: Acknowledged debt left in the code — TODOs, dead code, suppressed warnings.
Method: Roslyn syntactic debt markers (suppressions/TODO/FIXME/HACK/empty-catch/commented-code/Obsolete) plus SymbolFinder dead-code analysis; weighted-debt-per-KLoC density deducted 2.0x per unit. Deterministic, exhaustive.
58 deducted debt markers + unmeasured dead symbols across 50895 LoC in the .NET projects (1.0/KLoC) → score 7.9. Dead code not measured: the solution did not load cleanly, so the reference search was skipped.
Resolve the 55 EmptyCatchBlock finding(s) in Explicit Debt — start with REDACTED (17), MacroFuncSetting.xaml.vb (4), GRPBox.vb (3). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (55 issue-level).
Resolve the 3 TodoComment finding(s) in Explicit Debt — start with TriggerFunction.vb (2), MaterialDesign.Overrides.xaml. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (3 warning-level).
Stand up a CI pipeline, then gate Explicit Debt in it to reach Verified (currently Documented). — This repository has no CI pipeline, so there is nothing to add a gate to yet — the pipeline comes first. Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.
Detailed fixes: d17_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.
Do you agree with this assessment?
D18 · Solution Shape8.0 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified
What it measures: Whether the solution is laid out in a sensible, conventional structure.
Method: Solution structure: project count, decomposition, shell-project detection, build success (confirmed failures cap the score); traced to actual .sln files and binaries. Deterministic.
1 projects, 303 source files, 51231 hand-written lines of code (50895 production / 336 test — the split is derived per file: test is what its project, its own path, or a compile-guarded region marks as test, and a file carrying no test signal counts as production), plus 143 generated (machine-written code — designer, scaffolded and tool-emitted files — excluded from quality), 0 inter-project edges (build status unknown — did not finish).
Solution references a project that does not existEUD Editor 3.sln
Single-project monolith
What to do
Resolve the 1 Solution references a project that does not exist finding(s) in Solution Shape — start with EUD Editor 3.sln. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
Resolve the 1 Single-project monolith finding(s) in Solution Shape. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 recommendation-level).
Detailed fixes: d18_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.
Do you agree with this assessment?
D20 · ADR Quality0.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified
What it measures: Whether architecture decisions are recorded well (context, decision, consequences).
Method: Per-ADR judgment by language model at low temperature with two-pass stability; confidence is share of ADRs evaluated; enforcement-field presence detected deterministically. Advisory.
What it measures: Whether comments are worth it — explaining WHY (valuable) rather than WHAT (redundant).
Method: Every inline C# comment compared word by word with the identifiers, literals and constructs of the code it annotates (taken from the syntax); a comment whose words that code already contains is redundant, as are closing-brace labels and generator template text. Comments giving a reason or a reference are kept; other scripts and languages are not judged. Deterministic, exhaustive, advisory.
doc comments repeat the namesEUD Editor 3/Class/StormLib.vb:1040
What to do
Resolve the 3 redundant comment finding(s) in Comment Value — start with Parser.vb, RefreshTrigger.vb, Menu.vb. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (3 recommendation-level).
Detailed fixes: d24_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.
1 of 1 projects flagged as possibly oversized/incoherent.
Projects may be oversized for their cohesion
What to do
Resolve the 1 Projects may be oversized for their cohesion finding(s) in Project Cohesion. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 recommendation-level).
Detailed fixes: d26_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.
What it measures: How far you must trace to follow a call — low indirection and co-located slices read easier.
Method: Call indirection (interface hops, cross-namespace calls, slice-locality scaled) over a sampled set of method invocations, size-aware baseline. Sampled; confidence discounted by symbol-resolution gaps. C# also names each pass-through layer (a class whose every public method only forwards its own parameters to one collaborator) as a located finding; the score is not affected.
Coverage: Slice locality from the first namespace segments, SAMPLED (≤400 methods) — not exhaustive.
73 % of calls cross a namespace and 0 % go through an interface, but 98 % of collaborators are co-located — so a call's collaborators sit together and tracing stays easy. Baseline: large — vertical-slice locality expected.
What it measures: Whether any secrets were ever committed — scanned across the full git history, not just now.
Method: REDACTED scan via TWO gitleaks detect passes in an isolated checkout — the full git history, then a second --no-git pass over the working tree as it stands — merged and de-duplicated by (rule, file, line); each match flagged High. Both invocations are recorded in the audit trail. Exhaustive; when the tool is absent, or when its output cannot be parsed into the expected shape, the dimension is WITHHELD as an explicit measurement gap on our side — unscored and excluded from the lens, never a hedged middling score.
4 finding(s): 0 critical, 4 high, 0 medium, 0 low. Remediation for historically-committed secrets is credential rotation — they remain in history regardless of later deletion.
REDACTED
REDACTED
What to do
Resolve the 4 REDACTED finding(s) in Secrets (history) — start with REDACTED (4). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (4 issue-level).
Resolve the 1 Rotate the exposed credentials finding(s) in Secrets (history). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 recommendation-level).
Detailed fixes: d28_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.
What it measures: Real static-analysis (SAST) findings — likely security bugs in the code, any language.
Method: Polyglot static analysis via semgrep across the repo using the pinned, image-baked p/security-audit + p/owasp-top-ten rulesets (no scan-time registry fetch); severity rules (ERROR/WARNING/INFO) map to a full-band severity-weighted score. Exhaustive, deterministic; degrades on parse failure.
Coverage: semgrep pattern rules over all files — exhaustive for the rule set, blind to classes of bug without a rule (clean = no rule matched).
Resolve the 9 REDACTED finding(s) in Static Analysis (SAST) — start with REDACTED, REDACTED, REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (9 issue-level).
Detailed fixes: d29_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.
What it measures: Whether any dependency has a known published vulnerability (CVE), direct or transitive, in ANY ecosystem the repository declares — Dart pub, Elixir and Erlang via Hex, Go modules, Java and Kotlin via Maven/Gradle, JavaScript/npm, .NET/NuGet, PHP/Composer, Python/PyPI, RubyGems, Rust/Cargo and Swift.
Method: Dependency-CVE scan across every ecosystem the repository declares, scored ONCE. Three sources are unioned and deduplicated by advisory identity (rule id + alias closure, CVE<->GHSA) scoped to package+version, keeping the worst severity: `osv-scanner --recursive` over osv.dev for Dart pub, Elixir/Hex (and Erlang, whose `rebar.lock` syft first converts to a CycloneDX SBOM the scanner reads, with rows attributed back to the lock), Go, Java and Kotlin via Maven/Gradle (and Scala, whose sbt build's pinned direct declarations are written into a CycloneDX SBOM the scanner reads, with rows attributed back to the build file), npm, PHP/Composer, Python/PyPI, RubyGems, Rust/Cargo and Swift; `trivy fs --scanners vuln` for npm lockfiles; and `dotnet list package --vulnerable --include-transitive` for NuGet (with per-advisory collapse of the project x target-framework fan-out), plus a DECLARED-dependency arm that resolves a published gem's gemspec against rubygems.org where no Gemfile.lock is committed. `SeverityScore(c,h,m,l, normalizer 8.0)`. NotApplicable only when NO ecosystem is readable; if any applicable ecosystem could not be scanned the findings are REPORTED and the score is withheld. Supersedes the npm and OSV arms, retired 2026-09-05.
No known-vulnerable dependencies in the 1 ecosystem(s) that were scanned (nuget packages.config). Partial dependency scan: 1 of 2 declared ecosystem(s) were scanned (nuget packages.config), and the findings above are real and complete for them. nuget was not scanned (nuget: the solution did not restore on the analyzer's .NET SDK (an SDK/target-framework/restore mismatch, common for an older codebase), so there was no restored dependency graph to scan), so this is not the whole dependency surface and the result is reported at reduced confidence.
What it measures: Whether anyone still has living knowledge of each file, or it has been orphaned — last understood long ago by someone now gone quiet. The sibling of the bus factor: D16 asks who owns it, D34 asks whether anyone still knows it.
Method: File orphaning as total living-knowledge decay below one focused-commit's worth within a year, computed per-file from the D16 decay model. Exhaustive, deterministic over fixed history.
Every significant source file has living knowledge — recently and meaningfully worked. Counted over 188 of the 297 production source files in this repository: the rest are under the ~2,400-byte size floor this dimension measures over.
What it measures: Whether files that change together actually belong together — pairs that repeatedly co-change in git history despite having no explicit code dependency, surfacing the hidden/logical coupling (and boundaries in the wrong place) a static scan can't see.
Method: Pairwise co-occurrence over the per-commit file sets in git history (production source only — tests and generated dropped): Degree-of-Coupling = shared ÷ min individual revisions, reported above noise floors (each file ≥10 revisions, ≥5 shared commits, ≥50% strength); sweeping commits excluded. Deterministic over fixed history.
Coverage: Population: PRODUCTION source files only — test and generated files are dropped before pairing, so a class co-changing with its own test (trivially ~100%) can't drown the real production↔production coupling. Pairs ranked by Degree-of-Coupling. A non-source file is never a coupling PARTICIPANT either: documentation, schemas, config and data files are dropped with the rest, so a code↔docs pair — a command and the reference page that restates it — is not reported however strongly the two co-change; nor is coupling that runs THROUGH a build step or config file.
What it measures: Whether any dependency the repository declares is published as MALICIOUS rather than merely vulnerable — a package that is an attacker's work, in any ecosystem osv-scanner reads. Scored apart from D30 because the answer is binary: there is no safe version to upgrade to, and the fix is to remove the package and rotate every credential it could have read.
Method: The same dependency scan D30 reads, partitioned on the scanner's own classification rather than rescanned: a row is MALICIOUS when its id is in the `MAL-` space (the ossf/malicious-packages feed) OR its `database_specific.cwe_ids` carries `CWE-506` ("Embedded Malicious Code"). Both channels are structural; the summary text is deliberately NOT read, because a malicious-package record whose summary says only "Critical severity vulnerability" is a real shape ([GHSA redacted]) and a text matcher misses it. Scored BINARY: any surviving row is 0, whatever its severity and however many CVEs sit beside it — a hostile dependency is not a quantity. Applicability and degradation are D30's: NotApplicable only when no ecosystem is readable, and an unscannable ecosystem degrades rather than reading clean. SCORED, not informational.
Other · Architecture — How the codebase splits by code ROLE — domain, application, infrastructure, test, generated. The significance map behind the knowledge/coupling weighting, and a DDD signal in its own right: a thin domain core under fat infrastructure is the anemic-domain smell, quantified. How each file's role is decided, because the split is only as good as that: a generated name or a build-output tree makes it Generated, a test project makes it Test, and otherwise the file's NAMESPACE and PATH words are matched against fixed vocabularies in a fixed ORDER — domain, then infrastructure, then application — so a file whose words hit two layers is counted under the earlier one. A production file matching none of them counts as application, so that share reads 'application or unclassified' rather than a measured application layer. Roles come from naming convention, never from what the code does. On this repository the split was taken from the source tree on disk rather than from a loaded .NET workspace, so a file's role is decided by its PATH segments alone — no declared namespace was available to add to the evidence — and generated output is excluded from the census entirely rather than counted as a generated share.
Method: Roslyn line-count by code ROLE: every source file classified Domain/Application/Infrastructure/Test/Generated by namespace + path convention (the shared CodeRoleClassifier), then significant lines summed per role. Deterministic; the advisory score is the business-logic (domain+application) share of production code.
Coverage: Population: ALL source files, each bucketed into ONE of five roles (Domain/Application/Infrastructure/Test/Generated) by namespace + path convention — a file whose layer isn't named in the convention falls to Application (the neutral default), and the split is line-count, not semantic depth or business value.
What to do
The domain core is a small share of production code, but most of the rest matched no layer vocabulary at all — so this is not yet an anemic-domain finding. The namespace/path convention could not place that code, which makes the composition above a statement about the naming, not about the design. Name the layers (or check that the repository's conventions differ from the ones this check knows) before reading a thin domain into it.
Other · Architecture — Whether the project-reference graph is acyclic (cycles block independent build/deploy and signal eroding boundaries).
Method: Project reference cycles via elementary-DFS over real .csproj references, using the engine shared with D5/D7; cyclic versus acyclic. Exhaustive, deterministic.
Other · Architecture — Whether dependencies point inward (Domain ← Application ← Infrastructure/Web) — the clean-architecture dependency rule, checked across the project graph.
Method: Layer violations by name-segment inference (Domain/Core to Application to Infrastructure/Web) over the project-reference graph. Exhaustive over all projects, deterministic.
Other · Architecture — Whether the codebase has a recognisable, scale-appropriate structure (a named architectural style, or modular enough for its size) rather than being an ad-hoc ball of mud.
Method: Roslyn plus csproj analysis: architecture style detection (DDD, clean, vertical-slice, CQRS) and structure fitness for repo size. Deterministic.
~50.9k production LoC (342 types) across 1 project(s) / 10 namespace(s) with no recognised architectural style or layering — at this size, deliberate module boundaries would help. No DDD/clean/vertical-slice/CQRS/transaction-script organisation was detected — code is likely organised ad hoc, which makes change and onboarding harder as it grows.
What to do
Introduce deliberate module boundaries — by feature (vertical slices) if your team prefers, or by layer (domain/application/infrastructure). Even splitting into a few cohesive projects with a clear dependency direction would help.
Other · Code Health — Unreviewed-generation residue: shipped members still throwing NotImplementedException, and placeholder string literals left in non-test, non-generated code. Scored as a quality signature, never as a claim about authorship.
Method: Roslyn syntax scan: NotImplementedException throws and placeholder string literals in non-test, non-generated shipped code. Deterministic, code-shape signature.
Maturity · Maturity — Whether the repo and its projects have a README, and whether it's substantive and current.
Method: Filesystem scan: README presence, word count, and headings for depth; git history for staleness. Exhaustive across root and project dirs, deterministic.
The root README is 53 words, against a bar of 120. Of the three newcomer-critical sections this check looks for by heading, it found no a build/run or getting-started section, no a testing section, no an architecture or project-map section. Sections are matched on HEADING text only, so material written under a heading this check does not recognise — or with no heading at all — is not seen and this row may understate what the document covers.
What to do
Expand the README with getting-started, architecture overview and a project map.
Add a build/run (quick start) section to the root README — the first thing a newcomer needs.
Explain in the README how to run the tests. Add a section called Testing to the README in the repository's top folder, saying how to run the test suite.
Add an 'Architecture' / 'How it works' section to the root README — the high-level shape.
Maturity · Maturity — Whether key decisions (ADRs) and the high-level shape (C4/diagrams) are written down.
Method: Filesystem scan: ADR folder/naming conventions or content, plus Mermaid/PlantUML/C4/architecture.md discovery. Exhaustive, deterministic.
No Architecture Decision Records found — no conventional ADR directory, no numbered `NNNN-title` documents in any markup this check reads, and nothing ADR-shaped by content. Design rationale recorded elsewhere (a design-notes tree, a mailing list, pull-request discussion) is not visible to this check and is not re-findable per decision, so a future maintainer cannot ask why one choice was made and get an answer.
No C4/Structurizr/PlantUML/Mermaid/Graphviz/D2 diagram, no drawn diagram named for the architecture, no file named `architecture` or `design` in any markup this check reads, and nothing in the README, docs or contributor guides that announces the shape — no `## Architecture` heading, no "architecture overview"/"high-level design" phrasing, no "the architecture is …" introduction, no guided code tour. A shape laid out in prose that never names itself as the architecture is not visible to this check, and neither is one kept outside the repository, so this row reports the absence of a re-findable shape document — not evidence that nobody wrote the shape down.
What to do
Record your significant design decisions. Write one short document per decision, giving its date, the situation, the decision and its consequences, and keep them together with your other design documents. A docs/adr folder with each file named by number and title is the easiest place to find them.
Add a C4 context/container diagram (Structurizr, PlantUML or Mermaid) or an architecture.md overview.
Maturity · Maturity — Whether the repo is organised deliberately — src/test separation and consistent project naming.
Method: Filesystem scan: src/test folder separation and namespace-prefix consistency (majority RootNamespace agreement). Exhaustive across projects, deterministic.
Production code isn't grouped under a src/ folder — it all sits under EUD Editor 3/ alongside the root build files, so the conventional src/ boundary between the product and its tooling isn't drawn.
What to do
Group production code under src/ (or split deliberately, e.g. backend/ + frontend/) so production and tooling code aren't mixed at the root.
Do you agree with this assessment?
P1 · CI/CD gates0.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified
Readiness · Readiness — Whether an automated pipeline builds and tests every change.
Method: Filesystem scan: CI workflow files (.github/workflows, .gitlab-ci.yml, etc.) for build and test stages. Exhaustive, deterministic.
No CI workflow found (.github/workflows, azure-pipelines.yml, .gitlab-ci.yml, …) — changes aren't gated by an automated build/test.
What to do
Add a CI workflow that builds and runs the test suite on every push/PR.
Do you agree with this assessment?
P2 · Observability0.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified
Readiness · Readiness — Whether the code is diagnosable in production — structured logging, tracing/metrics, health checks.
No logging or diagnostics emission found. This repository ships a binary its users launch rather than a service you operate, so there is no operator to page — but when a run fails on a user's machine, neither they nor you have anything to read.
What to do
Write a diagnostic trail the user can hand back with a bug report: a log file under the platform's per-user data directory, switchable with a `--verbose`/`--debug` flag. Start with the `catch` blocks that emit nothing — a discarded exception is the failure the user cannot describe and you cannot reproduce.
For more than a log file, an `ActivitySource`/`EventSource` the user can switch on gives you a structured trace to attach to a bug report. A health-check endpoint does not apply here: nothing orchestrates or load-balances a binary the user launches.
Readiness · Readiness — Whether SAST, secret/dependency scanning and performance benchmarking are wired in (presence, not runtime).
Method: Filesystem scan: SAST configuration, dependency-update automation, secret scanning, and a benchmark harness or benchmark step — in this repository's own ecosystem. Exhaustive, deterministic.
No static application security testing detected. For this repository's stack, add a Roslyn security analyzer package referenced from the project (the analyzer packages do analyse VB.NET), plus gitleaks for committed secrets — CodeQL has no VB.NET extractor, so its csharp pack would extract nothing from this tree and then report it clean — this repository has no CI pipeline yet, so run it locally to clear the existing findings, then make it a step of the first workflow you add so a regression fails the build. What was searched, so you can tell an absence from a miss: the 0 CI workflow file(s) in this repository, and the scanner and linter configuration checked in beside them. A scan that runs outside CI, one configured in your forge's web UI rather than in a committed file, or a tool whose name is none of those this check carries, is not seen — if that is your case the row is wrong, and saying so is more useful than adding a second scanner.
What to do
Run what this repository's stack ships: a Roslyn security analyzer package referenced from the project (the analyzer packages do analyse VB.NET), plus gitleaks for committed secrets — CodeQL has no VB.NET extractor, so its csharp pack would extract nothing from this tree and then report it clean — locally for now, since there is no CI pipeline here yet, and as a step of the first workflow you add so a security regression fails the build instead of landing.
Enable Dependabot/Renovate or a dependency-review gate.
Add gitleaks/trufflehog in CI to block PRs that introduce committed secrets.
Readiness · Readiness — Whether releases are traceable — a maintained changelog and explicit version stamping.
Method: Filesystem scan: changelog file presence and version tags in csproj or git tags. Exhaustive, deterministic.
No CHANGELOG/HISTORY/RELEASES file — what shipped when isn't easy to reconstruct for support or audit. (Versioning/tagging makes releases traceable, but a changelog records the what.)
What to do
Keep a changelog (e.g. Keep-a-Changelog) recording what shipped in each release.
Do you agree with this assessment?
X28 · Index access outside its own emptiness guard10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged
Other · Code Health — Whether a condition that tests a value for emptiness indexes that same value only where the test holds — an `||` written one parenthesis too far to the left leaves an index access outside the guard beside it, so the empty case the guard exists to anticipate reaches the index and throws.
Method: Roslyn syntax only, no semantic model: the OUTERMOST `&&`/`||` of every boolean condition, read for a symbol the condition tests for emptiness (`string.IsNullOrEmpty`/`IsNullOrWhiteSpace`, a `Length`/`Count` comparison against a literal, `Any()`, a `Length`/`Count` pattern, or a comparison against `""`) and ALSO indexes. Each `symbol[...]` access is placed by a boolean-reachability walk from the access up to the outermost connective: an access is COVERED when some enclosing step has it in the right operand and the left operand, under the truth value that step forces, proves the symbol non-empty — a recursion over `&&`/`||` whose true- and false-directions are asymmetric. A finding needs BOTH an uncovered access and a covered one on the same symbol in the same condition, which is the agreeing twin that separates a misplaced parenthesis from an unrelated length test. Bare index accesses with no emptiness test in the condition are neither counted nor reported; a non-identifier receiver and a lambda nested inside the condition are outside the population. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.
Do you agree with this assessment?
Reference — by lens
The score is the rank-weighted fold of these lenses (worst-heaviest), each including its meta-dimensions; a lens with a Critical contributor is capped at Fair (its band reads "gated by …") and is never the strongest area however high its average.
Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Unscored — 1 check(s) recorded observations but carry no score
These checks ran and found something, but they do not carry a score — either by design (an advisory check reports evidence rather than grading it) or because they could not be scored here. They are excluded from the score for that reason, not because there was nothing to see.
SC1 Supply-chain hygiene — 1 observation(s) recorded · Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
Not evidenced — 5 control(s) we could not find positive evidence for
These checks grade a working control, and the repository shows no evidence of one. That is deliberately not scored as a zero: a repository cannot show an ops runbook, a database TTL or an infrastructure-side audit log, so absence of evidence here is not evidence the control is missing. It is also not a statement that the check is irrelevant to this codebase — the thing it grades applies; we just could not see it. Excluded from the score either way.
C3 Audit Trail — Not assessed: these audit controls are read from a source model (declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names, guard methods) that was not loaded for this repository — because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. Absence of an idiom this check recognises is NOT evidence that this repository lacks audit controls: it may implement them entirely in its own ecosystem. This is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
C4 Data Retention — Not assessed: these retention controls are read from a source model (declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names, guard methods) that was not loaded for this repository — because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. Absence of an idiom this check recognises is NOT evidence that this repository lacks retention controls: it may implement them entirely in its own ecosystem. This is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
C5 Data-Subject Rights — Not assessed: these data-subject rights controls are read from a source model (declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names, guard methods) that was not loaded for this repository — because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. Absence of an idiom this check recognises is NOT evidence that this repository lacks data-subject rights controls: it may implement them entirely in its own ecosystem. This is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
P4 Deployment & Rollback — not evidenced — no deploy/rollback/approval signal in the repo; absence of evidence is not evidence of a manual release
P5 DR & Backup — not evidenced — repo shows no backup/RTO/RPO controls; absence of evidence is not evidence of a working control
Not included — 79 check(s) not relevant to this codebase
These checks had nothing to measure here (no tests, no git history, the codebase is small, or the architecture style doesn't apply), so they're omitted above rather than scored low.
AC1 Text alternatives — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
AC2 Forms & labels — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
AC3 Page structure — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
AC4 Keyboard semantics — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
AC5 ARIA correctness — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
AC6 Visual & motion safety — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
AC7 A11y enforcement — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
AX1 Captive dependencies — no DI registrations detected
AX2 Stateful singletons — no singleton implementations detected
AX6 Interface segregation — no public interfaces
AX7 Slice cohesion — not applicable — not a vertical-slice architecture
AX8 Test isolation — no test/production split to check
AX9 CQS / query purity — no CQRS query handlers detected — query purity is not applicable to this codebase
AXB1 Runtime evidence locked — no reproducible boot — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
C1 Data Protection — Not assessed: these personal data controls are read from a source model (declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names, guard methods) that was not loaded for this repository — because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. Absence of an idiom this check recognises is NOT evidence that this repository lacks personal data controls: it may implement them entirely in its own ecosystem. This is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
C2 Access Controls — Not assessed: these authorization controls are read from a source model (declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names, guard methods) that was not loaded for this repository — because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. Absence of an idiom this check recognises is NOT evidence that this repository lacks authorization controls: it may implement them entirely in its own ecosystem. This is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
D10 Test Quality — ~336 lines of test source are present (.vb) but no test cases reached the test census for this repository — no test root we could resolve declared them, or the files we read declare no cases in a test framework we recognise — so skipped/assertion-free tests couldn't be counted. Not scored — this is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository.
D11 Test Reliability — Test reliability not included — the .NET workspace loaded no .vb test project
D12 Dependency Hygiene — Dependency hygiene not measured
D16 Bus Factor — single-maintainer repository — bus factor is not applicable
D19 Documentation Quality — No runnable or published unit to look for an example in, and no multi-project root README to look for a map in; the other documentation kinds are withheld (see the gaps), so documentation quality is not applicable here.
D21 Naming Consistency — Naming consistency is measured on C# only; Python, Visual Basic not measured.
D22 Internal API Consistency — No intentionally-exposed public API to evaluate for consistency.
D23 Boundary Type-Coupling — single shared-core project — no cross-context coupling to assess
D25 ADR Conformance — no ADRs to check
D31 IaC & Container Security — No Infrastructure-as-Code or container manifests found (Dockerfile, Docker Compose, Terraform, Kubernetes/Helm, CloudFormation, ARM, Bicep, Ansible); nothing to scan.
D32 Data Compliance (PII/GDPR) — No personal data was found crossing a boundary the PII/GDPR ruleset checks — nothing written to a log or console sink, placed in a URL or query string, or persisted to browser storage. That is a clean result for the LEAK surface only: this ruleset detects personal data escaping, it does not inventory the personal data a repository holds, so it is not evidence that this repository has no personal-data surface. The personal-data map (Appendix C) and the C1-C5 compliance cards are what speak to that.
D36 Supply-chain Provenance & Signing — No CI/build pipeline found (.github/.forgejo/.gitea workflows, .circleci, .buildkite, .woodpecker, .teamcity, .gitlab-ci.yml, .travis.yml, bitbucket-pipelines.yml, .drone.yml, .cirrus.yml, .woodpecker.yml, appveyor.yml, azure-pipelines*.yml, .pipelines/, .vsts-ci/, .azuredevops/, Jenkinsfile); there is no build to attest provenance for.
D37 Vulnerability-disclosure Policy — No vulnerability-disclosure policy file found (SECURITY.md/.markdown/.rst/.txt at root or under .github/.forgejo/.gitea/docs, .well-known/security.txt). A coordinated-disclosure policy may live off-repo, so this is not evidenced rather than failed.
D39 IL Efficiency — IL not measured — the target did not build
D40 Network Egress Confinement — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; network egress policy is a cluster-native control that may live at the platform/firewall layer, so there is nothing to assess here.
D41 Kernel & Syscall Confinement — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; seccomp/AppArmor/SELinux confinement is a workload-level control, so there is nothing to assess here.
D42 Runtime Threat Enforcement — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; runtime threat-detection and admission-control policy are cluster-level controls, so there is nothing to assess here.
D44 Platform End-of-Life — Platform end-of-life not assessed — this repository declares no platform this pass reads
D7 Architectural Integrity — no checkable ADRs and no dependency cycles — architectural integrity not assessed
D8 Code Coverage — Coverage NOT MEASURED: `--collect:"XPlat Code Coverage"` names a data collector that ships in the `coverlet.collector` package, and this repository wires up none — no test project references it and no runsettings declares one. The absence of coverage here is therefore not evidence about the suite or about our analyzer environment: without a collector, `--collect` produces nothing even from a suite that builds and passes. Add a `coverlet.collector` PackageReference to the test project(s) (or commit the Cobertura/OpenCover/lcov report your CI produces) and real coverage will be measured. It is excluded from the score rather than counted as a near-zero defect.
D9 Test Distribution — Test source is present (.vb) but no test cases reached the test census for this repository — no test root we could resolve declared them, or the files we read declare no cases in a test framework we recognise — so its unit/integration/BDD/E2E split couldn't be counted. Not scored — this is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository.
DM1 Domain Modelling — not scored — this repository shows none of the 3 signals this lens looks for
ED1 Event-Driven — not scored — this repository shows none of the 3 signals this lens looks for
ED5 Idempotency — no mutating command handlers or message consumers detected — idempotency check not applicable
ES1 Event Sourcing — not scored — this repository shows none of the 3 signals this lens looks for
IC1 Incompleteness & stubs — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
M4 Documentation accuracy — Not applicable: the 2 current-state document(s) make no claim of a kind M4 checks.
P12 CI test-gate honesty — no CI workflow found
P7 Outbound HTTP resilience — not applicable — this isn't a service/API/worker
P8 Schema migrations — no EF Core usage detected
P9 Domain vs controller coverage — no coverage report found on disk — produce a coverage report in a standard format (Cobertura — `dotnet test --collect:"XPlat Code Coverage"` with a `coverlet.collector` PackageReference) and commit it — a hosted scan measures a clone of the repository, so a report that exists only in a working tree, a CI runner's or your own, never reaches it; the artefact is commonly gitignored, so `git add -f` that one file (or un-ignore its path) and commit it alongside the code it measures, or wire coverage collection into CI, to enable this cross-layer check
PF1 Benchmark discipline — Not applicable: no benchmark suite was found. This check searched for a BenchmarkDotNet reference in an .fsproj or .vbproj, and for a `*benchmark*` script that this repository's CI runs. Benchmarks are credited as a bonus, so their absence is neither scored nor deducted.
PF2 Allocation hygiene — Not applicable: allocation awareness is rated where code engineers for it — at least 400 production lines that ship benchmarks or already use allocation-aware idioms (8 or more). This repository's Visual Basic code has 64,846 production line(s), 0 such use(s) and no benchmarks, so there is no allocation work to rate. The card is reward-only: its absence costs nothing.
PF3 Async & latency hygiene — Not applicable: this repository declares no async functions, so there is no asynchronous code for a blocking call to stall.
S1 Web-Security Posture — Not assessed: these web-security controls are read from a source model (declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names, guard methods) that was not loaded for this repository — because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. Absence of an idiom this check recognises is NOT evidence that this repository lacks web-security controls: it may implement them entirely in its own ecosystem. This is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
X1 Async correctness — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
X10 Duplicated predicate — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
X12 Unreachable branch — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X13 Undrained process stream — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X14 Bypassable address classification — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X15 Unvalidated length from an untrusted reader — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X16 Unfloored truncation loop — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X17 Uncapped recursion over a caller-supplied document — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X18 Disposal-pattern correctness — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X19 Unrestored process-global state — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X2 Cancellation propagation — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
X20 Mistyped argument guard — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X21 Side-effecting pattern guard — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X22 Contradicted release guard — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X23 Unguarded diagnostic materialisation — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X24 Document value interpolated into markup unescaped — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X25 Inert configuration knob — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X26 Unsynchronised callback handoff — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X27 Collection changed while being enumerated — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X29 Per-element action decided by a fixed element — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X3 Exception handling — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
X30 Support guard that admits what it rejects — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X32 Type resolved by simple name across every loaded assembly — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X4 Structured logging — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
X5 Nullable reference types — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
X6 Hand-rolled structured-format parsing — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
X7 Silent fallback defaults — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
X9 Subsumed condition operand — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
Appendix A — Findings (grouped)
The findings behind the scores, grouped by severity, then by dimension and kind. The high-severity issues are enumerated in full below; items per group are capped at 25 with any overflow stated explicitly per group, never silently truncated. The complete machine-readable list of every finding (all severities) is the companion findings.md in this report's bundle.
EmptyCatchBlock EUD Editor 3/Class/Binding/DatBinding.vb:144— empty catch block — the error is discarded with nothing recorded, so a failure here leaves no trace anywhere. Record it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, or let it propagate. Where swallowing one specific failure really is correct — as it often is on a teardown/dispose path where throwing would mask the original failure — catch exactly that exception type and write down WHY in a comment on the catch. Both are needed: a comment on a catch-all still swallows every failure nobody anticipated, and a note that only restates the swallow ("ignored", "do nothing") is read as no explanation at all.
EmptyCatchBlock EUD Editor 3/Class/Binding/ExtraDatBinding.vb:276— empty catch block — the error is discarded with nothing recorded, so a failure here leaves no trace anywhere. Record it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, or let it propagate. Where swallowing one specific failure really is correct — as it often is on a teardown/dispose path where throwing would mask the original failure — catch exactly that exception type and write down WHY in a comment on the catch. Both are needed: a comment on a catch-all still swallows every failure nobody anticipated, and a note that only restates the swallow ("ignored", "do nothing") is read as no explanation at all.
EmptyCatchBlock EUD Editor 3/Class/BulidData/WriteTriggerEditor.vb:48— empty catch block — the error is discarded with nothing recorded, so a failure here leaves no trace anywhere. Record it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, or let it propagate. Where swallowing one specific failure really is correct — as it often is on a teardown/dispose path where throwing would mask the original failure — catch exactly that exception type and write down WHY in a comment on the catch. Both are needed: a comment on a catch-all still swallows every failure nobody anticipated, and a note that only restates the swallow ("ignored", "do nothing") is read as no explanation at all.
EmptyCatchBlock EUD Editor 3/Class/BulidData/WriteTriggerEditor.vb:63— empty catch block — the error is discarded with nothing recorded, so a failure here leaves no trace anywhere. Record it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, or let it propagate. Where swallowing one specific failure really is correct — as it often is on a teardown/dispose path where throwing would mask the original failure — catch exactly that exception type and write down WHY in a comment on the catch. Both are needed: a comment on a catch-all still swallows every failure nobody anticipated, and a note that only restates the swallow ("ignored", "do nothing") is read as no explanation at all.
EmptyCatchBlock EUD Editor 3/Class/Data/CButtonData.vb:250— empty catch block — the error is discarded with nothing recorded, so a failure here leaves no trace anywhere. Record it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, or let it propagate. Where swallowing one specific failure really is correct — as it often is on a teardown/dispose path where throwing would mask the original failure — catch exactly that exception type and write down WHY in a comment on the catch. Both are needed: a comment on a catch-all still swallows every failure nobody anticipated, and a note that only restates the swallow ("ignored", "do nothing") is read as no explanation at all.
EmptyCatchBlock EUD Editor 3/Class/Data/ProjectData/BackUpManager.vb:29— empty catch block — the error is discarded with nothing recorded, so a failure here leaves no trace anywhere. Record it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, or let it propagate. Where swallowing one specific failure really is correct — as it often is on a teardown/dispose path where throwing would mask the original failure — catch exactly that exception type and write down WHY in a comment on the catch. Both are needed: a comment on a catch-all still swallows every failure nobody anticipated, and a note that only restates the swallow ("ignored", "do nothing") is read as no explanation at all.
EmptyCatchBlock EUD Editor 3/Class/Data/ProjectData/ProjectData.vb:658— empty catch block — the error is discarded with nothing recorded, so a failure here leaves no trace anywhere. Record it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, or let it propagate. Where swallowing one specific failure really is correct — as it often is on a teardown/dispose path where throwing would mask the original failure — catch exactly that exception type and write down WHY in a comment on the catch. Both are needed: a comment on a catch-all still swallows every failure nobody anticipated, and a note that only restates the swallow ("ignored", "do nothing") is read as no explanation at all.
EmptyCatchBlock EUD Editor 3/Class/DataManager.vb:277— empty catch block — the error is discarded with nothing recorded, so a failure here leaves no trace anywhere. Record it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, or let it propagate. Where swallowing one specific failure really is correct — as it often is on a teardown/dispose path where throwing would mask the original failure — catch exactly that exception type and write down WHY in a comment on the catch. Both are needed: a comment on a catch-all still swallows every failure nobody anticipated, and a note that only restates the swallow ("ignored", "do nothing") is read as no explanation at all.
EmptyCatchBlock EUD Editor 3/Class/DataManager.vb:369— empty catch block — the error is discarded with nothing recorded, so a failure here leaves no trace anywhere. Record it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, or let it propagate. Where swallowing one specific failure really is correct — as it often is on a teardown/dispose path where throwing would mask the original failure — catch exactly that exception type and write down WHY in a comment on the catch. Both are needed: a comment on a catch-all still swallows every failure nobody anticipated, and a note that only restates the swallow ("ignored", "do nothing") is read as no explanation at all.
EmptyCatchBlock EUD Editor 3/Class/GRP/GRPBox.vb:108— empty catch block — the error is discarded with nothing recorded, so a failure here leaves no trace anywhere. Record it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, or let it propagate. Where swallowing one specific failure really is correct — as it often is on a teardown/dispose path where throwing would mask the original failure — catch exactly that exception type and write down WHY in a comment on the catch. Both are needed: a comment on a catch-all still swallows every failure nobody anticipated, and a note that only restates the swallow ("ignored", "do nothing") is read as no explanation at all.
EmptyCatchBlock EUD Editor 3/Class/GRP/GRPBox.vb:125— empty catch block — the error is discarded with nothing recorded, so a failure here leaves no trace anywhere. Record it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, or let it propagate. Where swallowing one specific failure really is correct — as it often is on a teardown/dispose path where throwing would mask the original failure — catch exactly that exception type and write down WHY in a comment on the catch. Both are needed: a comment on a catch-all still swallows every failure nobody anticipated, and a note that only restates the swallow ("ignored", "do nothing") is read as no explanation at all.
EmptyCatchBlock EUD Editor 3/Class/GRP/GRPBox.vb:219— empty catch block — the error is discarded with nothing recorded, so a failure here leaves no trace anywhere. Record it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, or let it propagate. Where swallowing one specific failure really is correct — as it often is on a teardown/dispose path where throwing would mask the original failure — catch exactly that exception type and write down WHY in a comment on the catch. Both are needed: a comment on a catch-all still swallows every failure nobody anticipated, and a note that only restates the swallow ("ignored", "do nothing") is read as no explanation at all.
EmptyCatchBlock REDACTED:59— empty catch block — the error is discarded with nothing recorded, so a failure here leaves no trace anywhere. Record it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, or let it propagate. Where swallowing one specific failure really is correct — as it often is on a teardown/dispose path where throwing would mask the original failure — catch exactly that exception type and write down WHY in a comment on the catch. Both are needed: a comment on a catch-all still swallows every failure nobody anticipated, and a note that only restates the swallow ("ignored", "do nothing") is read as no explanation at all.
EmptyCatchBlock REDACTED:66— empty catch block — the error is discarded with nothing recorded, so a failure here leaves no trace anywhere. Record it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, or let it propagate. Where swallowing one specific failure really is correct — as it often is on a teardown/dispose path where throwing would mask the original failure — catch exactly that exception type and write down WHY in a comment on the catch. Both are needed: a comment on a catch-all still swallows every failure nobody anticipated, and a note that only restates the swallow ("ignored", "do nothing") is read as no explanation at all.
EmptyCatchBlock REDACTED:72— empty catch block — the error is discarded with nothing recorded, so a failure here leaves no trace anywhere. Record it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, or let it propagate. Where swallowing one specific failure really is correct — as it often is on a teardown/dispose path where throwing would mask the original failure — catch exactly that exception type and write down WHY in a comment on the catch. Both are needed: a comment on a catch-all still swallows every failure nobody anticipated, and a note that only restates the swallow ("ignored", "do nothing") is read as no explanation at all.
EmptyCatchBlock REDACTED:88— empty catch block — the error is discarded with nothing recorded, so a failure here leaves no trace anywhere. Record it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, or let it propagate. Where swallowing one specific failure really is correct — as it often is on a teardown/dispose path where throwing would mask the original failure — catch exactly that exception type and write down WHY in a comment on the catch. Both are needed: a comment on a catch-all still swallows every failure nobody anticipated, and a note that only restates the swallow ("ignored", "do nothing") is read as no explanation at all.
EmptyCatchBlock REDACTED:95— empty catch block — the error is discarded with nothing recorded, so a failure here leaves no trace anywhere. Record it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, or let it propagate. Where swallowing one specific failure really is correct — as it often is on a teardown/dispose path where throwing would mask the original failure — catch exactly that exception type and write down WHY in a comment on the catch. Both are needed: a comment on a catch-all still swallows every failure nobody anticipated, and a note that only restates the swallow ("ignored", "do nothing") is read as no explanation at all.
EmptyCatchBlock REDACTED:101— empty catch block — the error is discarded with nothing recorded, so a failure here leaves no trace anywhere. Record it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, or let it propagate. Where swallowing one specific failure really is correct — as it often is on a teardown/dispose path where throwing would mask the original failure — catch exactly that exception type and write down WHY in a comment on the catch. Both are needed: a comment on a catch-all still swallows every failure nobody anticipated, and a note that only restates the swallow ("ignored", "do nothing") is read as no explanation at all.
EmptyCatchBlock REDACTED:116— empty catch block — the error is discarded with nothing recorded, so a failure here leaves no trace anywhere. Record it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, or let it propagate. Where swallowing one specific failure really is correct — as it often is on a teardown/dispose path where throwing would mask the original failure — catch exactly that exception type and write down WHY in a comment on the catch. Both are needed: a comment on a catch-all still swallows every failure nobody anticipated, and a note that only restates the swallow ("ignored", "do nothing") is read as no explanation at all.
EmptyCatchBlock REDACTED:122— empty catch block — the error is discarded with nothing recorded, so a failure here leaves no trace anywhere. Record it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, or let it propagate. Where swallowing one specific failure really is correct — as it often is on a teardown/dispose path where throwing would mask the original failure — catch exactly that exception type and write down WHY in a comment on the catch. Both are needed: a comment on a catch-all still swallows every failure nobody anticipated, and a note that only restates the swallow ("ignored", "do nothing") is read as no explanation at all.
EmptyCatchBlock REDACTED:127— empty catch block — the error is discarded with nothing recorded, so a failure here leaves no trace anywhere. Record it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, or let it propagate. Where swallowing one specific failure really is correct — as it often is on a teardown/dispose path where throwing would mask the original failure — catch exactly that exception type and write down WHY in a comment on the catch. Both are needed: a comment on a catch-all still swallows every failure nobody anticipated, and a note that only restates the swallow ("ignored", "do nothing") is read as no explanation at all.
EmptyCatchBlock REDACTED:146— empty catch block — the error is discarded with nothing recorded, so a failure here leaves no trace anywhere. Record it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, or let it propagate. Where swallowing one specific failure really is correct — as it often is on a teardown/dispose path where throwing would mask the original failure — catch exactly that exception type and write down WHY in a comment on the catch. Both are needed: a comment on a catch-all still swallows every failure nobody anticipated, and a note that only restates the swallow ("ignored", "do nothing") is read as no explanation at all.
EmptyCatchBlock REDACTED:151— empty catch block — the error is discarded with nothing recorded, so a failure here leaves no trace anywhere. Record it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, or let it propagate. Where swallowing one specific failure really is correct — as it often is on a teardown/dispose path where throwing would mask the original failure — catch exactly that exception type and write down WHY in a comment on the catch. Both are needed: a comment on a catch-all still swallows every failure nobody anticipated, and a note that only restates the swallow ("ignored", "do nothing") is read as no explanation at all.
EmptyCatchBlock REDACTED:164— empty catch block — the error is discarded with nothing recorded, so a failure here leaves no trace anywhere. Record it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, or let it propagate. Where swallowing one specific failure really is correct — as it often is on a teardown/dispose path where throwing would mask the original failure — catch exactly that exception type and write down WHY in a comment on the catch. Both are needed: a comment on a catch-all still swallows every failure nobody anticipated, and a note that only restates the swallow ("ignored", "do nothing") is read as no explanation at all.
EmptyCatchBlock REDACTED:170— empty catch block — the error is discarded with nothing recorded, so a failure here leaves no trace anywhere. Record it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, or let it propagate. Where swallowing one specific failure really is correct — as it often is on a teardown/dispose path where throwing would mask the original failure — catch exactly that exception type and write down WHY in a comment on the catch. Both are needed: a comment on a catch-all still swallows every failure nobody anticipated, and a note that only restates the swallow ("ignored", "do nothing") is read as no explanation at all.
MethodTooLong: Parser.GetScriptBlock EUD Editor 3/Compiler/Parser/Parser.vb:579— MethodTooLong — GetScriptBlock runs 528 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 428 over it, 5.28× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
MethodTooLong: GUIScriptManager.GetItemScriptText EUD Editor 3/Class/TriggerEditor/GUIScriptEditor/GUIScriptManager.vb:233— MethodTooLong — GetItemScriptText runs 522 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 422 over it, 5.22× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
MethodTooLong: BuildData.GetMSQCLoaderEps EUD Editor 3/Class/BulidData/WriteSCAData.vb:129— MethodTooLong — GetMSQCLoaderEps runs 376 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 276 over it, 3.76× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
MethodTooLong: Lexical_Analyzer.DoWork EUD Editor 3/Compiler/Lexical Analyzer/Lexical Analyzer.vb:6— MethodTooLong — DoWork runs 350 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 250 over it, 3.50× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
MethodTooLong: CodeSelecter.ListCreateData EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/Field/CodeSelecter.xaml.vb:609— MethodTooLong — ListCreateData runs 349 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 249 over it, 3.49× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
MethodTooLong: Parser.Decoder EUD Editor 3/Compiler/Parser/Parser.vb:68— MethodTooLong — Decoder runs 311 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 211 over it, 3.11× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
MethodTooLong: ArgManager.GetArgList EUD Editor 3/Module/Tools/ArgManager.vb:5— MethodTooLong — GetArgList runs 255 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 155 over it, 2.55× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
MethodTooLong: GRPBox.Exec EUD Editor 3/Class/GRP/GRPBox.vb:82— MethodTooLong — Exec runs 253 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 153 over it, 2.53× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
MethodTooLong: TriggerEditValueSelecterWindow.ArgSelectBoxRefresh EUD Editor 3/Window/TriggerEditValueSelecterWindow.xaml.vb:261— MethodTooLong — ArgSelectBoxRefresh runs 253 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 153 over it, 2.53× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
MethodTooLong: ListSelecter.ListResetData EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/DataEditor/ListSelecter.xaml.vb:409— MethodTooLong — ListResetData runs 245 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 145 over it, 2.45× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
MethodTooLong: BuildData.GetSCAEps EUD Editor 3/Class/BulidData/WriteSCAData.vb:524— MethodTooLong — GetSCAEps runs 243 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 143 over it, 2.43× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
MethodTooLong: MacroManager.MacroApply EUD Editor 3/Class/MacroFunc/MacroManager.vb:184— MethodTooLong — MacroApply runs 234 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 134 over it, 2.34× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
MethodTooLong: CodeEditor.GetArgList EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/CodeEditor/funcLoader.vb:10— MethodTooLong — GetArgList runs 234 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 134 over it, 2.34× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
MethodTooLong: GUI_VarFuncUse.CrlInit EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/GUIEditorPage/Scripter/ScriptEditer/GUI_VarFuncUse.xaml.vb:17— MethodTooLong — CrlInit runs 219 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 119 over it, 2.19× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
MethodTooLong: TEGUIObjectSelecter.ToolBoxListRefresh EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/GUIEditorPage/TEGUIObjectSelecter.xaml.vb:106— MethodTooLong — ToolBoxListRefresh runs 219 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 119 over it, 2.19× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
MethodTooLong: CodeGrouping.CodeGrouping EUD Editor 3/Class/CodeGrouping.vb:80— MethodTooLong — CodeGrouping runs 204 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 104 over it, 2.04× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
MethodTooLong: GUI_Action_ArgSelecter.CrlInit EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/GUIEditorPage/Scripter/ScriptEditer/GUI_ActionValueSelect/GUI_Action_ArgSelecter.xaml.vb:37— MethodTooLong — CrlInit runs 189 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 89 over it, 1.89× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
MethodTooLong: CodeEditor.textEditor_KeyboardInput EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/CodeEditor/EnteredText.vb:10— MethodTooLong — textEditor_KeyboardInput runs 186 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 86 over it, 1.86× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
MethodTooLong: CIScript.playScript EUD Editor 3/Class/GRP/SCIScriptMoudle.vb:357— MethodTooLong — playScript runs 167 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 67 over it, 1.67× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
MethodTooLong: InputField.Init EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/Field/InputField.xaml.vb:187— MethodTooLong — Init runs 160 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 60 over it, 1.60× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
MethodTooLong: LagacySaveLoad.Load EUD Editor 3/EUDEditor2/SaveLoadClass/LagacySaveLoad.vb:33— MethodTooLong — Load runs 144 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 44 over it, 1.44× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
MethodTooLong: ClassicTriggerEditor.GetEpsText EUD Editor 3/Class/TriggerEditor/ClassicEditor/ClassicTriggerEditor.vb:141— MethodTooLong — GetEpsText runs 143 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 43 over it, 1.43× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
MethodTooLong: BGMPlayerConverter.BGMProcess EUD Editor 3/Window/BGMPlayerConverter.xaml.vb:32— MethodTooLong — BGMProcess runs 143 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 43 over it, 1.43× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
MethodTooLong: GUI_For.ResetControl EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/GUIEditorPage/Scripter/ScriptEditer/GUI_For.xaml.vb:162— MethodTooLong — ResetControl runs 142 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 42 over it, 1.42× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
MethodTooLong: ScriptBlock.GetTreeviewitem REDACTED:948— MethodTooLong — GetTreeviewitem runs 139 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 39 over it, 1.39× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
Low cohesion: ThemeControl (LCOM4 22) EUD Editor 3/Theme/ThemeControl.xaml.vb:5— ThemeControl's methods fall into 22 groups that share no field and call none of each other, against a bar of more than 3 for this run (LCOM4, configurable — your repository's bar is the one quoted here). Each group is a set of methods reachable from one another through shared fields or direct calls, so 22 groups means the type has that many internally-connected clusters with nothing tying them together. Types whose shape makes a high count expected — and which would otherwise dominate this list — are excluded before this row is raised, so this is a genuine split candidate rather than a metric reading. It is still a shape, not a defect: confirm the groups match responsibilities you can name before splitting.
Low cohesion: SettingWindows (LCOM4 17) EUD Editor 3/Window/SettingWindows.xaml.vb:4— SettingWindows's methods fall into 17 groups that share no field and call none of each other, against a bar of more than 3 for this run (LCOM4, configurable — your repository's bar is the one quoted here). Each group is a set of methods reachable from one another through shared fields or direct calls, so 17 groups means the type has that many internally-connected clusters with nothing tying them together. Types whose shape makes a high count expected — and which would otherwise dominate this list — are excluded before this row is raised, so this is a genuine split candidate rather than a metric reading. It is still a shape, not a defect: confirm the groups match responsibilities you can name before splitting.
Low cohesion: MacroManager (LCOM4 15) EUD Editor 3/Class/MacroFunc/MacroDefaultFunction.vb:1— MacroManager's methods fall into 15 groups that share no field and call none of each other, against a bar of more than 3 for this run (LCOM4, configurable — your repository's bar is the one quoted here). Each group is a set of methods reachable from one another through shared fields or direct calls, so 15 groups means the type has that many internally-connected clusters with nothing tying them together. Types whose shape makes a high count expected — and which would otherwise dominate this list — are excluded before this row is raised, so this is a genuine split candidate rather than a metric reading. It is still a shape, not a defect: confirm the groups match responsibilities you can name before splitting.
Low cohesion: GUIScriptManager (LCOM4 10) EUD Editor 3/Class/TriggerEditor/GUIScriptEditor/GUIScriptManager.vb:7— GUIScriptManager's methods fall into 10 groups that share no field and call none of each other, against a bar of more than 3 for this run (LCOM4, configurable — your repository's bar is the one quoted here). Each group is a set of methods reachable from one another through shared fields or direct calls, so 10 groups means the type has that many internally-connected clusters with nothing tying them together. Types whose shape makes a high count expected — and which would otherwise dominate this list — are excluded before this row is raised, so this is a genuine split candidate rather than a metric reading. It is still a shape, not a defect: confirm the groups match responsibilities you can name before splitting.
Low cohesion: MainWindowD (LCOM4 7) EUD Editor 3/MainWindow/MainWindowD.xaml.vb:9— MainWindowD's methods fall into 7 groups that share no field and call none of each other, against a bar of more than 3 for this run (LCOM4, configurable — your repository's bar is the one quoted here). Each group is a set of methods reachable from one another through shared fields or direct calls, so 7 groups means the type has that many internally-connected clusters with nothing tying them together. Types whose shape makes a high count expected — and which would otherwise dominate this list — are excluded before this row is raised, so this is a genuine split candidate rather than a metric reading. It is still a shape, not a defect: confirm the groups match responsibilities you can name before splitting.
Low cohesion: DataEditor (LCOM4 7) EUD Editor 3/Window/DataEditor.xaml.vb:4— DataEditor's methods fall into 7 groups that share no field and call none of each other, against a bar of more than 3 for this run (LCOM4, configurable — your repository's bar is the one quoted here). Each group is a set of methods reachable from one another through shared fields or direct calls, so 7 groups means the type has that many internally-connected clusters with nothing tying them together. Types whose shape makes a high count expected — and which would otherwise dominate this list — are excluded before this row is raised, so this is a genuine split candidate rather than a metric reading. It is still a shape, not a defect: confirm the groups match responsibilities you can name before splitting.
Low cohesion: ExtraDatFiles (LCOM4 6) EUD Editor 3/Class/ExtraData/ExtraDatFiles.vb:3— ExtraDatFiles's methods fall into 6 groups that share no field and call none of each other, against a bar of more than 3 for this run (LCOM4, configurable — your repository's bar is the one quoted here). Each group is a set of methods reachable from one another through shared fields or direct calls, so 6 groups means the type has that many internally-connected clusters with nothing tying them together. Types whose shape makes a high count expected — and which would otherwise dominate this list — are excluded before this row is raised, so this is a genuine split candidate rather than a metric reading. It is still a shape, not a defect: confirm the groups match responsibilities you can name before splitting.
Low cohesion: ButtonData (LCOM4 6) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/DataEditor/ButtonData.xaml.vb:3— ButtonData's methods fall into 6 groups that share no field and call none of each other, against a bar of more than 3 for this run (LCOM4, configurable — your repository's bar is the one quoted here). Each group is a set of methods reachable from one another through shared fields or direct calls, so 6 groups means the type has that many internally-connected clusters with nothing tying them together. Types whose shape makes a high count expected — and which would otherwise dominate this list — are excluded before this row is raised, so this is a genuine split candidate rather than a metric reading. It is still a shape, not a defect: confirm the groups match responsibilities you can name before splitting.
Low cohesion: TECTPage (LCOM4 6) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/ClassicTrigger/TECTPageFunc/AddTrigger.vb:1— TECTPage's methods fall into 6 groups that share no field and call none of each other, against a bar of more than 3 for this run (LCOM4, configurable — your repository's bar is the one quoted here). Each group is a set of methods reachable from one another through shared fields or direct calls, so 6 groups means the type has that many internally-connected clusters with nothing tying them together. Types whose shape makes a high count expected — and which would otherwise dominate this list — are excluded before this row is raised, so this is a genuine split candidate rather than a metric reading. It is still a shape, not a defect: confirm the groups match responsibilities you can name before splitting.
Low cohesion: TextEditorWindow (LCOM4 6) EUD Editor 3/Window/TextEditorWindow.xaml.vb:6— TextEditorWindow's methods fall into 6 groups that share no field and call none of each other, against a bar of more than 3 for this run (LCOM4, configurable — your repository's bar is the one quoted here). Each group is a set of methods reachable from one another through shared fields or direct calls, so 6 groups means the type has that many internally-connected clusters with nothing tying them together. Types whose shape makes a high count expected — and which would otherwise dominate this list — are excluded before this row is raised, so this is a genuine split candidate rather than a metric reading. It is still a shape, not a defect: confirm the groups match responsibilities you can name before splitting.
Low cohesion: TriggerEditor (LCOM4 5) EUD Editor 3/Window/TriggerEditor.xaml.vb:4— TriggerEditor's methods fall into 5 groups that share no field and call none of each other, against a bar of more than 3 for this run (LCOM4, configurable — your repository's bar is the one quoted here). Each group is a set of methods reachable from one another through shared fields or direct calls, so 5 groups means the type has that many internally-connected clusters with nothing tying them together. Types whose shape makes a high count expected — and which would otherwise dominate this list — are excluded before this row is raised, so this is a genuine split candidate rather than a metric reading. It is still a shape, not a defect: confirm the groups match responsibilities you can name before splitting.
Low cohesion: TriggerManager (LCOM4 4) EUD Editor 3/Class/TriggerEditor/TriggerFunction.vb:5— TriggerManager's methods fall into 4 groups that share no field and call none of each other, against a bar of more than 3 for this run (LCOM4, configurable — your repository's bar is the one quoted here). Each group is a set of methods reachable from one another through shared fields or direct calls, so 4 groups means the type has that many internally-connected clusters with nothing tying them together. Types whose shape makes a high count expected — and which would otherwise dominate this list — are excluded before this row is raised, so this is a genuine split candidate rather than a metric reading. It is still a shape, not a defect: confirm the groups match responsibilities you can name before splitting.
Low cohesion: CodeEditor (LCOM4 4) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/CodeEditor/CodeEditor.xaml.vb:5— CodeEditor's methods fall into 4 groups that share no field and call none of each other, against a bar of more than 3 for this run (LCOM4, configurable — your repository's bar is the one quoted here). Each group is a set of methods reachable from one another through shared fields or direct calls, so 4 groups means the type has that many internally-connected clusters with nothing tying them together. Types whose shape makes a high count expected — and which would otherwise dominate this list — are excluded before this row is raised, so this is a genuine split candidate rather than a metric reading. It is still a shape, not a defect: confirm the groups match responsibilities you can name before splitting.
Low cohesion: RequireListBox (LCOM4 4) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/Field/Require/RequireListBox.xaml.vb:4— RequireListBox's methods fall into 4 groups that share no field and call none of each other, against a bar of more than 3 for this run (LCOM4, configurable — your repository's bar is the one quoted here). Each group is a set of methods reachable from one another through shared fields or direct calls, so 4 groups means the type has that many internally-connected clusters with nothing tying them together. Types whose shape makes a high count expected — and which would otherwise dominate this list — are excluded before this row is raised, so this is a genuine split candidate rather than a metric reading. It is still a shape, not a defect: confirm the groups match responsibilities you can name before splitting.
Low cohesion: TEGUIObjectSelecter (LCOM4 4) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/GUIEditorPage/TEGUIObjectSelecter.xaml.vb:1— TEGUIObjectSelecter's methods fall into 4 groups that share no field and call none of each other, against a bar of more than 3 for this run (LCOM4, configurable — your repository's bar is the one quoted here). Each group is a set of methods reachable from one another through shared fields or direct calls, so 4 groups means the type has that many internally-connected clusters with nothing tying them together. Types whose shape makes a high count expected — and which would otherwise dominate this list — are excluded before this row is raised, so this is a genuine split candidate rather than a metric reading. It is still a shape, not a defect: confirm the groups match responsibilities you can name before splitting.
Low cohesion: TEGUIPage (LCOM4 4) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/GUIEditorPage/TEGUIPage.xaml.vb:3— TEGUIPage's methods fall into 4 groups that share no field and call none of each other, against a bar of more than 3 for this run (LCOM4, configurable — your repository's bar is the one quoted here). Each group is a set of methods reachable from one another through shared fields or direct calls, so 4 groups means the type has that many internally-connected clusters with nothing tying them together. Types whose shape makes a high count expected — and which would otherwise dominate this list — are excluded before this row is raised, so this is a genuine split candidate rather than a metric reading. It is still a shape, not a defect: confirm the groups match responsibilities you can name before splitting.
Low cohesion: SCAScriptBGMManager (LCOM4 4) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/TriggerEditorSetting/SCAScriptSetting/SCAScriptBGMManager.xaml.vb:8— SCAScriptBGMManager's methods fall into 4 groups that share no field and call none of each other, against a bar of more than 3 for this run (LCOM4, configurable — your repository's bar is the one quoted here). Each group is a set of methods reachable from one another through shared fields or direct calls, so 4 groups means the type has that many internally-connected clusters with nothing tying them together. Types whose shape makes a high count expected — and which would otherwise dominate this list — are excluded before this row is raised, so this is a genuine split candidate rather than a metric reading. It is still a shape, not a defect: confirm the groups match responsibilities you can name before splitting.
Low cohesion: BGMManager (LCOM4 4) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/TriggerEditorSetting/BGMManager.xaml.vb:8— BGMManager's methods fall into 4 groups that share no field and call none of each other, against a bar of more than 3 for this run (LCOM4, configurable — your repository's bar is the one quoted here). Each group is a set of methods reachable from one another through shared fields or direct calls, so 4 groups means the type has that many internally-connected clusters with nothing tying them together. Types whose shape makes a high count expected — and which would otherwise dominate this list — are excluded before this row is raised, so this is a genuine split candidate rather than a metric reading. It is still a shape, not a defect: confirm the groups match responsibilities you can name before splitting.
Low cohesion: PluginItem (LCOM4 4) EUD Editor 3/Window/PluginWindow/PlugItems/PluginItem.xaml.vb:1— PluginItem's methods fall into 4 groups that share no field and call none of each other, against a bar of more than 3 for this run (LCOM4, configurable — your repository's bar is the one quoted here). Each group is a set of methods reachable from one another through shared fields or direct calls, so 4 groups means the type has that many internally-connected clusters with nothing tying them together. Types whose shape makes a high count expected — and which would otherwise dominate this list — are excluded before this row is raised, so this is a genuine split candidate rather than a metric reading. It is still a shape, not a defect: confirm the groups match responsibilities you can name before splitting.
FileTooLong: Field/CodeSelecter.xaml.vb EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/Field/CodeSelecter.xaml.vb— FileTooLong — 994 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 494 over it, 1.99× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.
FileTooLong: Parser/Parser.vb EUD Editor 3/Compiler/Parser/Parser.vb— FileTooLong — 950 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 450 over it, 1.90× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.
FileTooLong: REDACTED REDACTED— FileTooLong — 919 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 419 over it, 1.84× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.
FileTooLong: BulidData/WriteSCAData.vb EUD Editor 3/Class/BulidData/WriteSCAData.vb— FileTooLong — 803 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 303 over it, 1.61× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.
FileTooLong: Scripter/GUIScriptEditorUI.xaml.vb EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/GUIEditorPage/Scripter/GUIScriptEditorUI.xaml.vb— FileTooLong — 735 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 235 over it, 1.47× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.
FileTooLong: DataEditor/ListSelecter.xaml.vb EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/DataEditor/ListSelecter.xaml.vb— FileTooLong — 726 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 226 over it, 1.45× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.
FileTooLong: CodeEditor/funcLoader.vb EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/CodeEditor/funcLoader.vb— FileTooLong — 724 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 224 over it, 1.45× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.
FileTooLong: Window/TriggerEditValueSelecterWindow.xaml.vb EUD Editor 3/Window/TriggerEditValueSelecterWindow.xaml.vb— FileTooLong — 716 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 216 over it, 1.43× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.
FileTooLong: GUIScriptEditor/GUIScriptManager.vb EUD Editor 3/Class/TriggerEditor/GUIScriptEditor/GUIScriptManager.vb— FileTooLong — 702 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 202 over it, 1.40× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.
FileTooLong: REDACTED REDACTED— FileTooLong — 583 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 83 over it, 1.17× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.
FileTooLong: DataEditor/ButtonData.xaml.vb EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/DataEditor/ButtonData.xaml.vb— FileTooLong — 557 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 57 over it, 1.11× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.
FileTooLong: MacroFunc/MacroManager.vb EUD Editor 3/Class/MacroFunc/MacroManager.vb— FileTooLong — 525 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 25 over it, 1.05× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.
FileTooLong: REDACTED REDACTED— FileTooLong — 514 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 14 over it, 1.03× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.
FileTooLong: CodeEditor/Init.vb EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/CodeEditor/Init.vb— FileTooLong — 501 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 1 over it, 1.00× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.
ClassTooLong: Parser EUD Editor 3/Compiler/Parser/ParseTool.vb— ClassTooLong — 1026 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), 14 methods. The bar is 400 significant lines; this is 626 over it, 2.57× the bar. To reduce it, group the members that share the same data into a smaller type of their own and delegate to it, so no single type carries every responsibility.
ClassTooLong: GUIScriptManager EUD Editor 3/Class/TriggerEditor/GUIScriptEditor/GUIScriptManager.vb— ClassTooLong — 1015 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), 23 methods. The bar is 400 significant lines; this is 615 over it, 2.54× the bar. To reduce it, group the members that share the same data into a smaller type of their own and delegate to it, so no single type carries every responsibility.
ClassTooLong: ProjectData EUD Editor 3/Class/Data/ProjectData/Init.vb— ClassTooLong — 1012 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), 23 methods. The bar is 400 significant lines; this is 612 over it, 2.53× the bar. To reduce it, group the members that share the same data into a smaller type of their own and delegate to it, so no single type carries every responsibility.
ClassTooLong: CodeSelecter EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/Field/CodeSelecter.xaml.vb— ClassTooLong — 993 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), 29 methods. The bar is 400 significant lines; this is 593 over it, 2.48× the bar. To reduce it, group the members that share the same data into a smaller type of their own and delegate to it, so no single type carries every responsibility.
ClassTooLong: ScriptBlock REDACTED— ClassTooLong — 915 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), 26 methods. The bar is 400 significant lines; this is 515 over it, 2.29× the bar. To reduce it, group the members that share the same data into a smaller type of their own and delegate to it, so no single type carries every responsibility.
ClassTooLong: ListSelecter EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/DataEditor/ListSelecter.xaml.vb— ClassTooLong — 725 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), 25 methods. The bar is 400 significant lines; this is 325 over it, 1.81× the bar. To reduce it, group the members that share the same data into a smaller type of their own and delegate to it, so no single type carries every responsibility.
ClassTooLong: TriggerEditValueSelecterWindow EUD Editor 3/Window/TriggerEditValueSelecterWindow.xaml.vb— ClassTooLong — 712 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), 30 methods. The bar is 400 significant lines; this is 312 over it, 1.78× the bar. To reduce it, group the members that share the same data into a smaller type of their own and delegate to it, so no single type carries every responsibility.
ClassTooLong: GRPManager REDACTED— ClassTooLong — 512 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), 7 methods. The bar is 400 significant lines; this is 112 over it, 1.28× the bar. To reduce it, group the members that share the same data into a smaller type of their own and delegate to it, so no single type carries every responsibility.
ClassTooLong: GUI_VarFuncUse EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/GUIEditorPage/Scripter/ScriptEditer/GUI_VarFuncUse.xaml.vb— ClassTooLong — 493 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), 10 methods. The bar is 400 significant lines; this is 93 over it, 1.23× the bar. To reduce it, group the members that share the same data into a smaller type of their own and delegate to it, so no single type carries every responsibility.
ClassTooLong: StarCraftData REDACTED— ClassTooLong — 471 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), 6 methods. The bar is 400 significant lines; this is 71 over it, 1.18× the bar. To reduce it, group the members that share the same data into a smaller type of their own and delegate to it, so no single type carries every responsibility.
ClassTooLong: DataManager EUD Editor 3/Class/DataManager.vb— ClassTooLong — 439 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), 14 methods. The bar is 400 significant lines; this is 39 over it, 1.10× the bar. To reduce it, group the members that share the same data into a smaller type of their own and delegate to it, so no single type carries every responsibility.
ClassTooLong: CRequireData EUD Editor 3/Class/Data/CRequireData.vb— ClassTooLong — 406 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), 7 methods. The bar is 400 significant lines; this is 6 over it, 1.02× the bar. To reduce it, group the members that share the same data into a smaller type of their own and delegate to it, so no single type carries every responsibility.
TooManyMethods: ProjectExplorer EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/WorkTab/ProjectExplorer/Colors.vb— TooManyMethods — 1023 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), 87 methods. The bar is 30 methods; this is 57 over it, 2.90× the bar. To reduce it, group the members that share the same data into a smaller type of their own and delegate to it, so no single type carries every responsibility.
TooManyMethods: GUIScriptEditorUI EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/GUIEditorPage/Scripter/GUIScriptEditorUI.xaml.vb— TooManyMethods — 1244 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), 73 methods. The bar is 30 methods; this is 43 over it, 2.43× the bar. To reduce it, group the members that share the same data into a smaller type of their own and delegate to it, so no single type carries every responsibility.
TooManyMethods: TECTPage EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/ClassicTrigger/TECTPage.xaml.vb— TooManyMethods — 820 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), 59 methods. The bar is 30 methods; this is 29 over it, 1.97× the bar. To reduce it, group the members that share the same data into a smaller type of their own and delegate to it, so no single type carries every responsibility.
TooManyMethods: CodeEditor EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/CodeEditor/CodeEditor.xaml.vb— TooManyMethods — 1542 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), 56 methods. The bar is 30 methods; this is 26 over it, 1.87× the bar. To reduce it, group the members that share the same data into a smaller type of their own and delegate to it, so no single type carries every responsibility.
TooManyMethods: ButtonData EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/DataEditor/ButtonData.xaml.vb— TooManyMethods — 556 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), 49 methods. The bar is 30 methods; this is 19 over it, 1.63× the bar. To reduce it, group the members that share the same data into a smaller type of their own and delegate to it, so no single type carries every responsibility.
TooManyMethods: RequireListBox EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/Field/Require/RequireListBox.xaml.vb— TooManyMethods — 485 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), 45 methods. The bar is 30 methods; this is 15 over it, 1.50× the bar. To reduce it, group the members that share the same data into a smaller type of their own and delegate to it, so no single type carries every responsibility.
TooManyMethods: MPQModule.StormLib EUD Editor 3/Class/StormLib.vb— TooManyMethods — 336 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), 45 methods. The bar is 30 methods; this is 15 over it, 1.50× the bar. To reduce it, group the members that share the same data into a smaller type of their own and delegate to it, so no single type carries every responsibility.
TooManyMethods: BuildData EUD Editor 3/Class/BulidData/BulidMain.vb— TooManyMethods — 1894 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), 40 methods. The bar is 30 methods; this is 10 over it, 1.33× the bar. To reduce it, group the members that share the same data into a smaller type of their own and delegate to it, so no single type carries every responsibility.
TooManyMethods: MacroManager EUD Editor 3/Class/MacroFunc/MacroDefaultFunction.vb— TooManyMethods — 1098 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), 40 methods. The bar is 30 methods; this is 10 over it, 1.33× the bar. To reduce it, group the members that share the same data into a smaller type of their own and delegate to it, so no single type carries every responsibility.
TooManyMethods: SettingWindows EUD Editor 3/Window/SettingWindows.xaml.vb— TooManyMethods — 415 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), 37 methods. The bar is 30 methods; this is 7 over it, 1.23× the bar. To reduce it, group the members that share the same data into a smaller type of their own and delegate to it, so no single type carries every responsibility.
TooManyMethods: TriggerEditControl EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/ClassicTrigger/TriggerEditControl.xaml.vb— TooManyMethods — 514 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), 31 methods. The bar is 30 methods; this is 1 over it, 1.03× the bar. To reduce it, group the members that share the same data into a smaller type of their own and delegate to it, so no single type carries every responsibility.
Duplicated block (11 lines × 2) EUD Editor 3/Class/TriggerEditor/StarCraftArchive.vb:77— EUD Editor 3/Class/TriggerEditor/StarCraftArchive.vb:77-87 | EUD Editor 3/Class/TriggerEditor/StarCraftArchive.vb:107-117 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (11 lines × 2) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/ClassicTrigger/TrgUnitProperty.xaml.vb:160— EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/ClassicTrigger/TrgUnitProperty.xaml.vb:160-170 | EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/GUIEditorPage/Scripter/ScriptEditer/GUI_ActionValueSelect/GUI_Action_UnitProperty.xaml.vb:97-107 — before extracting anything, compare `EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/ClassicTrigger/TrgUnitProperty.xaml.vb` and `EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/GUIEditorPage/Scripter/ScriptEditer/GUI_ActionValueSelect/GUI_Action_UnitProperty.xaml.vb` as WHOLE FILES: 97% of the shorter file's lines also appear in the other, so this reads as one file having been copied from the other rather than as a helper waiting to be extracted. The 2 duplicated block(s) this scan matched between them are fragments of that copy, not the extent of it — treat the file pair as the unit. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (11 lines × 2) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/ClassicTrigger/TECTPageFunc/MoveTrigger.vb:31— EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/ClassicTrigger/TECTPageFunc/MoveTrigger.vb:31-41 | EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/ClassicTrigger/TECTPageFunc/MoveTrigger.vb:68-79 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately.
Duplicated block (11 lines × 2) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/CUIEditorPage/EpsImportManager.vb:123— EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/CUIEditorPage/EpsImportManager.vb:123-133 | EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/SCAScriptPage/SCALuaImportManager.vb:94-104 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice.
Duplicated block (11 lines × 2) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/GUIEditorPage/Scripter/GUIScriptEditorUIClass/TaskManager.vb:40— EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/GUIEditorPage/Scripter/GUIScriptEditorUIClass/TaskManager.vb:40-52 | EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/GUIEditorPage/Scripter/GUIScriptEditorUIClass/TaskManager.vb:80-90 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (11 lines × 2) EUD Editor 3/Window/BGMPlayerConverter.xaml.vb:70— EUD Editor 3/Window/BGMPlayerConverter.xaml.vb:70-80 | EUD Editor 3/Window/BGMPlayerConverter.xaml.vb:232-242 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `EUD Editor 3/Window/BGMPlayerConverter.xaml.vb:70` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
Duplicated block (11 lines × 2) EUD Editor 3/Window/TriggerEditValueSelecterWindow.xaml.vb:658— EUD Editor 3/Window/TriggerEditValueSelecterWindow.xaml.vb:658-668 | EUD Editor 3/Window/TriggerEditValueSelecterWindow.xaml.vb:710-720 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/Field/Require/RequireListBox.xaml.vb:449— EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/Field/Require/RequireListBox.xaml.vb:449-457 | EUD Editor 3/Window/PluginWindow/DragManager.vb:84-92 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice.
Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) EUD Editor 3/Class/LuaManager.vb:236— EUD Editor 3/Class/LuaManager.vb:236-244 | EUD Editor 3/Class/LuaManager.vb:266-275 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately.
Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/DataEditor/DataPages/Tech_Data.xaml.vb:28— EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/DataEditor/DataPages/Tech_Data.xaml.vb:28-36 | EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/DataEditor/DataPages/Upgrade_Data.xaml.vb:30-38 — before extracting anything, compare `EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/DataEditor/DataPages/Tech_Data.xaml.vb` and `EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/DataEditor/DataPages/Upgrade_Data.xaml.vb` as WHOLE FILES: 93% of the shorter file's lines also appear in the other, so this reads as one file having been copied from the other rather than as a helper waiting to be extracted. The 2 duplicated block(s) this scan matched between them are fragments of that copy, not the extent of it — treat the file pair as the unit. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/ClassicTrigger/TriggerEditControlFunc/DeleteFunction.vb:22— EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/ClassicTrigger/TriggerEditControlFunc/DeleteFunction.vb:22-30 | EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/ClassicTrigger/TriggerEditControlFunc/PasteFunction.vb:75-83 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from both call sites, so a change lands once. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/ClassicTrigger/TriggerEditControlFunc/PasteFunction.vb:71` calls `List`, `DeserializeObject`, `GetType` and `EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/ClassicTrigger/TriggerEditControlFunc/DeleteFunction.vb:18` does not — after which the two agree again for 2 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) EUD Editor 3/Class/TriggerEditor/DotPainter/DotData.vb:54— EUD Editor 3/Class/TriggerEditor/DotPainter/DotData.vb:54-62 | EUD Editor 3/Class/TriggerEditor/SCAScriptEditor/SCAScriptImageData.vb:35-43 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice.
Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/DataEditor/ListSelecter.xaml.vb:238— EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/DataEditor/ListSelecter.xaml.vb:238-246 | EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/Field/CodeSelecter.xaml.vb:257-265 — before extracting anything, compare `EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/DataEditor/ListSelecter.xaml.vb` and `EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/Field/CodeSelecter.xaml.vb` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 12 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 292 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (13 lines × 2) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/DataEditor/ListSelecter.xaml.vb:57— EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/DataEditor/ListSelecter.xaml.vb:57-69 | EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/Field/CodeSelecter.xaml.vb:69-81 — before extracting anything, compare `EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/DataEditor/ListSelecter.xaml.vb` and `EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/Field/CodeSelecter.xaml.vb` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 12 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 292 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (13 lines × 2) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/DataEditor/DataPages/Tech_Data.xaml.vb:9— EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/DataEditor/DataPages/Tech_Data.xaml.vb:9-21 | EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/DataEditor/DataPages/Upgrade_Data.xaml.vb:9-21 — before extracting anything, compare `EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/DataEditor/DataPages/Tech_Data.xaml.vb` and `EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/DataEditor/DataPages/Upgrade_Data.xaml.vb` as WHOLE FILES: 93% of the shorter file's lines also appear in the other, so this reads as one file having been copied from the other rather than as a helper waiting to be extracted. The 2 duplicated block(s) this scan matched between them are fragments of that copy, not the extent of it — treat the file pair as the unit. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (13 lines × 2) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/Field/Require/RequireListBox.xaml.vb:149— EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/Field/Require/RequireListBox.xaml.vb:149-161 | EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/Field/Require/RequireListBox.xaml.vb:488-500 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (13 lines × 2) EUD Editor 3/Window/PluginWindow/DragManager.vb:103— EUD Editor 3/Window/PluginWindow/DragManager.vb:103-116 | EUD Editor 3/Window/PluginWindow/PluginWindow.xaml.vb:128-140 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from both call sites, so a change lands once.
Duplicated block (13 lines × 2) EUD Editor 3/Window/SCASettingWindows.xaml.vb:74— EUD Editor 3/Window/SCASettingWindows.xaml.vb:74-86 | EUD Editor 3/Window/SCASettingWindows.xaml.vb:99-111 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (13 lines × 2) EUD Editor 3/Class/GRP/GPRs/HDGRP.vb:23— EUD Editor 3/Class/GRP/GPRs/HDGRP.vb:23-35 | EUD Editor 3/Class/GRP/GPRs/SDGRP.vb:34-46 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from both call sites, so a change lands once.
Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/DataEditor/DataPages/Unit_Graphic.xaml.vb:37— EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/DataEditor/DataPages/Unit_Graphic.xaml.vb:37-43 | EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/DataEditor/DataPages/Unit_Graphic.xaml.vb:68-74 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) EUD Editor 3/Class/MacroFunc/MacroDefaultFunction.vb:276— EUD Editor 3/Class/MacroFunc/MacroDefaultFunction.vb:276-282 | EUD Editor 3/Class/MacroFunc/MacroDefaultFunction.vb:289-295 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) REDACTED:227— REDACTED:227-234 | REDACTED:348-354 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/GUIEditorPage/Scripter/GUIScriptEditorUI.xaml.vb:254— EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/GUIEditorPage/Scripter/GUIScriptEditorUI.xaml.vb:254-260 | EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/GUIEditorPage/Scripter/GUIScriptEditorUI.xaml.vb:581-591 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/TriggerEditorSetting/BGMManager.xaml.vb:346— EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/TriggerEditorSetting/BGMManager.xaml.vb:346-352 | EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/TriggerEditorSetting/SCAScriptSetting/SCAScriptBGMManager.xaml.vb:346-352 — before extracting anything, compare `EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/TriggerEditorSetting/BGMManager.xaml.vb` and `EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/TriggerEditorSetting/SCAScriptSetting/SCAScriptBGMManager.xaml.vb` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 8 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 158 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (14 lines × 2) EUD Editor 3/Class/Hash/AESModule.vb:22— EUD Editor 3/Class/Hash/AESModule.vb:22-35 | EUD Editor 3/Class/Hash/AESModule.vb:78-91 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (14 lines × 2) EUD Editor 3/Compiler/Parser/TokenTool.vb:19— EUD Editor 3/Compiler/Parser/TokenTool.vb:19-32 | EUD Editor 3/Compiler/Parser/TokenTool.vb:39-52 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (14 lines × 2) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/DataEditor/ListSelecter.xaml.vb:72— EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/DataEditor/ListSelecter.xaml.vb:72-85 | EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/Field/CodeSelecter.xaml.vb:84-97 — before extracting anything, compare `EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/DataEditor/ListSelecter.xaml.vb` and `EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/Field/CodeSelecter.xaml.vb` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 12 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 292 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (14 lines × 2) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/ClassicTrigger/TriggerEditControlFunc/DeleteFunction.vb:7— EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/ClassicTrigger/TriggerEditControlFunc/DeleteFunction.vb:7-22 | EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/ClassicTrigger/TriggerEditControlFunc/EditFunction.vb:7-20 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from both call sites, so a change lands once.
TodoComment EUD Editor 3/Class/TriggerEditor/TriggerFunction.vb:19— 'TODO:UserFunc 만들어야됨 — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `' REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment EUD Editor 3/Class/TriggerEditor/TriggerFunction.vb:21— 'TODO:UserFunc ExternFunc만들어야됨 — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `' REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment EUD Editor 3/ResourceDictionary/MaterialDesign.Overrides.xaml:749— <!-- TODO --> — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
D4 · Code Duplication· Members sharing a duplicated core (4 members, 50+ identical tokens) · ×3
Members sharing a duplicated core (4 members, 50+ identical tokens) EUD Editor 3/Class/MacroFunc/MacroDefaultFunction.vb:276— EUD Editor 3/Class/MacroFunc/MacroDefaultFunction.vb:276-285 | EUD Editor 3/Class/MacroFunc/MacroDefaultFunction.vb:288-319 | EUD Editor 3/Class/MacroFunc/MacroDefaultFunction.vb:322-426 | EUD Editor 3/Class/MacroFunc/MacroDefaultFunction.vb:429-519 — These 4 members share a duplicated core: a run of at least 50 identical tokens appears in every one of them. That run is NOT broken out as duplicated-block rows below — it is what admitted this row, and the blocks below cover only the part of it that clears the block floor, so they understate the correspondence. Read the members as one construct written 4 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 4 times.
Members sharing a duplicated core (4 members, 50+ identical tokens) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/DataEditor/ListSelecter.xaml.vb:777— EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/DataEditor/ListSelecter.xaml.vb:777-810 | EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/DataEditor/ListSelecter.xaml.vb:813-844 | EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/Field/CodeSelecter.xaml.vb:1125-1159 | EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/Field/CodeSelecter.xaml.vb:1162-1196 — These 4 members share a duplicated core: a run of at least 50 identical tokens appears in every one of them. That run is NOT broken out as duplicated-block rows below — it is what admitted this row, and the blocks below cover only the part of it that clears the block floor, so they understate the correspondence. Read the members as one construct written 4 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 4 times.
Members sharing a duplicated core (4 members, 50+ identical tokens) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/Field/FlagSelecter.xaml.vb:9— EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/Field/FlagSelecter.xaml.vb:9-67 | EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/Field/FlagSelecter.xaml.vb:71-103 | EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/Field/FlagSelecterMini.xaml.vb:9-61 | EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/Field/FlagSelecterMini.xaml.vb:65-96 — These 4 members share a duplicated core: a run of at least 50 identical tokens appears in every one of them. That run is NOT broken out as duplicated-block rows below — it is what admitted this row, and the blocks below cover only the part of it that clears the block floor, so they understate the correspondence. Read the members as one construct written 4 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 4 times.
Duplicated block (12 lines × 2) REDACTED:519— REDACTED:519-530 | REDACTED:542-553 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (12 lines × 2) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/GUIEditorPage/Scripter/GUIScriptEditorUIClass/TaskManager.vb:130— EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/GUIEditorPage/Scripter/GUIScriptEditorUIClass/TaskManager.vb:130-141 | EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/GUIEditorPage/Scripter/GUIScriptEditorUIClass/TaskManager.vb:173-184 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (12 lines × 2) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/TriggerEditorSetting/BGMManager.xaml.vb:277— EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/TriggerEditorSetting/BGMManager.xaml.vb:277-288 | EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/TriggerEditorSetting/SCAScriptSetting/SCAScriptBGMManager.xaml.vb:277-288 — before extracting anything, compare `EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/TriggerEditorSetting/BGMManager.xaml.vb` and `EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/TriggerEditorSetting/SCAScriptSetting/SCAScriptBGMManager.xaml.vb` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 8 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 158 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) EUD Editor 3/Class/Binding/DatBinding.vb:120— EUD Editor 3/Class/Binding/DatBinding.vb:120-129 | EUD Editor 3/Class/Binding/DatBinding.vb:254-265 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/DataEditor/ListSelecter.xaml.vb:749— EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/DataEditor/ListSelecter.xaml.vb:749-758 | EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/Field/CodeSelecter.xaml.vb:1097-1106 — before extracting anything, compare `EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/DataEditor/ListSelecter.xaml.vb` and `EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/Field/CodeSelecter.xaml.vb` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 12 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 292 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/GUIEditorPage/Scripter/ScriptEditer/GUI_Import.xaml.vb:42— EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/GUIEditorPage/Scripter/ScriptEditer/GUI_Import.xaml.vb:42-51 | EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/TriggerEditorSetting.xaml.vb:81-90 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) EUD Editor 3/Class/Binding/DatBinding.vb:327— EUD Editor 3/Class/Binding/DatBinding.vb:327-331 | EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/Field/IconSelecterP.xaml.vb:163-167 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) EUD Editor 3/Class/BulidData/WriteButtonData.vb:28— EUD Editor 3/Class/BulidData/WriteButtonData.vb:28-32 | EUD Editor 3/Class/BulidData/WriteButtonData.vb:37-41 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) EUD Editor 3/Class/Data/CButtonData.vb:136— EUD Editor 3/Class/Data/CButtonData.vb:136-140 | EUD Editor 3/Class/Data/CButtonData.vb:141-145 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/TriggerEditorSetting/EditDotData.xaml.vb:12— EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/TriggerEditorSetting/EditDotData.xaml.vb:12-17 | EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/TriggerEditorSetting/EditDotData.xaml.vb:24-29 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/DataEditor/ButtonData.xaml.vb:377— EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/DataEditor/ButtonData.xaml.vb:377-382 | EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/DataEditor/ButtonData.xaml.vb:675-680 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/DataEditor/ButtonData.xaml.vb:392— EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/DataEditor/ButtonData.xaml.vb:392-397 | EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/DataEditor/ButtonData.xaml.vb:698-703 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (39 lines × 2) EUD Editor 3/AvalonEdit/CodeEditor/TriggerEditorCompletionData.vb:78— EUD Editor 3/AvalonEdit/CodeEditor/TriggerEditorCompletionData.vb:78-116 | EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/CodeEditor/funcLoader.vb:915-953 — before extracting anything, compare `EUD Editor 3/AvalonEdit/CodeEditor/TriggerEditorCompletionData.vb` and `EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/CodeEditor/funcLoader.vb` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 4 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 110 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (39 lines × 2) EUD Editor 3/AvalonEdit/CodeEditor/TriggerEditorCompletionData.vb:144— EUD Editor 3/AvalonEdit/CodeEditor/TriggerEditorCompletionData.vb:144-182 | EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/CodeEditor/funcLoader.vb:981-1019 — before extracting anything, compare `EUD Editor 3/AvalonEdit/CodeEditor/TriggerEditorCompletionData.vb` and `EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/CodeEditor/funcLoader.vb` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 4 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 110 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (34 lines × 2) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/DataEditor/ListSelecter.xaml.vb:20— EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/DataEditor/ListSelecter.xaml.vb:20-53 | EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/Field/CodeSelecter.xaml.vb:32-65 — before extracting anything, compare `EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/DataEditor/ListSelecter.xaml.vb` and `EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/Field/CodeSelecter.xaml.vb` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 12 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 292 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (34 lines × 2) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/ClassicTrigger/TrgUnitProperty.xaml.vb:78— EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/ClassicTrigger/TrgUnitProperty.xaml.vb:78-111 | EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/GUIEditorPage/Scripter/ScriptEditer/GUI_ActionValueSelect/GUI_Action_UnitProperty.xaml.vb:15-48 — before extracting anything, compare `EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/ClassicTrigger/TrgUnitProperty.xaml.vb` and `EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/GUIEditorPage/Scripter/ScriptEditer/GUI_ActionValueSelect/GUI_Action_UnitProperty.xaml.vb` as WHOLE FILES: 97% of the shorter file's lines also appear in the other, so this reads as one file having been copied from the other rather than as a helper waiting to be extracted. The 2 duplicated block(s) this scan matched between them are fragments of that copy, not the extent of it — treat the file pair as the unit. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (23 lines × 2) EUD Editor 3/Class/Data/ProjectData/Timer.vb:83— EUD Editor 3/Class/Data/ProjectData/Timer.vb:83-105 | EUD Editor 3/Class/TriggerEditor/TriggerEditorData.vb:276-298 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice.
Duplicated block (23 lines × 2) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/TriggerEditorSetting/BGMManager.xaml.vb:26— EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/TriggerEditorSetting/BGMManager.xaml.vb:26-48 | EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/TriggerEditorSetting/SCAScriptSetting/SCAScriptBGMManager.xaml.vb:26-48 — before extracting anything, compare `EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/TriggerEditorSetting/BGMManager.xaml.vb` and `EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/TriggerEditorSetting/SCAScriptSetting/SCAScriptBGMManager.xaml.vb` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 8 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 158 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (15–17 lines × 2) EUD Editor 3/AvalonEdit/CodeEditor/EditorInit.vb:7— EUD Editor 3/AvalonEdit/CodeEditor/EditorInit.vb:7-21 | EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/CodeEditor/Init.vb:37-53 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice.
Duplicated block (15–17 lines × 2) EUD Editor 3/Class/TriggerEditor/GUIScriptEditor/GUIScriptEditor.vb:133— EUD Editor 3/Class/TriggerEditor/GUIScriptEditor/GUIScriptEditor.vb:133-149 | EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/CodeEditor/ExternerManager.vb:111-125 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately.
Duplicated block (15 lines × 2) EUD Editor 3/Class/BulidData/BulidMain.vb:72— EUD Editor 3/Class/BulidData/BulidMain.vb:72-86 | EUD Editor 3/Class/BulidData/BulidMain.vb:88-102 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (15 lines × 2) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/CodeEditor/Init.vb:361— EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/CodeEditor/Init.vb:361-375 | EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/CommandConsole/ConsoleTextbox.xaml.vb:79-93 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice.
Duplicated block (9 lines × 3) EUD Editor 3/Class/BulidData/WriteSCAData.vb:682— EUD Editor 3/Class/BulidData/WriteSCAData.vb:682-690 | EUD Editor 3/Class/BulidData/WriteSCAData.vb:724-732 | EUD Editor 3/Class/BulidData/WriteSCAData.vb:814-822 — all 3 copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from every one of those sites — resolving only two of them leaves the rest to drift apart the first time one is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `EUD Editor 3/Class/BulidData/WriteSCAData.vb:682` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `EUD Editor 3/Class/BulidData/WriteSCAData.vb:692` calls `AppendLine` and `EUD Editor 3/Class/BulidData/WriteSCAData.vb:734` does not — after which the two agree again for 3 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
Duplicated block (9 lines × 3) EUD Editor 3/Class/TriggerEditor/CUIScriptEditor/CUIScriptEditor.vb:71— EUD Editor 3/Class/TriggerEditor/CUIScriptEditor/CUIScriptEditor.vb:71-79 | EUD Editor 3/Class/TriggerEditor/SCAScriptEditor/SCAScriptEditor.vb:71-79 | EUD Editor 3/Class/TriggerEditor/TextEditor/RawTextScriptEditor.vb:70-78 — `EUD Editor 3/Class/TriggerEditor/CUIScriptEditor/CUIScriptEditor.vb` and `EUD Editor 3/Class/TriggerEditor/SCAScriptEditor/SCAScriptEditor.vb` are one unit implemented once per sibling directory, so they are most likely parallel implementations of one contract rather than a copy of each other — this scan matched 4 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 37 lines. If both are selected at run time, neither can be retired in favour of the other, and the lines that DIFFER between them are the reason both exist. The move that pays here is to hoist the identical part into a shared location the whole family can reach and give what differs a parameter or a seam, so a change lands once instead of once per sibling; extracting one helper per block leaves every sibling to drift on its own.
Duplicated block (11 lines × 3) EUD Editor 3/Class/TriggerEditor/CUIScriptEditor/CUIScriptEditor.vb:16— EUD Editor 3/Class/TriggerEditor/CUIScriptEditor/CUIScriptEditor.vb:16-26 | EUD Editor 3/Class/TriggerEditor/SCAScriptEditor/SCAScriptEditor.vb:16-26 | EUD Editor 3/Class/TriggerEditor/TextEditor/RawTextScriptEditor.vb:16-26 — `EUD Editor 3/Class/TriggerEditor/CUIScriptEditor/CUIScriptEditor.vb` and `EUD Editor 3/Class/TriggerEditor/SCAScriptEditor/SCAScriptEditor.vb` are one unit implemented once per sibling directory, so they are most likely parallel implementations of one contract rather than a copy of each other — this scan matched 4 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 37 lines. If both are selected at run time, neither can be retired in favour of the other, and the lines that DIFFER between them are the reason both exist. The move that pays here is to hoist the identical part into a shared location the whole family can reach and give what differs a parameter or a seam, so a change lands once instead of once per sibling; extracting one helper per block leaves every sibling to drift on its own.
Duplicated block (11 lines × 3) EUD Editor 3/Class/TriggerEditor/CUIScriptEditor/CUIScriptEditor.vb:29— EUD Editor 3/Class/TriggerEditor/CUIScriptEditor/CUIScriptEditor.vb:29-39 | EUD Editor 3/Class/TriggerEditor/SCAScriptEditor/SCAScriptEditor.vb:29-39 | EUD Editor 3/Class/TriggerEditor/TextEditor/RawTextScriptEditor.vb:29-39 — `EUD Editor 3/Class/TriggerEditor/CUIScriptEditor/CUIScriptEditor.vb` and `EUD Editor 3/Class/TriggerEditor/SCAScriptEditor/SCAScriptEditor.vb` are one unit implemented once per sibling directory, so they are most likely parallel implementations of one contract rather than a copy of each other — this scan matched 4 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 37 lines. If both are selected at run time, neither can be retired in favour of the other, and the lines that DIFFER between them are the reason both exist. The move that pays here is to hoist the identical part into a shared location the whole family can reach and give what differs a parameter or a seam, so a change lands once instead of once per sibling; extracting one helper per block leaves every sibling to drift on its own.
Appears unstructured (no recognised architecture) — ~50.9k production LoC (342 types) across 1 project(s) / 10 namespace(s) with no recognised architectural style or layering — at this size, deliberate module boundaries would help. No DDD/clean/vertical-slice/CQRS/transaction-script organisation was detected — code is likely organised ad hoc, which makes change and onboarding harder as it grows.
Parser.GetScriptBlock (cyclomatic 146) EUD Editor 3/Compiler/Parser/Parser.vb:579— Parser.GetScriptBlock has cyclomatic complexity 146 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function, or replace a long branch ladder over a single value with a data-driven lookup or dispatch table.
GUIScriptManager.GetItemScriptText (cyclomatic 126) EUD Editor 3/Class/TriggerEditor/GUIScriptEditor/GUIScriptManager.vb:233— GUIScriptManager.GetItemScriptText has cyclomatic complexity 126 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function, or replace a long branch ladder over a single value with a data-driven lookup or dispatch table.
Lexical_Analyzer.DoWork (cyclomatic 102) EUD Editor 3/Compiler/Lexical Analyzer/Lexical Analyzer.vb:6— Lexical_Analyzer.DoWork has cyclomatic complexity 102 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function, or replace a long branch ladder over a single value with a data-driven lookup or dispatch table.
CodeSelecter.ListCreateData (cyclomatic 87) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/Field/CodeSelecter.xaml.vb:609— CodeSelecter.ListCreateData has cyclomatic complexity 87 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function, or replace a long branch ladder over a single value with a data-driven lookup or dispatch table.
TriggerEditValueSelecterWindow.ArgSelectBoxRefresh (cyclomatic 80) EUD Editor 3/Window/TriggerEditValueSelecterWindow.xaml.vb:261— TriggerEditValueSelecterWindow.ArgSelectBoxRefresh has cyclomatic complexity 80 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function, or replace a long branch ladder over a single value with a data-driven lookup or dispatch table.
Parser.Decoder (cyclomatic 73) EUD Editor 3/Compiler/Parser/Parser.vb:68— Parser.Decoder has cyclomatic complexity 73 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function, or replace a long branch ladder over a single value with a data-driven lookup or dispatch table.
ArgManager.GetArgList (cyclomatic 65) EUD Editor 3/Module/Tools/ArgManager.vb:5— ArgManager.GetArgList has cyclomatic complexity 65 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function, or replace a long branch ladder over a single value with a data-driven lookup or dispatch table.
CIScript.playScript (cyclomatic 62) EUD Editor 3/Class/GRP/SCIScriptMoudle.vb:357— CIScript.playScript has cyclomatic complexity 62 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function, or replace a long branch ladder over a single value with a data-driven lookup or dispatch table.
CodeEditor.GetArgList (cyclomatic 59) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/CodeEditor/funcLoader.vb:10— CodeEditor.GetArgList has cyclomatic complexity 59 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function, or replace a long branch ladder over a single value with a data-driven lookup or dispatch table.
ListSelecter.ListResetData (cyclomatic 59) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/DataEditor/ListSelecter.xaml.vb:409— ListSelecter.ListResetData has cyclomatic complexity 59 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function, or replace a long branch ladder over a single value with a data-driven lookup or dispatch table.
MapData.LoadDataStormLib (cyclomatic 56) EUD Editor 3/Class/Data/MapData.vb:161— MapData.LoadDataStormLib has cyclomatic complexity 56 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function, or replace a long branch ladder over a single value with a data-driven lookup or dispatch table.
MacroManager.MacroApply (cyclomatic 54) EUD Editor 3/Class/MacroFunc/MacroManager.vb:184— MacroManager.MacroApply has cyclomatic complexity 54 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function, or replace a long branch ladder over a single value with a data-driven lookup or dispatch table.
CodeGrouping.CodeGrouping (cyclomatic 46) EUD Editor 3/Class/CodeGrouping.vb:80— CodeGrouping.CodeGrouping has cyclomatic complexity 46 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function, or replace a long branch ladder over a single value with a data-driven lookup or dispatch table.
MapData.LoadDataSFMPQ (cyclomatic 46) EUD Editor 3/Class/Data/MapData.vb:637— MapData.LoadDataSFMPQ has cyclomatic complexity 46 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function, or replace a long branch ladder over a single value with a data-driven lookup or dispatch table.
ScriptTreeviewitem.Refresh (cyclomatic 45) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/GUIEditorPage/Scripter/ScriptTreeviewitem.xaml.vb:22— ScriptTreeviewitem.Refresh has cyclomatic complexity 45 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function, or replace a long branch ladder over a single value with a data-driven lookup or dispatch table.
ScriptBlock.ValueCoder (cyclomatic 44) REDACTED:386— ScriptBlock.ValueCoder has cyclomatic complexity 44 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function, or replace a long branch ladder over a single value with a data-driven lookup or dispatch table. This is NOT this file's highest cyclomatic complexity: ScriptBlock.New.ctor (cyclomatic 45) is higher and carries no row of its own — it was excluded as a flat dispatcher (a long switch/match over independent cases: many branches, almost no nesting), which this dimension does not treat as a refactor obligation. It is named here so the ranking you see in this file is not mistaken for the whole of it; the excluded method is counted neither in this dimension's figures nor in its score.
TEGUIObjectSelecter.ToolBoxListRefresh (cyclomatic 44) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/GUIEditorPage/TEGUIObjectSelecter.xaml.vb:106— TEGUIObjectSelecter.ToolBoxListRefresh has cyclomatic complexity 44 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function, or replace a long branch ladder over a single value with a data-driven lookup or dispatch table.
CodeEditor.textEditor_KeyboardInput (cyclomatic 41) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/CodeEditor/EnteredText.vb:10— CodeEditor.textEditor_KeyboardInput has cyclomatic complexity 41 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function, or replace a long branch ladder over a single value with a data-driven lookup or dispatch table.
GUI_VarFuncUse.CrlInit (cyclomatic 41) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/GUIEditorPage/Scripter/ScriptEditer/GUI_VarFuncUse.xaml.vb:17— GUI_VarFuncUse.CrlInit has cyclomatic complexity 41 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function, or replace a long branch ladder over a single value with a data-driven lookup or dispatch table.
ClassicTriggerEditor.GetEpsText (cyclomatic 40) EUD Editor 3/Class/TriggerEditor/ClassicEditor/ClassicTriggerEditor.vb:141— ClassicTriggerEditor.GetEpsText has cyclomatic complexity 40 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function, or replace a long branch ladder over a single value with a data-driven lookup or dispatch table.
CodeEditor.LoadData (cyclomatic 40) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/CodeEditor/funcLoader.vb:294— CodeEditor.LoadData has cyclomatic complexity 40 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function, or replace a long branch ladder over a single value with a data-driven lookup or dispatch table.
CodeEditor.LoadMacroData (cyclomatic 35) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/CodeEditor/funcLoader.vb:532— CodeEditor.LoadMacroData has cyclomatic complexity 35 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function, or replace a long branch ladder over a single value with a data-driven lookup or dispatch table.
GUIScriptEditorUI.CheckValidated (cyclomatic 34) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/GUIEditorPage/Scripter/GUIScriptEditorUIClass/AddRule.vb:10— GUIScriptEditorUI.CheckValidated has cyclomatic complexity 34 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function, or replace a long branch ladder over a single value with a data-driven lookup or dispatch table.
DataManager.PasteDatPage (cyclomatic 32) EUD Editor 3/Class/DataManager.vb:166— DataManager.PasteDatPage has cyclomatic complexity 32 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function, or replace a long branch ladder over a single value with a data-driven lookup or dispatch table.
LagacySaveLoad.Load (cyclomatic 31) EUD Editor 3/EUDEditor2/SaveLoadClass/LagacySaveLoad.vb:33— LagacySaveLoad.Load has cyclomatic complexity 31 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function, or replace a long branch ladder over a single value with a data-driven lookup or dispatch table.
DataManager.PasteDatObject (cyclomatic 29) EUD Editor 3/Class/DataManager.vb:283— DataManager.PasteDatObject has cyclomatic complexity 29 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function, or replace a long branch ladder over a single value with a data-driven lookup or dispatch table.
GRPBox.Exec (cyclomatic 29) EUD Editor 3/Class/GRP/GRPBox.vb:82— GRPBox.Exec has cyclomatic complexity 29 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function, or replace a long branch ladder over a single value with a data-driven lookup or dispatch table.
GUIScriptManager.GetLocalVar (cyclomatic 29) EUD Editor 3/Class/TriggerEditor/GUIScriptEditor/ScriptTool/GUIVarAnalyze.vb:20— GUIScriptManager.GetLocalVar has cyclomatic complexity 29 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function, or replace a long branch ladder over a single value with a data-driven lookup or dispatch table.
GUI_Action_ArgSelecter.CrlInit (cyclomatic 29) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/GUIEditorPage/Scripter/ScriptEditer/GUI_ActionValueSelect/GUI_Action_ArgSelecter.xaml.vb:37— GUI_Action_ArgSelecter.CrlInit has cyclomatic complexity 29 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function, or replace a long branch ladder over a single value with a data-driven lookup or dispatch table.
GUI_For.ResetControl (cyclomatic 29) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/GUIEditorPage/Scripter/ScriptEditer/GUI_For.xaml.vb:162— GUI_For.ResetControl has cyclomatic complexity 29 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function, or replace a long branch ladder over a single value with a data-driven lookup or dispatch table.
ScriptBlock.FuncCoder (cyclomatic 28) REDACTED:725— ScriptBlock.FuncCoder has cyclomatic complexity 28 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function, or replace a long branch ladder over a single value with a data-driven lookup or dispatch table. This is NOT this file's highest cyclomatic complexity: ScriptBlock.New.ctor (cyclomatic 45) is higher and carries no row of its own — it was excluded as a flat dispatcher (a long switch/match over independent cases: many branches, almost no nesting), which this dimension does not treat as a refactor obligation. It is named here so the ranking you see in this file is not mistaken for the whole of it; the excluded method is counted neither in this dimension's figures nor in its score.
TriggerFunction.GetFunctionFromStr (cyclomatic 28) EUD Editor 3/Class/TriggerEditor/TriggerFunction.vb:383— TriggerFunction.GetFunctionFromStr has cyclomatic complexity 28 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function, or replace a long branch ladder over a single value with a data-driven lookup or dispatch table.
LagacySaveLoad.Save (cyclomatic 27) EUD Editor 3/EUDEditor2/SaveLoadClass/LagacySaveLoad.vb:366— LagacySaveLoad.Save has cyclomatic complexity 27 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function, or replace a long branch ladder over a single value with a data-driven lookup or dispatch table.
CodeEditor.AutoInserter (cyclomatic 27) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/CodeEditor/Init.vb:642— CodeEditor.AutoInserter has cyclomatic complexity 27 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function, or replace a long branch ladder over a single value with a data-driven lookup or dispatch table.
ProjectData.CodeLabel.Get (cyclomatic 26) EUD Editor 3/Class/Data/ProjectData/ProjectData.vb:579— ProjectData.CodeLabel.Get has cyclomatic complexity 26 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function, or replace a long branch ladder over a single value with a data-driven lookup or dispatch table.
LuaFunction.New.ctor (cyclomatic 26) EUD Editor 3/Class/MacroFunc/MacroManager.vb:533— LuaFunction.New.ctor has cyclomatic complexity 26 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function, or replace a long branch ladder over a single value with a data-driven lookup or dispatch table.
Trigger.GetTriggerCodeText (cyclomatic 26) REDACTED:182— Trigger.GetTriggerCodeText has cyclomatic complexity 26 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function, or replace a long branch ladder over a single value with a data-driven lookup or dispatch table.
InputField.Init (cyclomatic 26) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/Field/InputField.xaml.vb:187— InputField.Init has cyclomatic complexity 26 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function, or replace a long branch ladder over a single value with a data-driven lookup or dispatch table.
GUI_FunctionSelecter.ListReset (cyclomatic 26) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/GUIEditorPage/Scripter/ScriptEditer/GUI_ActionValueSelect/GUI_FunctionSelecter.xaml.vb:38— GUI_FunctionSelecter.ListReset has cyclomatic complexity 26 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function, or replace a long branch ladder over a single value with a data-driven lookup or dispatch table.
BindingManager.New.ctor (cyclomatic 25) EUD Editor 3/Class/Binding/BindingManager.vb:68— BindingManager.New.ctor has cyclomatic complexity 25 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function, or replace a long branch ladder over a single value with a data-driven lookup or dispatch table.
ExtraDatBinding.Value.Set (cyclomatic 25) EUD Editor 3/Class/Binding/ExtraDatBinding.vb:208— ExtraDatBinding.Value.Set has cyclomatic complexity 25 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function, or replace a long branch ladder over a single value with a data-driven lookup or dispatch table.
CodeEditor.ShowCompletion (cyclomatic 25) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/CodeEditor/Init.vb:378— CodeEditor.ShowCompletion has cyclomatic complexity 25 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function, or replace a long branch ladder over a single value with a data-driven lookup or dispatch table.
CFunc.LoadFunc (cyclomatic 24) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/CodeEditor/CFunc.vb:417— CFunc.LoadFunc has cyclomatic complexity 24 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function, or replace a long branch ladder over a single value with a data-driven lookup or dispatch table.
TrgUnitPorperty.RefreshValue (cyclomatic 23) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/ClassicTrigger/TrgUnitProperty.xaml.vb:77— TrgUnitPorperty.RefreshValue has cyclomatic complexity 23 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function, or replace a long branch ladder over a single value with a data-driven lookup or dispatch table.
GUI_Action_UnitProperty.RefreshValue (cyclomatic 23) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/GUIEditorPage/Scripter/ScriptEditer/GUI_ActionValueSelect/GUI_Action_UnitProperty.xaml.vb:14— GUI_Action_UnitProperty.RefreshValue has cyclomatic complexity 23 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function, or replace a long branch ladder over a single value with a data-driven lookup or dispatch table.
FunctionToolTip.New.ctor (cyclomatic 22) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/CodeEditor/CFunc.vb:71— FunctionToolTip.New.ctor has cyclomatic complexity 22 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function, or replace a long branch ladder over a single value with a data-driven lookup or dispatch table.
CodeSelecter.ListReset (cyclomatic 22) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/Field/CodeSelecter.xaml.vb:406— CodeSelecter.ListReset has cyclomatic complexity 22 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function, or replace a long branch ladder over a single value with a data-driven lookup or dispatch table.
BuildData.GetSCAEps (cyclomatic 21) EUD Editor 3/Class/BulidData/WriteSCAData.vb:524— BuildData.GetSCAEps has cyclomatic complexity 21 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function, or replace a long branch ladder over a single value with a data-driven lookup or dispatch table.
CodeEditor.ShowFuncTooltip (cyclomatic 21) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/CodeEditor/Init.vb:154— CodeEditor.ShowFuncTooltip has cyclomatic complexity 21 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function, or replace a long branch ladder over a single value with a data-driven lookup or dispatch table.
GUI_VarFuncUse.EnCoding (cyclomatic 21) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/GUIEditorPage/Scripter/ScriptEditer/GUI_VarFuncUse.xaml.vb:404— GUI_VarFuncUse.EnCoding has cyclomatic complexity 21 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function, or replace a long branch ladder over a single value with a data-driven lookup or dispatch table.
BGMPlayerConverter.BGMProcess (cyclomatic 21) EUD Editor 3/Window/BGMPlayerConverter.xaml.vb:32— BGMPlayerConverter.BGMProcess has cyclomatic complexity 21 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function, or replace a long branch ladder over a single value with a data-driven lookup or dispatch table.
EdsBlockItem.GetEdsString (cyclomatic 20) EUD Editor 3/Class/BulidData/WriteedsFile.vb:125— EdsBlockItem.GetEdsString has cyclomatic complexity 20 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function, or replace a long branch ladder over a single value with a data-driven lookup or dispatch table.
TriggerCodeBlock.GetCodeText (cyclomatic 20) REDACTED:10— TriggerCodeBlock.GetCodeText has cyclomatic complexity 20 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function, or replace a long branch ladder over a single value with a data-driven lookup or dispatch table.
GlobalObj.InitProgram (cyclomatic 20) EUD Editor 3/Module/GlobalObj.vb:93— GlobalObj.InitProgram has cyclomatic complexity 20 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function, or replace a long branch ladder over a single value with a data-driven lookup or dispatch table.
ConsoleTextbox.LoadAutocmp (cyclomatic 20) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/CommandConsole/AutoComplete.vb:2— ConsoleTextbox.LoadAutocmp has cyclomatic complexity 20 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function, or replace a long branch ladder over a single value with a data-driven lookup or dispatch table.
BuildData.CheckBuildable (cyclomatic 19) EUD Editor 3/Class/BulidData/BulidMain.vb:155— BuildData.CheckBuildable has cyclomatic complexity 19 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function, or replace a long branch ladder over a single value with a data-driven lookup or dispatch table.
MacroManager.SetDatFile (cyclomatic 19) EUD Editor 3/Class/MacroFunc/MacroDefaultFunction.vb:321— MacroManager.SetDatFile has cyclomatic complexity 19 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function, or replace a long branch ladder over a single value with a data-driven lookup or dispatch table.
ColoredTextBox.TextColred (cyclomatic 19) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/Field/ColoredTextBox.xaml.vb:30— ColoredTextBox.TextColred has cyclomatic complexity 19 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function, or replace a long branch ladder over a single value with a data-driven lookup or dispatch table.
GUIScriptEditorUI.PasteSelectItem (cyclomatic 19) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/GUIEditorPage/Scripter/GUIScriptEditorUI.xaml.vb:253— GUIScriptEditorUI.PasteSelectItem has cyclomatic complexity 19 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function, or replace a long branch ladder over a single value with a data-driven lookup or dispatch table.
GUI_ArgEditor.TypeboxInit (cyclomatic 19) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/GUIEditorPage/Scripter/ScriptEditer/GUI_ArgEditor.xaml.vb:133— GUI_ArgEditor.TypeboxInit has cyclomatic complexity 19 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function, or replace a long branch ladder over a single value with a data-driven lookup or dispatch table.
CParamater.New.ctor (cyclomatic 18) EUD Editor 3/Class/Data/SCDatFiles.vb:343— CParamater.New.ctor has cyclomatic complexity 18 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function, or replace a long branch ladder over a single value with a data-driven lookup or dispatch table.
ListSelecter.ContextMenu_Opened (cyclomatic 18) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/DataEditor/ListSelecter.xaml.vb:122— ListSelecter.ContextMenu_Opened has cyclomatic complexity 18 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function, or replace a long branch ladder over a single value with a data-driven lookup or dispatch table.
CodeSelecter.ContextMenu_Opened (cyclomatic 18) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/Field/CodeSelecter.xaml.vb:140— CodeSelecter.ContextMenu_Opened has cyclomatic complexity 18 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function, or replace a long branch ladder over a single value with a data-driven lookup or dispatch table.
UnitData.LoasScreen (cyclomatic 18) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/DataEditor/UnitData.xaml.vb:45— UnitData.LoasScreen has cyclomatic complexity 18 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function, or replace a long branch ladder over a single value with a data-driven lookup or dispatch table.
ListItemCodeBlock.RefreshItem (cyclomatic 18) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/ClassicTrigger/ListItemCodeBlock.xaml.vb:17— ListItemCodeBlock.RefreshItem has cyclomatic complexity 18 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function, or replace a long branch ladder over a single value with a data-driven lookup or dispatch table.
GUIScriptEditorUI.MainTreeview_SelectedItemChanged (cyclomatic 18) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/GUIEditorPage/Scripter/GUIScriptEditorUI.xaml.vb:751— GUIScriptEditorUI.MainTreeview_SelectedItemChanged has cyclomatic complexity 18 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function, or replace a long branch ladder over a single value with a data-driven lookup or dispatch table.
GUI_For.CheckEditable (cyclomatic 18) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/GUIEditorPage/Scripter/ScriptEditer/GUI_For.xaml.vb:88— GUI_For.CheckEditable has cyclomatic complexity 18 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function, or replace a long branch ladder over a single value with a data-driven lookup or dispatch table.
MsgDialog.Init (cyclomatic 18) EUD Editor 3/Window/MsgDialog.xaml.vb:5— MsgDialog.Init has cyclomatic complexity 18 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function, or replace a long branch ladder over a single value with a data-driven lookup or dispatch table.
SettingWindows.Window_Loaded (cyclomatic 18) EUD Editor 3/Window/SettingWindows.xaml.vb:6— SettingWindows.Window_Loaded has cyclomatic complexity 18 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function, or replace a long branch ladder over a single value with a data-driven lookup or dispatch table.
GRPManager.LoadSDGRP (cyclomatic 17) REDACTED:273— GRPManager.LoadSDGRP has cyclomatic complexity 17 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function, or replace a long branch ladder over a single value with a data-driven lookup or dispatch table.
MacroManager.ConditionDatFile (cyclomatic 17) EUD Editor 3/Class/MacroFunc/MacroDefaultFunction.vb:428— MacroManager.ConditionDatFile has cyclomatic complexity 17 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function, or replace a long branch ladder over a single value with a data-driven lookup or dispatch table.
TriggerCodeBlock.GetEditorText (cyclomatic 17) REDACTED:196— TriggerCodeBlock.GetEditorText has cyclomatic complexity 17 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function, or replace a long branch ladder over a single value with a data-driven lookup or dispatch table.
CodeEditor.LoaddotData (cyclomatic 17) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/CodeEditor/funcLoader.vb:453— CodeEditor.LoaddotData has cyclomatic complexity 17 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function, or replace a long branch ladder over a single value with a data-driven lookup or dispatch table.
GUIScriptEditorUI.ItemFixer (cyclomatic 17) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/GUIEditorPage/Scripter/GUIScriptEditorUI.xaml.vb:88— GUIScriptEditorUI.ItemFixer has cyclomatic complexity 17 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function, or replace a long branch ladder over a single value with a data-driven lookup or dispatch table.
SCADataList.OpenEditWindow (cyclomatic 17) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/TriggerEditorSetting/SCADataList.xaml.vb:87— SCADataList.OpenEditWindow has cyclomatic complexity 17 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function, or replace a long branch ladder over a single value with a data-driven lookup or dispatch table.
DataManager.ResetDatPage (cyclomatic 16) EUD Editor 3/Class/DataManager.vb:375— DataManager.ResetDatPage has cyclomatic complexity 16 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function, or replace a long branch ladder over a single value with a data-driven lookup or dispatch table.
GRPManager.LoadHDGRP (cyclomatic 16) REDACTED:428— GRPManager.LoadHDGRP has cyclomatic complexity 16 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function, or replace a long branch ladder over a single value with a data-driven lookup or dispatch table. This shape REPEATS in the file: one other method here (GRPManager.LoadCarbotGRP) has the same decision points, in the same order, at the same nesting depths — so this is one pattern written twice rather than two separate problems. Splitting this body alone leaves the other exactly as it is. Where these are variations on one operation, the change that clears both is the shared one: lift the common shape into a single routine the variants call, parameterised by whatever genuinely differs between them, and keep in each method only the part that is not shared.
GRPManager.LoadCarbotGRP (cyclomatic 16) REDACTED:546— GRPManager.LoadCarbotGRP has cyclomatic complexity 16 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function, or replace a long branch ladder over a single value with a data-driven lookup or dispatch table. This shape REPEATS in the file: one other method here (GRPManager.LoadHDGRP) has the same decision points, in the same order, at the same nesting depths — so this is one pattern written twice rather than two separate problems. Splitting this body alone leaves the other exactly as it is. Where these are variations on one operation, the change that clears both is the shared one: lift the common shape into a single routine the variants call, parameterised by whatever genuinely differs between them, and keep in each method only the part that is not shared.
StringTool.GetCharAt (cyclomatic 16) EUD Editor 3/Module/StringTool.vb:128— StringTool.GetCharAt has cyclomatic complexity 16 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function, or replace a long branch ladder over a single value with a data-driven lookup or dispatch table.
CodeEditor.ExternerLoader (cyclomatic 16) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/CodeEditor/ExternerManager.vb:76— CodeEditor.ExternerLoader has cyclomatic complexity 16 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function, or replace a long branch ladder over a single value with a data-driven lookup or dispatch table.
StatTxtData.LimitShortCut (cyclomatic 16) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/DataEditor/StatTxtData.xaml.vb:108— StatTxtData.LimitShortCut has cyclomatic complexity 16 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function, or replace a long branch ladder over a single value with a data-driven lookup or dispatch table.
TECTPage.PlayerListReset (cyclomatic 16) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/ClassicTrigger/TECTPage.xaml.vb:49— TECTPage.PlayerListReset has cyclomatic complexity 16 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function, or replace a long branch ladder over a single value with a data-driven lookup or dispatch table.
GUIScriptEditorUI.OkayBtnEvent (cyclomatic 16) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/GUIEditorPage/Scripter/GUIScriptEditorUIClass/AddItem.vb:185— GUIScriptEditorUI.OkayBtnEvent has cyclomatic complexity 16 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function, or replace a long branch ladder over a single value with a data-driven lookup or dispatch table.
D18 · Solution Shape· Solution references a project that does not exist · ×1
Solution references a project that does not exist EUD Editor 3.sln— `EUD Editor 3.sln` declares 1 project file(s) that are missing from the tree (`BingsuCodeEditor.csproj`). A solution-level restore or build fails on a dangling reference, so anyone building the solution rather than an individual project is blocked. Delete the stale entry from the solution, or restore the missing project file.
Parser.GetScriptBlock (cognitive 495) EUD Editor 3/Compiler/Parser/Parser.vb:579— Parser.GetScriptBlock has cognitive complexity 495 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
Lexical_Analyzer.DoWork (cognitive 271) EUD Editor 3/Compiler/Lexical Analyzer/Lexical Analyzer.vb:6— Lexical_Analyzer.DoWork has cognitive complexity 271 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
GUIScriptManager.GetItemScriptText (cognitive 239) EUD Editor 3/Class/TriggerEditor/GUIScriptEditor/GUIScriptManager.vb:233— GUIScriptManager.GetItemScriptText has cognitive complexity 239 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
CodeSelecter.ListCreateData (cognitive 224) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/Field/CodeSelecter.xaml.vb:609— CodeSelecter.ListCreateData has cognitive complexity 224 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
MacroManager.MacroApply (cognitive 162) EUD Editor 3/Class/MacroFunc/MacroManager.vb:184— MacroManager.MacroApply has cognitive complexity 162 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
ListSelecter.ListResetData (cognitive 161) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/DataEditor/ListSelecter.xaml.vb:409— ListSelecter.ListResetData has cognitive complexity 161 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
MapData.LoadDataStormLib (cognitive 155) EUD Editor 3/Class/Data/MapData.vb:161— MapData.LoadDataStormLib has cognitive complexity 155 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
MapData.LoadDataSFMPQ (cognitive 135) EUD Editor 3/Class/Data/MapData.vb:637— MapData.LoadDataSFMPQ has cognitive complexity 135 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
CodeGrouping.CodeGrouping (cognitive 112) EUD Editor 3/Class/CodeGrouping.vb:80— CodeGrouping.CodeGrouping has cognitive complexity 112 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
TEGUIObjectSelecter.ToolBoxListRefresh (cognitive 101) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/GUIEditorPage/TEGUIObjectSelecter.xaml.vb:106— TEGUIObjectSelecter.ToolBoxListRefresh has cognitive complexity 101 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
DataManager.PasteDatPage (cognitive 100) EUD Editor 3/Class/DataManager.vb:166— DataManager.PasteDatPage has cognitive complexity 100 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
ClassicTriggerEditor.GetEpsText (cognitive 96) EUD Editor 3/Class/TriggerEditor/ClassicEditor/ClassicTriggerEditor.vb:141— ClassicTriggerEditor.GetEpsText has cognitive complexity 96 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
CodeEditor.textEditor_KeyboardInput (cognitive 93) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/CodeEditor/EnteredText.vb:10— CodeEditor.textEditor_KeyboardInput has cognitive complexity 93 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
LagacySaveLoad.Load (cognitive 91) EUD Editor 3/EUDEditor2/SaveLoadClass/LagacySaveLoad.vb:33— LagacySaveLoad.Load has cognitive complexity 91 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
DataManager.PasteDatObject (cognitive 88) EUD Editor 3/Class/DataManager.vb:283— DataManager.PasteDatObject has cognitive complexity 88 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
GUI_Action_ArgSelecter.CrlInit (cognitive 88) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/GUIEditorPage/Scripter/ScriptEditer/GUI_ActionValueSelect/GUI_Action_ArgSelecter.xaml.vb:37— GUI_Action_ArgSelecter.CrlInit has cognitive complexity 88 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
ScriptBlock.FuncCoder (cognitive 87) REDACTED:725— ScriptBlock.FuncCoder has cognitive complexity 87 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
ScriptBlock.ValueCoder (cognitive 84) REDACTED:386— ScriptBlock.ValueCoder has cognitive complexity 84 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
GUI_VarFuncUse.CrlInit (cognitive 80) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/GUIEditorPage/Scripter/ScriptEditer/GUI_VarFuncUse.xaml.vb:17— GUI_VarFuncUse.CrlInit has cognitive complexity 80 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
CodeEditor.ShowFuncTooltip (cognitive 78) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/CodeEditor/Init.vb:154— CodeEditor.ShowFuncTooltip has cognitive complexity 78 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
GUIScriptEditorUI.MainTreeview_SelectedItemChanged (cognitive 76) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/GUIEditorPage/Scripter/GUIScriptEditorUI.xaml.vb:751— GUIScriptEditorUI.MainTreeview_SelectedItemChanged has cognitive complexity 76 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
Trigger.GetTriggerCodeText (cognitive 72) REDACTED:182— Trigger.GetTriggerCodeText has cognitive complexity 72 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
Parser.Decoder (cognitive 72) EUD Editor 3/Compiler/Parser/Parser.vb:68— Parser.Decoder has cognitive complexity 72 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
GUI_VarFuncUse.EnCoding (cognitive 68) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/GUIEditorPage/Scripter/ScriptEditer/GUI_VarFuncUse.xaml.vb:404— GUI_VarFuncUse.EnCoding has cognitive complexity 68 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
LagacySaveLoad.Save (cognitive 66) EUD Editor 3/EUDEditor2/SaveLoadClass/LagacySaveLoad.vb:366— LagacySaveLoad.Save has cognitive complexity 66 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
GUI_FunctionSelecter.ListReset (cognitive 62) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/GUIEditorPage/Scripter/ScriptEditer/GUI_ActionValueSelect/GUI_FunctionSelecter.xaml.vb:38— GUI_FunctionSelecter.ListReset has cognitive complexity 62 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
TriggerFunction.GetFunctionFromStr (cognitive 59) EUD Editor 3/Class/TriggerEditor/TriggerFunction.vb:383— TriggerFunction.GetFunctionFromStr has cognitive complexity 59 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
CodeEditor.LoaddotData (cognitive 58) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/CodeEditor/funcLoader.vb:453— CodeEditor.LoaddotData has cognitive complexity 58 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
GUI_For.ResetControl (cognitive 58) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/GUIEditorPage/Scripter/ScriptEditer/GUI_For.xaml.vb:162— GUI_For.ResetControl has cognitive complexity 58 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
GUIScriptManager.GetLocalVar (cognitive 57) EUD Editor 3/Class/TriggerEditor/GUIScriptEditor/ScriptTool/GUIVarAnalyze.vb:20— GUIScriptManager.GetLocalVar has cognitive complexity 57 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
ArgManager.GetArgList (cognitive 57) EUD Editor 3/Module/Tools/ArgManager.vb:5— ArgManager.GetArgList has cognitive complexity 57 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
CIScript.playScript (cognitive 56) EUD Editor 3/Class/GRP/SCIScriptMoudle.vb:357— CIScript.playScript has cognitive complexity 56 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
ProjectData.FileCheck_Tick (cognitive 55) EUD Editor 3/Class/Data/ProjectData/Timer.vb:11— ProjectData.FileCheck_Tick has cognitive complexity 55 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
LuaFunction.New.ctor (cognitive 55) EUD Editor 3/Class/MacroFunc/MacroManager.vb:533— LuaFunction.New.ctor has cognitive complexity 55 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
TriggerEditValueSelecterWindow.ArgSelectBoxRefresh (cognitive 52) EUD Editor 3/Window/TriggerEditValueSelecterWindow.xaml.vb:261— TriggerEditValueSelecterWindow.ArgSelectBoxRefresh has cognitive complexity 52 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
BuildData.CheckBuildable (cognitive 51) EUD Editor 3/Class/BulidData/BulidMain.vb:155— BuildData.CheckBuildable has cognitive complexity 51 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
ListItemCodeBlock.RefreshItem (cognitive 51) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/ClassicTrigger/ListItemCodeBlock.xaml.vb:17— ListItemCodeBlock.RefreshItem has cognitive complexity 51 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
CodeEditor.ShowCompletion (cognitive 50) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/CodeEditor/Init.vb:378— CodeEditor.ShowCompletion has cognitive complexity 50 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
GUIScriptEditorUI.CheckValidated (cognitive 50) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/GUIEditorPage/Scripter/GUIScriptEditorUIClass/AddRule.vb:10— GUIScriptEditorUI.CheckValidated has cognitive complexity 50 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
GRPBox.Exec (cognitive 49) EUD Editor 3/Class/GRP/GRPBox.vb:82— GRPBox.Exec has cognitive complexity 49 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
TriggerCodeBlock.GetEditorText (cognitive 49) REDACTED:196— TriggerCodeBlock.GetEditorText has cognitive complexity 49 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
ScriptBlock.RefreshValue (cognitive 49) REDACTED:285— ScriptBlock.RefreshValue has cognitive complexity 49 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
ListSelecter.ContextMenu_Opened (cognitive 49) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/DataEditor/ListSelecter.xaml.vb:122— ListSelecter.ContextMenu_Opened has cognitive complexity 49 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
CodeSelecter.ContextMenu_Opened (cognitive 49) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/Field/CodeSelecter.xaml.vb:140— CodeSelecter.ContextMenu_Opened has cognitive complexity 49 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
ColoredTextBox.TextColred (cognitive 49) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/Field/ColoredTextBox.xaml.vb:30— ColoredTextBox.TextColred has cognitive complexity 49 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
GRPManager.LoadHDGRP (cognitive 48) REDACTED:428— GRPManager.LoadHDGRP has cognitive complexity 48 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function. This shape REPEATS in the file: one other method here (GRPManager.LoadCarbotGRP) has the same decision points, in the same order, at the same nesting depths — so this is one pattern written twice rather than two separate problems. Splitting this body alone leaves the other exactly as it is. Where these are variations on one operation, the change that clears both is the shared one: lift the common shape into a single routine the variants call, parameterised by whatever genuinely differs between them, and keep in each method only the part that is not shared.
GRPManager.LoadCarbotGRP (cognitive 48) REDACTED:546— GRPManager.LoadCarbotGRP has cognitive complexity 48 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function. This shape REPEATS in the file: one other method here (GRPManager.LoadHDGRP) has the same decision points, in the same order, at the same nesting depths — so this is one pattern written twice rather than two separate problems. Splitting this body alone leaves the other exactly as it is. Where these are variations on one operation, the change that clears both is the shared one: lift the common shape into a single routine the variants call, parameterised by whatever genuinely differs between them, and keep in each method only the part that is not shared.
CFunc.LoadFunc (cognitive 48) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/CodeEditor/CFunc.vb:417— CFunc.LoadFunc has cognitive complexity 48 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
InputField.Init (cognitive 48) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/Field/InputField.xaml.vb:187— InputField.Init has cognitive complexity 48 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
SCADataList.VariableReset (cognitive 48) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/TriggerEditorSetting/SCADataList.xaml.vb:305— SCADataList.VariableReset has cognitive complexity 48 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
CodeEditor.GetArgList (cognitive 47) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/CodeEditor/funcLoader.vb:10— CodeEditor.GetArgList has cognitive complexity 47 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
StatTxtData.LimitShortCut (cognitive 47) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/DataEditor/StatTxtData.xaml.vb:108— StatTxtData.LimitShortCut has cognitive complexity 47 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
GUIScriptEditorUI.PasteSelectItem (cognitive 47) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/GUIEditorPage/Scripter/GUIScriptEditorUI.xaml.vb:253— GUIScriptEditorUI.PasteSelectItem has cognitive complexity 47 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
FunctionToolTip.New.ctor (cognitive 46) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/CodeEditor/CFunc.vb:71— FunctionToolTip.New.ctor has cognitive complexity 46 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
MacroManager.ConditionDatFile (cognitive 45) EUD Editor 3/Class/MacroFunc/MacroDefaultFunction.vb:428— MacroManager.ConditionDatFile has cognitive complexity 45 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
StringTool.GetCharAt (cognitive 45) EUD Editor 3/Module/StringTool.vb:128— StringTool.GetCharAt has cognitive complexity 45 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
BuildData.Build (cognitive 43) EUD Editor 3/Class/BulidData/BulidMain.vb:24— BuildData.Build has cognitive complexity 43 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
CodeEditor.ExternerLoader (cognitive 43) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/CodeEditor/ExternerManager.vb:76— CodeEditor.ExternerLoader has cognitive complexity 43 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
ProjectExplorer.ContextMenu_Opened (cognitive 43) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/WorkTab/ProjectExplorer/Menu.vb:7— ProjectExplorer.ContextMenu_Opened has cognitive complexity 43 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
GUIScriptManager.GetExternVar (cognitive 41) EUD Editor 3/Class/TriggerEditor/GUIScriptEditor/ScriptTool/GUIVarAnalyze.vb:149— GUIScriptManager.GetExternVar has cognitive complexity 41 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
SCADataList.OpenEditWindow (cognitive 41) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/TriggerEditorSetting/SCADataList.xaml.vb:87— SCADataList.OpenEditWindow has cognitive complexity 41 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
GRPManager.LoadSDGRP (cognitive 40) REDACTED:273— GRPManager.LoadSDGRP has cognitive complexity 40 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
MacroManager.SetDatFile (cognitive 40) EUD Editor 3/Class/MacroFunc/MacroDefaultFunction.vb:321— MacroManager.SetDatFile has cognitive complexity 40 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
ConsoleTextbox.ConsoleKeyDown (cognitive 40) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/CommandConsole/ConsoleTextbox.xaml.vb:213— ConsoleTextbox.ConsoleKeyDown has cognitive complexity 40 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
CodeEditor.AutoInserter (cognitive 40) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/CodeEditor/Init.vb:642— CodeEditor.AutoInserter has cognitive complexity 40 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
GUI_ArgExpress.maingrid_PreviewMouseMove (cognitive 40) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/GUIEditorPage/Scripter/ScriptEditer/GUI_ArgExpress.xaml.vb:65— GUI_ArgExpress.maingrid_PreviewMouseMove has cognitive complexity 40 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
ExtraDatFiles.LoadReqdata (cognitive 38) EUD Editor 3/Class/ExtraData/ExtraDatFiles.vb:127— ExtraDatFiles.LoadReqdata has cognitive complexity 38 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
TrgUnitPorperty.RefreshValue (cognitive 38) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/ClassicTrigger/TrgUnitProperty.xaml.vb:77— TrgUnitPorperty.RefreshValue has cognitive complexity 38 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
GUI_Action_UnitProperty.RefreshValue (cognitive 38) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/GUIEditorPage/Scripter/ScriptEditer/GUI_ActionValueSelect/GUI_Action_UnitProperty.xaml.vb:14— GUI_Action_UnitProperty.RefreshValue has cognitive complexity 38 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
BGMPlayerConverter.BGMProcess (cognitive 38) EUD Editor 3/Window/BGMPlayerConverter.xaml.vb:32— BGMPlayerConverter.BGMProcess has cognitive complexity 38 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
GRP.LoadGRP (cognitive 37) EUD Editor 3/Class/GRP/GRP.vb:483— GRP.LoadGRP has cognitive complexity 37 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
GRP.DrawToBytes (cognitive 37) EUD Editor 3/Class/GRP/GRP.vb:592— GRP.DrawToBytes has cognitive complexity 37 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
CodeEditor.LoadData (cognitive 37) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/CodeEditor/funcLoader.vb:294— CodeEditor.LoadData has cognitive complexity 37 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
IconSelecter.Init (cognitive 36) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/Field/IconSelecter.xaml.vb:14— IconSelecter.Init has cognitive complexity 36 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
BindingManager.New.ctor (cognitive 35) EUD Editor 3/Class/Binding/BindingManager.vb:68— BindingManager.New.ctor has cognitive complexity 35 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
UnitData.LoasScreen (cognitive 35) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/DataEditor/UnitData.xaml.vb:45— UnitData.LoasScreen has cognitive complexity 35 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
IconSelecter.ReLoad (cognitive 35) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/Field/IconSelecter.xaml.vb:202— IconSelecter.ReLoad has cognitive complexity 35 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
BuildData.Starteds (cognitive 34) EUD Editor 3/Class/BulidData/BulidMain.vb:380— BuildData.Starteds has cognitive complexity 34 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
ArgValue.GetCodeText (cognitive 34) REDACTED:50— ArgValue.GetCodeText has cognitive complexity 34 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
CodeEditor.LoadMacroData (cognitive 34) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/CodeEditor/funcLoader.vb:532— CodeEditor.LoadMacroData has cognitive complexity 34 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
GUIScriptEditorUI.ItemFixer (cognitive 34) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/GUIEditorPage/Scripter/GUIScriptEditorUI.xaml.vb:88— GUIScriptEditorUI.ItemFixer has cognitive complexity 34 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
ConsoleTextbox.LoadAutocmp (cognitive 33) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/CommandConsole/AutoComplete.vb:2— ConsoleTextbox.LoadAutocmp has cognitive complexity 33 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
GUIScriptEditorUI.AddItemClick (cognitive 33) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/GUIEditorPage/Scripter/GUIScriptEditorUIClass/AddItem.vb:2— GUIScriptEditorUI.AddItemClick has cognitive complexity 33 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
ExtraDatBinding.Value.Set (cognitive 31) EUD Editor 3/Class/Binding/ExtraDatBinding.vb:208— ExtraDatBinding.Value.Set has cognitive complexity 31 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
Parser.GetGUIScripter (cognitive 31) EUD Editor 3/Compiler/Parser/Parser.vb:542— Parser.GetGUIScripter has cognitive complexity 31 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
CodeSelecter.ListReset (cognitive 31) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/Field/CodeSelecter.xaml.vb:406— CodeSelecter.ListReset has cognitive complexity 31 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
tblReader.New.ctor (cognitive 30) EUD Editor 3/Class/tblReader.vb:17— tblReader.New.ctor has cognitive complexity 30 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
TreeviewExample.MainTreeviewItme_PreviewMouseUp (cognitive 30) EUD Editor 3/TEST/UIEditorPage/DragItem.vb:42— TreeviewExample.MainTreeviewItme_PreviewMouseUp has cognitive complexity 30 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
EdsBlockItem.GetEdsString (cognitive 29) EUD Editor 3/Class/BulidData/WriteedsFile.vb:125— EdsBlockItem.GetEdsString has cognitive complexity 29 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
BuildData.WriteRequireData (cognitive 29) EUD Editor 3/Class/BulidData/WriteReqFile.vb:5— BuildData.WriteRequireData has cognitive complexity 29 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
CodeConnecter.NotifyPropertyChanged (cognitive 29) EUD Editor 3/Class/CodeConnecter.vb:114— CodeConnecter.NotifyPropertyChanged has cognitive complexity 29 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
DataManager.ResetDatPage (cognitive 29) EUD Editor 3/Class/DataManager.vb:375— DataManager.ResetDatPage has cognitive complexity 29 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
TriggerCodeBlock.LoadArgText (cognitive 29) REDACTED:122— TriggerCodeBlock.LoadArgText has cognitive complexity 29 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
StringTool.ChangeCharAt (cognitive 28) EUD Editor 3/Module/StringTool.vb:45— StringTool.ChangeCharAt has cognitive complexity 28 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
CodeSelecter.AddTreeList (cognitive 28) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/Field/CodeSelecter.xaml.vb:1161— CodeSelecter.AddTreeList has cognitive complexity 28 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
InputField.ReLoad (cognitive 28) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/Field/InputField.xaml.vb:19— InputField.ReLoad has cognitive complexity 28 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
TriggerManager.GetListFromEpScript (cognitive 27) EUD Editor 3/Class/TriggerEditor/TriggerFunction.vb:275— TriggerManager.GetListFromEpScript has cognitive complexity 27 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
TreeviewExample.ListClick (cognitive 27) EUD Editor 3/TEST/UIEditorPage/System.vb:55— TreeviewExample.ListClick has cognitive complexity 27 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
ProjectExplorer.ListClick (cognitive 27) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/WorkTab/ProjectExplorer/System.vb:81— ProjectExplorer.ListClick has cognitive complexity 27 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
CodeEditor._FildFile (cognitive 26) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/CodeEditor/ExternerManager.vb:8— CodeEditor._FildFile has cognitive complexity 26 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
ListSelecter.AddTreeList (cognitive 26) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/DataEditor/ListSelecter.xaml.vb:812— ListSelecter.AddTreeList has cognitive complexity 26 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
TriggerEditor.CheckTabablzControl (cognitive 26) EUD Editor 3/Window/TriggerEditor.xaml.vb:349— TriggerEditor.CheckTabablzControl has cognitive complexity 26 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
CodeConnecter.ListReset (cognitive 25) EUD Editor 3/Class/CodeConnecter.vb:52— CodeConnecter.ListReset has cognitive complexity 25 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
FuncDefine.InitCFunc (cognitive 25) EUD Editor 3/Class/TriggerEditor/FuncArgManager.vb:159— FuncDefine.InitCFunc has cognitive complexity 25 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
TriggerCodeBlock.GetCodeText (cognitive 25) REDACTED:10— TriggerCodeBlock.GetCodeText has cognitive complexity 25 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
IconSelecter.Click (cognitive 25) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/Field/IconSelecter.xaml.vb:376— IconSelecter.Click has cognitive complexity 25 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
TriggerCodeEditControl.FliterApply (cognitive 25) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/ClassicTrigger/TriggerCodeEditControl.xaml.vb:217— TriggerCodeEditControl.FliterApply has cognitive complexity 25 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
TriggerCodeEditControl.FuncRefresh (cognitive 25) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/ClassicTrigger/TriggerCodeEditContorlFunc/ArgChange.vb:42— TriggerCodeEditControl.FuncRefresh has cognitive complexity 25 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
GUI_ArgEditor.TypeboxInit (cognitive 25) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/GUIEditorPage/Scripter/ScriptEditer/GUI_ArgEditor.xaml.vb:133— GUI_ArgEditor.TypeboxInit has cognitive complexity 25 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
ScriptTreeviewitem.Refresh (cognitive 25) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/GUIEditorPage/Scripter/ScriptTreeviewitem.xaml.vb:22— ScriptTreeviewitem.Refresh has cognitive complexity 25 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
UIManager.Back.Get (cognitive 24) EUD Editor 3/Class/Binding/UIManager.vb:214— UIManager.Back.Get has cognitive complexity 24 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function. This shape REPEATS in the file: one other method here (UIManager.TreeviewBack.Get) has the same decision points, in the same order, at the same nesting depths — so this is one pattern written twice rather than two separate problems. Splitting this body alone leaves the other exactly as it is. Where these are variations on one operation, the change that clears both is the shared one: lift the common shape into a single routine the variants call, parameterised by whatever genuinely differs between them, and keep in each method only the part that is not shared.
UIManager.TreeviewBack.Get (cognitive 24) EUD Editor 3/Class/Binding/UIManager.vb:256— UIManager.TreeviewBack.Get has cognitive complexity 24 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function. This shape REPEATS in the file: one other method here (UIManager.Back.Get) has the same decision points, in the same order, at the same nesting depths — so this is one pattern written twice rather than two separate problems. Splitting this body alone leaves the other exactly as it is. Where these are variations on one operation, the change that clears both is the shared one: lift the common shape into a single routine the variants call, parameterised by whatever genuinely differs between them, and keep in each method only the part that is not shared.
ByteBitmap.GetWireFrame (cognitive 24) EUD Editor 3/Class/Bitmap/BitmapManager.vb:294— ByteBitmap.GetWireFrame has cognitive complexity 24 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
GlobalObj.InitProgram (cognitive 24) EUD Editor 3/Module/GlobalObj.vb:93— GlobalObj.InitProgram has cognitive complexity 24 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
Tool.TextColorBlock (cognitive 24) EUD Editor 3/Module/Tools/Tool.vb:253— Tool.TextColorBlock has cognitive complexity 24 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
WindowMenus.OpenTriggerEdit (cognitive 24) EUD Editor 3/Module/Tools/WindowControl.vb:427— WindowMenus.OpenTriggerEdit has cognitive complexity 24 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function. This shape REPEATS in the file: one other method here (WindowMenus.OpenPlugin) has the same decision points, in the same order, at the same nesting depths — so this is one pattern written twice rather than two separate problems. Splitting this body alone leaves the other exactly as it is. Where these are variations on one operation, the change that clears both is the shared one: lift the common shape into a single routine the variants call, parameterised by whatever genuinely differs between them, and keep in each method only the part that is not shared.
WindowMenus.OpenPlugin (cognitive 24) EUD Editor 3/Module/Tools/WindowControl.vb:480— WindowMenus.OpenPlugin has cognitive complexity 24 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function. This shape REPEATS in the file: one other method here (WindowMenus.OpenTriggerEdit) has the same decision points, in the same order, at the same nesting depths — so this is one pattern written twice rather than two separate problems. Splitting this body alone leaves the other exactly as it is. Where these are variations on one operation, the change that clears both is the shared one: lift the common shape into a single routine the variants call, parameterised by whatever genuinely differs between them, and keep in each method only the part that is not shared.
GUI_ArgExpress.InsertChip (cognitive 24) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/GUIEditorPage/Scripter/ScriptEditer/GUI_ArgExpress.xaml.vb:305— GUI_ArgExpress.InsertChip has cognitive complexity 24 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
GRP.DrawGRP (cognitive 23) EUD Editor 3/Class/GRP/GRP.vb:667— GRP.DrawGRP has cognitive complexity 23 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
TriggerManager.GetVariableFromEpScript (cognitive 23) EUD Editor 3/Class/TriggerEditor/TriggerFunction.vb:184— TriggerManager.GetVariableFromEpScript has cognitive complexity 23 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
ErrorItem.New.ctor (cognitive 23) EUD Editor 3/Module/Tools/BuildErrorHandling.vb:89— ErrorItem.New.ctor has cognitive complexity 23 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
GUIScriptEditorUI.OkayBtnEvent (cognitive 23) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/GUIEditorPage/Scripter/GUIScriptEditorUIClass/AddItem.vb:185— GUIScriptEditorUI.OkayBtnEvent has cognitive complexity 23 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
GUIScriptEditorUI.FoldUnder_Click (cognitive 23) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/GUIEditorPage/Scripter/GUIScriptEditorUI.xaml.vb:874— GUIScriptEditorUI.FoldUnder_Click has cognitive complexity 23 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function. This shape REPEATS in the file: one other method here (GUIScriptEditorUI.UnFoldUnder_Click) has the same decision points, in the same order, at the same nesting depths — so this is one pattern written twice rather than two separate problems. Splitting this body alone leaves the other exactly as it is. Where these are variations on one operation, the change that clears both is the shared one: lift the common shape into a single routine the variants call, parameterised by whatever genuinely differs between them, and keep in each method only the part that is not shared.
GUIScriptEditorUI.UnFoldUnder_Click (cognitive 23) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/GUIEditorPage/Scripter/GUIScriptEditorUI.xaml.vb:898— GUIScriptEditorUI.UnFoldUnder_Click has cognitive complexity 23 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function. This shape REPEATS in the file: one other method here (GUIScriptEditorUI.FoldUnder_Click) has the same decision points, in the same order, at the same nesting depths — so this is one pattern written twice rather than two separate problems. Splitting this body alone leaves the other exactly as it is. Where these are variations on one operation, the change that clears both is the shared one: lift the common shape into a single routine the variants call, parameterised by whatever genuinely differs between them, and keep in each method only the part that is not shared.
BuildData.WriteDatFile (cognitive 22) EUD Editor 3/Class/BulidData/WriteDatFile.vb:5— BuildData.WriteDatFile has cognitive complexity 22 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
DataManager.CopyDatObject (cognitive 22) EUD Editor 3/Class/DataManager.vb:104— DataManager.CopyDatObject has cognitive complexity 22 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
ProjectData.Save (cognitive 22) REDACTED:7— ProjectData.Save has cognitive complexity 22 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
ArgValue.GetEditorText (cognitive 22) REDACTED:105— ArgValue.GetEditorText has cognitive complexity 22 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
TECTPage.PlayerListReset (cognitive 22) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/ClassicTrigger/TECTPage.xaml.vb:49— TECTPage.PlayerListReset has cognitive complexity 22 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
GUI_ObjectSelecter.ListReset (cognitive 22) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/GUIEditorPage/Scripter/ScriptEditer/GUI_ActionValueSelect/GUI_ObjectSelecter.xaml.vb:17— GUI_ObjectSelecter.ListReset has cognitive complexity 22 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
SettingWindows.Window_Loaded (cognitive 22) EUD Editor 3/Window/SettingWindows.xaml.vb:6— SettingWindows.Window_Loaded has cognitive complexity 22 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
BindingManager.ExtraDatBinding.Get (cognitive 21) EUD Editor 3/Class/Binding/BindingManager.vb:341— BindingManager.ExtraDatBinding.Get has cognitive complexity 21 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
BuildData.WriteWireFrame (cognitive 21) EUD Editor 3/Class/BulidData/WriteDatFile.vb:180— BuildData.WriteWireFrame has cognitive complexity 21 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
CodeSelecter.Refresh (cognitive 21) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/Field/CodeSelecter.xaml.vb:357— CodeSelecter.Refresh has cognitive complexity 21 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
RequireListBox.MainListBox_PreviewMouseMove (cognitive 21) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/Field/Require/RequireListBox.xaml.vb:440— RequireListBox.MainListBox_PreviewMouseMove has cognitive complexity 21 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
GUI_Var.CrlRefresh (cognitive 21) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/GUIEditorPage/Scripter/ScriptEditer/GUI_Var.xaml.vb:64— GUI_Var.CrlRefresh has cognitive complexity 21 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
ProjectExplorer.MainTreeviewItme_PreviewMouseUp (cognitive 21) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/WorkTab/ProjectExplorer/DragItem.vb:131— ProjectExplorer.MainTreeviewItme_PreviewMouseUp has cognitive complexity 21 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
SettingWindows.UpdateChecker_RunWorkerCompleted (cognitive 21) EUD Editor 3/Window/SettingWindows.xaml.vb:185— SettingWindows.UpdateChecker_RunWorkerCompleted has cognitive complexity 21 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
BuildData.GetSCAEps (cognitive 20) EUD Editor 3/Class/BulidData/WriteSCAData.vb:524— BuildData.GetSCAEps has cognitive complexity 20 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
ProjectData.UnitName.Get (cognitive 20) EUD Editor 3/Class/Data/ProjectData/ProjectData.vb:671— ProjectData.UnitName.Get has cognitive complexity 20 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
TECTPage.PasteTrigger (cognitive 20) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/ClassicTrigger/TECTPageFunc/PasteTrigger.vb:51— TECTPage.PasteTrigger has cognitive complexity 20 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
TriggerEditControl.ButtonRefresh (cognitive 20) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/ClassicTrigger/TriggerEditControl.xaml.vb:122— TriggerEditControl.ButtonRefresh has cognitive complexity 20 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
MsgDialog.Init (cognitive 20) EUD Editor 3/Window/MsgDialog.xaml.vb:5— MsgDialog.Init has cognitive complexity 20 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
DataManager.ResetDatObject (cognitive 19) EUD Editor 3/Class/DataManager.vb:454— DataManager.ResetDatObject has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
LuaFunction.New.ctor (cognitive 19) EUD Editor 3/Class/MacroFunc/MacroManager.vb:691— LuaFunction.New.ctor has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
GUIScriptManager.GetObjectFromCFunc (cognitive 19) EUD Editor 3/Class/TriggerEditor/GUIScriptEditor/ScriptTool/GUIObjectAnalyze.vb:35— GUIScriptManager.GetObjectFromCFunc has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
GUIScriptManager.GetObjectByName (cognitive 19) EUD Editor 3/Class/TriggerEditor/GUIScriptEditor/ScriptTool/GUIObjectAnalyze.vb:80— GUIScriptManager.GetObjectByName has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
WindowControl.CloseCheckTabablzControl (cognitive 19) EUD Editor 3/Module/Tools/WindowControl.vb:222— WindowControl.CloseCheckTabablzControl has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
WindowMenus.ScmdOpen (cognitive 19) EUD Editor 3/Module/Tools/WindowControl.vb:351— WindowMenus.ScmdOpen has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
CFunc.BraketLiner (cognitive 19) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/CodeEditor/CFunc.vb:375— CFunc.BraketLiner has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
ListSelecter.CodeIndexerList_KeyDown (cognitive 19) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/DataEditor/ListSelecter.xaml.vb:19— ListSelecter.CodeIndexerList_KeyDown has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
CodeSelecter.CodeIndexerList_KeyDown (cognitive 19) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/Field/CodeSelecter.xaml.vb:31— CodeSelecter.CodeIndexerList_KeyDown has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
SCALuaImportManager.GetTEFileContent (cognitive 19) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/SCAScriptPage/SCALuaImportManager.vb:7— SCALuaImportManager.GetTEFileContent has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
EpsImportManager.GetTEFileContent (cognitive 19) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/CUIEditorPage/EpsImportManager.vb:8— EpsImportManager.GetTEFileContent has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
GUIScriptEditorUI.DeleteSelectItem (cognitive 19) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/GUIEditorPage/Scripter/GUIScriptEditorUI.xaml.vb:398— GUIScriptEditorUI.DeleteSelectItem has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
ProjectExplorer.AddSelectItem (cognitive 19) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/WorkTab/ProjectExplorer/System.vb:26— ProjectExplorer.AddSelectItem has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
TriggerEditValueSelecterWindow.SelectListbox_SelectionChanged (cognitive 19) EUD Editor 3/Window/TriggerEditValueSelecterWindow.xaml.vb:824— TriggerEditValueSelecterWindow.SelectListbox_SelectionChanged has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
ProjectData.CodeLabel.Get (cognitive 18) EUD Editor 3/Class/Data/ProjectData/ProjectData.vb:579— ProjectData.CodeLabel.Get has cognitive complexity 18 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
FuncDefine.InitScript (cognitive 18) EUD Editor 3/Class/TriggerEditor/FuncArgManager.vb:222— FuncDefine.InitScript has cognitive complexity 18 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
FuncDefine.New.ctor (cognitive 18) EUD Editor 3/Class/TriggerEditor/FuncArgManager.vb:272— FuncDefine.New.ctor has cognitive complexity 18 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
GUIScriptEditorUI.MoveUpItem (cognitive 18) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/GUIEditorPage/Scripter/GUIScriptEditorUI.xaml.vb:429— GUIScriptEditorUI.MoveUpItem has cognitive complexity 18 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function. This shape REPEATS in the file: one other method here (GUIScriptEditorUI.MoveDownItem) has the same decision points, in the same order, at the same nesting depths — so this is one pattern written twice rather than two separate problems. Splitting this body alone leaves the other exactly as it is. Where these are variations on one operation, the change that clears both is the shared one: lift the common shape into a single routine the variants call, parameterised by whatever genuinely differs between them, and keep in each method only the part that is not shared.
GUIScriptEditorUI.MoveDownItem (cognitive 18) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/GUIEditorPage/Scripter/GUIScriptEditorUI.xaml.vb:492— GUIScriptEditorUI.MoveDownItem has cognitive complexity 18 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function. This shape REPEATS in the file: one other method here (GUIScriptEditorUI.MoveUpItem) has the same decision points, in the same order, at the same nesting depths — so this is one pattern written twice rather than two separate problems. Splitting this body alone leaves the other exactly as it is. Where these are variations on one operation, the change that clears both is the shared one: lift the common shape into a single routine the variants call, parameterised by whatever genuinely differs between them, and keep in each method only the part that is not shared.
ExtraDatBinding.ValueImage.Get (cognitive 17) EUD Editor 3/Class/Binding/ExtraDatBinding.vb:133— ExtraDatBinding.ValueImage.Get has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
tblWriter.StrExecuter (cognitive 17) EUD Editor 3/Class/tblWriter.vb:61— tblWriter.StrExecuter has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
PluginWindow.EdsText_PreviewMouseMove (cognitive 17) EUD Editor 3/Window/PluginWindow/DragManager.vb:70— PluginWindow.EdsText_PreviewMouseMove has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
ExtraDatBinding.ValueText.Get (cognitive 16) EUD Editor 3/Class/Binding/ExtraDatBinding.vb:93— ExtraDatBinding.ValueText.Get has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
ExtraDatBinding.Value.Get (cognitive 16) EUD Editor 3/Class/Binding/ExtraDatBinding.vb:170— ExtraDatBinding.Value.Get has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
CPCX.LoadPCX (cognitive 16) EUD Editor 3/Class/GRP/GRP.vb:85— CPCX.LoadPCX has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
TriggerEditorData.GetTEFile (cognitive 16) EUD Editor 3/Class/TriggerEditor/TriggerEditorData.vb:137— TriggerEditorData.GetTEFile has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
Tool.GetRelativePath (cognitive 16) EUD Editor 3/Module/Tools/Tool.vb:375— Tool.GetRelativePath has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
TreeviewExample.AddSelectItem (cognitive 16) EUD Editor 3/TEST/UIEditorPage/System.vb:16— TreeviewExample.AddSelectItem has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
ConsoleTextbox.ShowCompletion (cognitive 16) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/CommandConsole/ConsoleTextbox.xaml.vb:115— ConsoleTextbox.ShowCompletion has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
ListSelecter.ListReset (cognitive 16) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/DataEditor/ListSelecter.xaml.vb:298— ListSelecter.ListReset has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
ColoredTextBlock.TextColred (cognitive 16) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/Field/ColoredTextBlock.xaml.vb:24— ColoredTextBlock.TextColred has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
TriggerCodeEditControl.CodeList_SelectedItemChanged (cognitive 16) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/ClassicTrigger/TriggerCodeEditControl.xaml.vb:304— TriggerCodeEditControl.CodeList_SelectedItemChanged has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
CodeEditor.TextEditorPreviewKey (cognitive 16) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/CodeEditor/Init.vb:575— CodeEditor.TextEditorPreviewKey has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
GUIScriptEditorUI.InsertItems (cognitive 16) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/GUIEditorPage/Scripter/GUIScriptEditorUI.xaml.vb:59— GUIScriptEditorUI.InsertItems has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
GUI_Action_ArgSelecter.argBtnRefresh (cognitive 16) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/GUIEditorPage/Scripter/ScriptEditer/GUI_ActionValueSelect/GUI_Action_ArgSelecter.xaml.vb:292— GUI_Action_ArgSelecter.argBtnRefresh has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
GUI_Action_Count.New.ctor (cognitive 16) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/GUIEditorPage/Scripter/ScriptEditer/GUI_ActionValueSelect/GUI_Action_Count.xaml.vb:5— GUI_Action_Count.New.ctor has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
ProjectExplorer.MainTreeviewItme_PreviewMouseMove (cognitive 16) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/WorkTab/ProjectExplorer/DragItem.vb:94— ProjectExplorer.MainTreeviewItme_PreviewMouseMove has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
TriggerEditValueSelecterWindow.Open (cognitive 16) EUD Editor 3/Window/TriggerEditValueSelecterWindow.xaml.vb:152— TriggerEditValueSelecterWindow.Open has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
TriggerEditValueSelecterWindow.CheckBox_TextChanged (cognitive 16) EUD Editor 3/Window/TriggerEditValueSelecterWindow.xaml.vb:705— TriggerEditValueSelecterWindow.CheckBox_TextChanged has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
D4 · Code Duplication· Members sharing a duplicated core (6 members, 50+ identical tokens) · ×1
Members sharing a duplicated core (6 members, 50+ identical tokens) EUD Editor 3/MainWindow.xaml.vb:234— EUD Editor 3/MainWindow.xaml.vb:234-263 | EUD Editor 3/MainWindow.xaml.vb:267-295 | EUD Editor 3/MainWindow.xaml.vb:302-330 | EUD Editor 3/Module/Tools/WindowControl.vb:391-424 | EUD Editor 3/Module/Tools/WindowControl.vb:428-476 | EUD Editor 3/Module/Tools/WindowControl.vb:481-525 — These 6 members share a duplicated core: a run of at least 50 identical tokens appears in every one of them. That run is NOT broken out as duplicated-block rows below — it is what admitted this row, and the blocks below cover only the part of it that clears the block floor, so they understate the correspondence. Read the members as one construct written 6 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 6 times.
D4 · Code Duplication· Members sharing a duplicated core (5 members, 50+ identical tokens) · ×1
Members sharing a duplicated core (5 members, 50+ identical tokens) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/DataEditor/ListSelecter.xaml.vb:359— EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/DataEditor/ListSelecter.xaml.vb:359-381 | EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/DataEditor/ListSelecter.xaml.vb:384-406 | EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/Field/CodeSelecter.xaml.vb:518-540 | EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/Field/CodeSelecter.xaml.vb:544-566 | EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/Field/CodeSelecter.xaml.vb:570-604 — These 5 members share a duplicated core: a run of at least 50 identical tokens appears in every one of them. That run is NOT broken out as duplicated-block rows below — it is what admitted this row, and the blocks below cover only the part of it that clears the block floor, so they understate the correspondence. Read the members as one construct written 5 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 5 times.
Duplicated block (83–84 lines × 2) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/DataEditor/ListSelecter.xaml.vb:123— EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/DataEditor/ListSelecter.xaml.vb:123-205 | EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/Field/CodeSelecter.xaml.vb:141-224 — before extracting anything, compare `EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/DataEditor/ListSelecter.xaml.vb` and `EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/Field/CodeSelecter.xaml.vb` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 12 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 292 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (49 lines × 2) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/CUIEditorPage/EpsImportManager.vb:9— EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/CUIEditorPage/EpsImportManager.vb:9-57 | EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/SCAScriptPage/SCALuaImportManager.vb:8-56 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice.
Duplicated block (42 lines × 2) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/TriggerEditorSetting/BGMManager.xaml.vb:292— EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/TriggerEditorSetting/BGMManager.xaml.vb:292-333 | EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/TriggerEditorSetting/SCAScriptSetting/SCAScriptBGMManager.xaml.vb:292-333 — before extracting anything, compare `EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/TriggerEditorSetting/BGMManager.xaml.vb` and `EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/TriggerEditorSetting/SCAScriptSetting/SCAScriptBGMManager.xaml.vb` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 8 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 158 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (38 lines × 2) EUD Editor 3/Class/MacroFunc/MacroDefaultFunction.vb:329— EUD Editor 3/Class/MacroFunc/MacroDefaultFunction.vb:329-366 | EUD Editor 3/Class/MacroFunc/MacroDefaultFunction.vb:434-471 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `EUD Editor 3/Class/MacroFunc/MacroDefaultFunction.vb:369` calls `Pow` and `EUD Editor 3/Class/MacroFunc/MacroDefaultFunction.vb:472` does not — after which the two agree again for 4 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
Duplicated block (37 lines × 2) EUD Editor 3/Class/Binding/UIManager.vb:215— EUD Editor 3/Class/Binding/UIManager.vb:215-251 | EUD Editor 3/Class/Binding/UIManager.vb:257-293 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (36 lines × 2) EUD Editor 3/Class/Binding/DatBinding.vb:67— EUD Editor 3/Class/Binding/DatBinding.vb:67-102 | EUD Editor 3/Class/Binding/ExtraDatBinding.vb:53-88 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from both call sites, so a change lands once.
Duplicated block (32–33 lines × 2) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/Field/FlagSelecter.xaml.vb:71— EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/Field/FlagSelecter.xaml.vb:71-103 | EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/Field/FlagSelecterMini.xaml.vb:65-96 — before extracting anything, compare `EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/Field/FlagSelecter.xaml.vb` and `EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/Field/FlagSelecterMini.xaml.vb` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 3 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 61 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (29–30 lines × 2) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/GUIEditorPage/Scripter/GUIScriptEditorUI.xaml.vb:281— EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/GUIEditorPage/Scripter/GUIScriptEditorUI.xaml.vb:281-310 | EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/GUIEditorPage/Scripter/GUIScriptEditorUIClass/AddItem.vb:12-40 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately.
Duplicated block (28 lines × 2) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/GUIEditorPage/Scripter/GUIScriptEditorUI.xaml.vb:430— EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/GUIEditorPage/Scripter/GUIScriptEditorUI.xaml.vb:430-457 | EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/GUIEditorPage/Scripter/GUIScriptEditorUI.xaml.vb:493-520 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (25 lines × 2) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/ClassicTrigger/TriggerEditControlFunc/MoveFunction.vb:37— EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/ClassicTrigger/TriggerEditControlFunc/MoveFunction.vb:37-61 | EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/ClassicTrigger/TriggerEditControlFunc/MoveFunction.vb:67-91 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (26 lines × 2) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/TriggerEditorSetting/BGMManager.xaml.vb:95— EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/TriggerEditorSetting/BGMManager.xaml.vb:95-120 | EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/TriggerEditorSetting/SCAScriptSetting/SCAScriptBGMManager.xaml.vb:95-120 — before extracting anything, compare `EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/TriggerEditorSetting/BGMManager.xaml.vb` and `EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/TriggerEditorSetting/SCAScriptSetting/SCAScriptBGMManager.xaml.vb` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 8 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 158 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (24–25 lines × 2) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/DataEditor/ListSelecter.xaml.vb:778— EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/DataEditor/ListSelecter.xaml.vb:778-802 | EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/Field/CodeSelecter.xaml.vb:1126-1149 — before extracting anything, compare `EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/DataEditor/ListSelecter.xaml.vb` and `EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/Field/CodeSelecter.xaml.vb` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 12 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 292 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/DataEditor/ListSelecter.xaml.vb:778` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/Field/CodeSelecter.xaml.vb:1149` calls `Resources` and `EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/DataEditor/ListSelecter.xaml.vb:802` does not — after which the two agree again for 5 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
Duplicated block (23–25 lines × 2) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/CodeEditor/Init.vb:400— EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/CodeEditor/Init.vb:400-424 | EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/CodeEditor/Init.vb:455-477 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/CodeEditor/Init.vb:480` calls `Show` and `EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/CodeEditor/Init.vb:426` does not — after which the two agree again for 3 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
Duplicated block (16–24 lines × 2) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/DataEditor/ListSelecter.xaml.vb:325— EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/DataEditor/ListSelecter.xaml.vb:325-348 | EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/Field/CodeSelecter.xaml.vb:492-507 — before extracting anything, compare `EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/DataEditor/ListSelecter.xaml.vb` and `EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/Field/CodeSelecter.xaml.vb` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 12 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 292 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (23–24 lines × 2) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/DataEditor/ListSelecter.xaml.vb:813— EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/DataEditor/ListSelecter.xaml.vb:813-836 | EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/Field/CodeSelecter.xaml.vb:1162-1184 — before extracting anything, compare `EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/DataEditor/ListSelecter.xaml.vb` and `EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/Field/CodeSelecter.xaml.vb` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 12 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 292 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/DataEditor/ListSelecter.xaml.vb:813` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/Field/CodeSelecter.xaml.vb:1184` calls `Resources` and `EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/DataEditor/ListSelecter.xaml.vb:836` does not — after which the two agree again for 5 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
Duplicated block (24 lines × 2) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/TriggerEditorSetting/BGMManager.xaml.vb:222— EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/TriggerEditorSetting/BGMManager.xaml.vb:222-245 | EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/TriggerEditorSetting/SCAScriptSetting/SCAScriptBGMManager.xaml.vb:222-245 — before extracting anything, compare `EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/TriggerEditorSetting/BGMManager.xaml.vb` and `EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/TriggerEditorSetting/SCAScriptSetting/SCAScriptBGMManager.xaml.vb` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 8 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 158 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (22–23 lines × 2) EUD Editor 3/Class/CascData.vb:51— EUD Editor 3/Class/CascData.vb:51-72 | EUD Editor 3/Class/CascData.vb:97-119 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `EUD Editor 3/Class/CascData.vb:51` calls `BinaryReader` and `EUD Editor 3/Class/CascData.vb:97` does not — after which the two agree again for 2 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
Duplicated block (22 lines × 5) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/DataEditor/ListSelecter.xaml.vb:360— EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/DataEditor/ListSelecter.xaml.vb:360-381 | EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/DataEditor/ListSelecter.xaml.vb:385-406 | EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/Field/CodeSelecter.xaml.vb:519-540 | EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/Field/CodeSelecter.xaml.vb:545-566 | EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/Field/CodeSelecter.xaml.vb:583-604 — before extracting anything, compare `EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/DataEditor/ListSelecter.xaml.vb` and `EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/Field/CodeSelecter.xaml.vb` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 12 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 292 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (21–22 lines × 2) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/Field/CodeSelecter.xaml.vb:1137— EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/Field/CodeSelecter.xaml.vb:1137-1157 | EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/Field/CodeSelecter.xaml.vb:1172-1193 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (18–21 lines × 3) EUD Editor 3/Module/Tools/WindowControl.vb:391— EUD Editor 3/Module/Tools/WindowControl.vb:391-408 | EUD Editor 3/Module/Tools/WindowControl.vb:428-448 | EUD Editor 3/Module/Tools/WindowControl.vb:481-498 — all 3 copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from every one of those sites — resolving only two of them leaves the rest to drift apart the first time one is edited.
Duplicated block (21 lines × 2) EUD Editor 3/Class/GRP/GPRs/HDGRP.vb:95— EUD Editor 3/Class/GRP/GPRs/HDGRP.vb:95-116 | EUD Editor 3/Class/GRP/GPRs/SDGRP.vb:94-114 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from both call sites, so a change lands once. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately.
Duplicated block (20–21 lines × 2) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/CommandConsole/ConsoleTextbox.xaml.vb:136— EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/CommandConsole/ConsoleTextbox.xaml.vb:136-155 | EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/CommandConsole/ConsoleTextbox.xaml.vb:175-195 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (19–20 lines × 2) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/DataEditor/ListSelecter.xaml.vb:724— EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/DataEditor/ListSelecter.xaml.vb:724-743 | EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/Field/CodeSelecter.xaml.vb:1067-1085 — before extracting anything, compare `EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/DataEditor/ListSelecter.xaml.vb` and `EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/Field/CodeSelecter.xaml.vb` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 12 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 292 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/DataEditor/ListSelecter.xaml.vb:724` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
Duplicated block (18 lines × 2) EUD Editor 3/AvalonEdit/CodeEditor/TriggerEditorCompletionData.vb:48— EUD Editor 3/AvalonEdit/CodeEditor/TriggerEditorCompletionData.vb:48-65 | EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/CodeEditor/funcLoader.vb:881-898 — before extracting anything, compare `EUD Editor 3/AvalonEdit/CodeEditor/TriggerEditorCompletionData.vb` and `EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/CodeEditor/funcLoader.vb` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 4 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 110 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (16–18 lines × 2) EUD Editor 3/Module/Tools/Tool.vb:1076— EUD Editor 3/Module/Tools/Tool.vb:1076-1091 | EUD Editor 3/Window/TriggerEditor.xaml.vb:418-435 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `EUD Editor 3/Module/Tools/Tool.vb:1075` calls `PlusTabItem` and `EUD Editor 3/Window/TriggerEditor.xaml.vb:414` does not — after which the two agree again for 2 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
Duplicated block (17–18 lines × 2) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/Field/FlagSelecter.xaml.vb:9— EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/Field/FlagSelecter.xaml.vb:9-26 | EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/Field/FlagSelecterMini.xaml.vb:9-25 — before extracting anything, compare `EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/Field/FlagSelecter.xaml.vb` and `EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/Field/FlagSelecterMini.xaml.vb` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 3 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 61 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (14–17 lines × 6) EUD Editor 3/MainWindow.xaml.vb:234— EUD Editor 3/MainWindow.xaml.vb:234-247 | EUD Editor 3/MainWindow.xaml.vb:267-280 | EUD Editor 3/MainWindow.xaml.vb:302-315 | EUD Editor 3/Module/Tools/WindowControl.vb:392-405 | EUD Editor 3/Module/Tools/WindowControl.vb:429-445 | EUD Editor 3/Module/Tools/WindowControl.vb:482-495 — there are 6 copies across 2 file(s) — more copies than files, so at least one file holds the block twice. Extract it once into a single shared function every call site can reach and call it from all 6 sites; resolving a subset leaves the remainder to drift apart.
Duplicated block (17 lines × 2) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/TriggerEditorSetting/BGMManager.xaml.vb:249— EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/TriggerEditorSetting/BGMManager.xaml.vb:249-265 | EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/TriggerEditorSetting/SCAScriptSetting/SCAScriptBGMManager.xaml.vb:249-265 — before extracting anything, compare `EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/TriggerEditorSetting/BGMManager.xaml.vb` and `EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/TriggerEditorSetting/SCAScriptSetting/SCAScriptBGMManager.xaml.vb` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 8 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 158 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (14 lines × 3) EUD Editor 3/AvalonEdit/CodeEditor/TriggerEditorCompletionData.vb:152— EUD Editor 3/AvalonEdit/CodeEditor/TriggerEditorCompletionData.vb:152-165 | EUD Editor 3/Class/DataEditCompletionData.vb:70-83 | EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/CodeEditor/funcLoader.vb:989-1002 — before extracting anything, compare `EUD Editor 3/AvalonEdit/CodeEditor/TriggerEditorCompletionData.vb` and `EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/CodeEditor/funcLoader.vb` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 4 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 110 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (13–15 lines × 3) EUD Editor 3/Class/BulidData/WriteSCAData.vb:666— EUD Editor 3/Class/BulidData/WriteSCAData.vb:666-678 | EUD Editor 3/Class/BulidData/WriteSCAData.vb:707-720 | EUD Editor 3/Class/BulidData/WriteSCAData.vb:796-810 — all 3 copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from every one of those sites — resolving only two of them leaves the rest to drift apart the first time one is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `EUD Editor 3/Class/BulidData/WriteSCAData.vb:666` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
Duplicated block (14–15 lines × 3) EUD Editor 3/Class/MacroFunc/MacroDefaultFunction.vb:293— EUD Editor 3/Class/MacroFunc/MacroDefaultFunction.vb:293-307 | EUD Editor 3/Class/MacroFunc/MacroDefaultFunction.vb:329-342 | EUD Editor 3/Class/MacroFunc/MacroDefaultFunction.vb:434-447 — all 3 copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from every one of those sites — resolving only two of them leaves the rest to drift apart the first time one is edited. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately.
Duplicated block (13 lines × 4) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/DataEditor/ListSelecter.xaml.vb:779— EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/DataEditor/ListSelecter.xaml.vb:779-791 | EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/DataEditor/ListSelecter.xaml.vb:813-825 | EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/Field/CodeSelecter.xaml.vb:1127-1139 | EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/Field/CodeSelecter.xaml.vb:1162-1174 — before extracting anything, compare `EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/DataEditor/ListSelecter.xaml.vb` and `EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/Field/CodeSelecter.xaml.vb` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 12 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 292 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/DataEditor/ListSelecter.xaml.vb:779` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
Duplicated block (12–13 lines × 2) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/GUIEditorPage/Scripter/ScriptEditer/GUI_ActionValueSelect/GUI_ObjectSelecter.xaml.vb:21— EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/GUIEditorPage/Scripter/ScriptEditer/GUI_ActionValueSelect/GUI_ObjectSelecter.xaml.vb:21-32 | EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/GUIEditorPage/Scripter/ScriptEditer/GUI_ActionValueSelect/GUI_ObjectSelecter.xaml.vb:33-45 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (9–10 lines × 4) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/Field/FlagSelecter.xaml.vb:13— EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/Field/FlagSelecter.xaml.vb:13-22 | EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/Field/FlagSelecter.xaml.vb:75-83 | EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/Field/FlagSelecterMini.xaml.vb:13-22 | EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/Field/FlagSelecterMini.xaml.vb:69-77 — before extracting anything, compare `EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/Field/FlagSelecter.xaml.vb` and `EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/Field/FlagSelecterMini.xaml.vb` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 3 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 61 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/Field/FlagSelecter.xaml.vb:24` calls `Clear` and `EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/Field/FlagSelecter.xaml.vb:85` does not — after which the two agree again for 2 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
Duplicated block (10 lines × 3) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/GUIEditorPage/Scripter/GUIScriptEditorUIClass/TaskManager.vb:40— EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/GUIEditorPage/Scripter/GUIScriptEditorUIClass/TaskManager.vb:40-52 | EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/GUIEditorPage/Scripter/GUIScriptEditorUIClass/TaskManager.vb:62-71 | EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/GUIEditorPage/Scripter/GUIScriptEditorUIClass/TaskManager.vb:80-90 — all 3 copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from every one of those sites — resolving only two of them leaves the rest to drift apart the first time one is edited.
Duplicated block (3–9 lines × 3) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/DataEditor/ImageData.xaml.vb:25— EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/DataEditor/ImageData.xaml.vb:25-33 | EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/DataEditor/ImageData.xaml.vb:49-56 | EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/DataEditor/ImageData.xaml.vb:73-75 — all 3 copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from every one of those sites — resolving only two of them leaves the rest to drift apart the first time one is edited. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/DataEditor/ImageData.xaml.vb:33` calls `Add`, `Format`, `iscriptEntry` and `EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/DataEditor/ImageData.xaml.vb:75` does not — after which the two agree again for 2 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
Duplicated block (8–9 lines × 2) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/GUIEditorPage/Scripter/GUIScriptEditorUIClass/TaskManager.vb:150— EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/GUIEditorPage/Scripter/GUIScriptEditorUIClass/TaskManager.vb:150-158 | EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/GUIEditorPage/Scripter/GUIScriptEditorUIClass/TaskManager.vb:185-192 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 4) EUD Editor 3/Class/MacroFunc/MacroDefaultFunction.vb:280— EUD Editor 3/Class/MacroFunc/MacroDefaultFunction.vb:280-284 | EUD Editor 3/Class/MacroFunc/MacroDefaultFunction.vb:293-298 | EUD Editor 3/Class/MacroFunc/MacroDefaultFunction.vb:329-334 | EUD Editor 3/Class/MacroFunc/MacroDefaultFunction.vb:434-439 — all 4 copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from every one of those sites — resolving only two of them leaves the rest to drift apart the first time one is edited. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `EUD Editor 3/Class/MacroFunc/MacroDefaultFunction.vb:327` calls `ParseUnit` and `EUD Editor 3/Class/MacroFunc/MacroDefaultFunction.vb:278` does not — after which the two agree again for 2 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 3) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/DataEditor/DataPages/Unit_Graphic.xaml.vb:37— EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/DataEditor/DataPages/Unit_Graphic.xaml.vb:37-41 | EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/DataEditor/DataPages/Unit_Graphic.xaml.vb:68-72 | EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/DataEditor/DataPages/Unit_Graphic.xaml.vb:78-82 — all 3 copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from every one of those sites — resolving only two of them leaves the rest to drift apart the first time one is edited.
Duplicated block (8 lines × 8) EUD Editor 3/Class/Binding/UIManager.vb:114— EUD Editor 3/Class/Binding/UIManager.vb:114-121 | EUD Editor 3/Class/Binding/UIManager.vb:126-133 | EUD Editor 3/Class/Binding/UIManager.vb:138-145 | EUD Editor 3/Class/Binding/UIManager.vb:150-157 | EUD Editor 3/Class/Binding/UIManager.vb:162-169 | EUD Editor 3/Class/Binding/UIManager.vb:174-181 | EUD Editor 3/Class/Binding/UIManager.vb:186-193 | EUD Editor 3/Class/Binding/UIManager.vb:198-205 — all 8 copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from every one of those sites — resolving only two of them leaves the rest to drift apart the first time one is edited.
Duplicated block (6 lines × 4) EUD Editor 3/Class/TriggerEditor/CUIScriptEditor/CUIScriptEditor.vb:62— EUD Editor 3/Class/TriggerEditor/CUIScriptEditor/CUIScriptEditor.vb:62-67 | EUD Editor 3/Class/TriggerEditor/GUIScriptEditor/GUIScriptEditor.vb:221-226 | EUD Editor 3/Class/TriggerEditor/SCAScriptEditor/SCAScriptEditor.vb:62-67 | EUD Editor 3/Class/TriggerEditor/TextEditor/RawTextScriptEditor.vb:61-66 — `EUD Editor 3/Class/TriggerEditor/CUIScriptEditor/CUIScriptEditor.vb` and `EUD Editor 3/Class/TriggerEditor/SCAScriptEditor/SCAScriptEditor.vb` are one unit implemented once per sibling directory, so they are most likely parallel implementations of one contract rather than a copy of each other — this scan matched 4 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 37 lines. If both are selected at run time, neither can be retired in favour of the other, and the lines that DIFFER between them are the reason both exist. The move that pays here is to hoist the identical part into a shared location the whole family can reach and give what differs a parameter or a seam, so a change lands once instead of once per sibling; extracting one helper per block leaves every sibling to drift on its own.
Duplicated block (9 lines × 4) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/GUIEditorPage/Scripter/ScriptEditer/GUI_Action.xaml.vb:58— EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/GUIEditorPage/Scripter/ScriptEditer/GUI_Action.xaml.vb:58-66 | EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/GUIEditorPage/Scripter/ScriptEditer/GUI_ActionValueSelect/GUI_Action_String.xaml.vb:18-26 | EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/GUIEditorPage/Scripter/ScriptEditer/GUI_ActionValueSelect/GUI_WavSelecter.xaml.vb:29-37 | EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/GUIEditorPage/Scripter/ScriptEditer/GUI_ArgEditor.xaml.vb:341-349 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere all 4 call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made 4 times.
Duplicated block (7 lines × 3) EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/TriggerEditorSetting/BGMManager.xaml.vb:131— EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/TriggerEditorSetting/BGMManager.xaml.vb:131-137 | EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/TriggerEditorSetting/SCADataList.xaml.vb:64-70 | EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/TriggerEditorSetting/SCAScriptSetting/SCAScriptBGMManager.xaml.vb:131-137 — before extracting anything, compare `EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/TriggerEditorSetting/BGMManager.xaml.vb` and `EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/TriggerEditorSetting/SCAScriptSetting/SCAScriptBGMManager.xaml.vb` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 8 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 158 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Coverage not measured — no coverage collector is wired up — Coverage NOT MEASURED: `--collect:"XPlat Code Coverage"` names a data collector that ships in the `coverlet.collector` package, and this repository wires up none — no test project references it and no runsettings declares one. The absence of coverage here is therefore not evidence about the suite or about our analyzer environment: without a collector, `--collect` produces nothing even from a suite that builds and passes. Add a `coverlet.collector` PackageReference to the test project(s) (or commit the Cobertura/OpenCover/lcov report your CI produces) and real coverage will be measured. It is excluded from the score rather than counted as a near-zero defect.
No structured logging — No logging or diagnostics emission found. This repository ships a binary its users launch rather than a service you operate, so there is no operator to page — but when a run fails on a user's machine, neither they nor you have anything to read.
SC1 · Supply-chain hygiene· NuGet dependencies are not locked · ×1
NuGet dependencies are not locked — No packages.lock.json and no central package management — restores aren't reproducible or pinned (SSDF PW.4.4). Enable <RestorePackagesWithLockFile>true</RestorePackagesWithLockFile> (commit the lockfile) or adopt Directory.Packages.props. Advisory — never scored.
redundant comment EUD Editor 3/Compiler/Parser/Parser.vb:268— "CODE_COMPOUND_ST" repeats the code it sits on: 3 of its 3 words (code, compound, st) are already in `Decoder(CodeType.CODE_COMPOUND_ST, ncode)`. Delete it, or replace it with what the code cannot say (why it is done here, a constraint, or a consequence).
redundant comment EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/ClassicTrigger/TECTPageFunc/RefreshTrigger.vb:40— "Scripter.TriggerList" repeats the code it sits on: 3 of its 3 words (scripter, trigger, list) are already in `TListBox.ItemsSource = Scripter.TriggerListCollection`. Delete it, or replace it with what the code cannot say (why it is done here, a constraint, or a consequence).
redundant comment EUD Editor 3/UserContorl/TriggerEditor/WorkTab/ProjectExplorer/Menu.vb:198— "HotKey Add" repeats the code it sits on: 3 of its 3 words (hot, key, add) are already in `Private Sub AddHotKeys()`. Delete it, or replace it with what the code cannot say (why it is done here, a constraint, or a consequence).
Single-project monolith — The whole codebase lives in one project — at this size, splitting along clear seams (domain / infrastructure / hosting) would make boundaries explicit and builds faster.
No ADRs found — No ADRs found. No recognised ADR directory (`docs/adr/`, `docs/decisions/`, `adr/`, `docs/rfcs/`, an `ADR0001/` folder, or their siblings) exists anywhere in this tree. What was searched, so you can tell an empty log from a search that missed one: every directory under the tree (build output, dependencies and VCS metadata excepted), for a document that is either any non-index page inside a recognised ADR directory, whatever its name and however deeply nested (`docs/adr/use-postgres.md`, `docs/adr/2024/0001-x.md`); or a file anywhere whose name is ADR-shaped (`0001-use-postgres.md`, `adr-012-caching.md`); or, when neither turned anything up, a document carrying the decision-record signature (an "Architecture Decision Record" heading, or Status / Context / Decision / Consequences as section headings). A decision log that clears none of these — unnumbered files outside any recognised directory, without those headings — is not seen by this check and this row is then wrong. If that is your case, say so rather than renaming anything; otherwise, consider recording architectural decisions in `docs/adr/`.
D26 · Project Cohesion· Projects may be oversized for their cohesion · ×1
Projects may be oversized for their cohesion — 1 of 1 project(s) overshoot their size bounds, lowering Project Cohesion to 0.0/10. The most over is `EUD Editor 3` (50895 LoC, 310 public types across 4 namespaces). Review these for cohesion — split a project that spans unrelated responsibilities.
D28 · Secrets (history)· Rotate the exposed credentials · ×1
Thin README — The root README is 53 words, against a bar of 120. Of the three newcomer-critical sections this check looks for by heading, it found no a build/run or getting-started section, no a testing section, no an architecture or project-map section. Sections are matched on HEADING text only, so material written under a heading this check does not recognise — or with no heading at all — is not seen and this row may understate what the document covers.
No ADRs — No Architecture Decision Records found — no conventional ADR directory, no numbered `NNNN-title` documents in any markup this check reads, and nothing ADR-shaped by content. Design rationale recorded elsewhere (a design-notes tree, a mailing list, pull-request discussion) is not visible to this check and is not re-findable per decision, so a future maintainer cannot ask why one choice was made and get an answer.
M2 · Architecture documentation· No architecture diagram/doc · ×1
No architecture diagram/doc — No C4/Structurizr/PlantUML/Mermaid/Graphviz/D2 diagram, no drawn diagram named for the architecture, no file named `architecture` or `design` in any markup this check reads, and nothing in the README, docs or contributor guides that announces the shape — no `## Architecture` heading, no "architecture overview"/"high-level design" phrasing, no "the architecture is …" introduction, no guided code tour. A shape laid out in prose that never names itself as the architecture is not visible to this check, and neither is one kept outside the repository, so this row reports the absence of a re-findable shape document — not evidence that nobody wrote the shape down.
No src/ separation — Production code isn't grouped under a src/ folder — it all sits under EUD Editor 3/ alongside the root build files, so the conventional src/ boundary between the product and its tooling isn't drawn.
No SAST — No static application security testing detected. For this repository's stack, add a Roslyn security analyzer package referenced from the project (the analyzer packages do analyse VB.NET), plus gitleaks for committed secrets — CodeQL has no VB.NET extractor, so its csharp pack would extract nothing from this tree and then report it clean — this repository has no CI pipeline yet, so run it locally to clear the existing findings, then make it a step of the first workflow you add so a regression fails the build. What was searched, so you can tell an absence from a miss: the 0 CI workflow file(s) in this repository, and the scanner and linter configuration checked in beside them. A scan that runs outside CI, one configured in your forge's web UI rather than in a committed file, or a tool whose name is none of those this check carries, is not seen — if that is your case the row is wrong, and saying so is more useful than adding a second scanner.
No changelog — No CHANGELOG/HISTORY/RELEASES file — what shipped when isn't easy to reconstruct for support or audit. (Versioning/tagging makes releases traceable, but a changelog records the what.)
doc comments repeat the names EUD Editor 3/Class/StormLib.vb:1040— 1 of 144 documented parameters and 0 of 57 summaries in `EUD Editor 3` only repeat the member or parameter name (e.g. "New name of the file." for `szNewFileName`). Delete the restating tags, or add what the name does not say.
Appendix B — Reproduction & audit trail
Every external tool invocation behind a deep-scan dimension — the tool, its captured version, the exact command, how many findings it yielded, and a link to the retained raw output. To reproduce any finding: check out the same commit and run the command shown (repo-relative — never an absolute scratch path). The complete raw scanner output is retained verbatim under artifacts/raw/ (indexed in artifacts/raw/index.json); per-invocation exit codes and wall-clock durations are in sidecar.json — kept out of this table so the rendered report stays byte-identical across runs of the same commit.
nuget: not applicable — nuget: the solution did not restore on the analyzer's .NET SDK (an SDK/target-framework/restore mismatch, common for an older codebase), so there was no restored dependency graph to scan
trivy: not applicable — No Infrastructure-as-Code or container manifests found (Dockerfile, Docker Compose, Terraform, Kubernetes/Helm, CloudFormation, ARM, Bicep, Ansible); nothing to scan.
semgrep: not applicable — No personal data was found crossing a boundary the PII/GDPR ruleset checks — nothing written to a log or console sink, placed in a URL or query string, or persisted to browser storage. That is a clean result for the LEAK surface only: this ruleset detects personal data escaping, it does not inventory the personal data a repository holds, so it is not evidence that this repository has no personal-data surface. The personal-data map (Appendix C) and the C1-C5 compliance cards are what speak to that.
provenance: not applicable — No CI/build pipeline found (.github/.forgejo/.gitea workflows, .circleci, .buildkite, .woodpecker, .teamcity, .gitlab-ci.yml, .travis.yml, bitbucket-pipelines.yml, .drone.yml, .cirrus.yml, .woodpecker.yml, appveyor.yml, azure-pipelines*.yml, .pipelines/, .vsts-ci/, .azuredevops/, Jenkinsfile); there is no build to attest provenance for.
disclosure: not applicable — No vulnerability-disclosure policy file found (SECURITY.md/.markdown/.rst/.txt at root or under .github/.forgejo/.gitea/docs, .well-known/security.txt). A coordinated-disclosure policy may live off-repo, so this is not evidenced rather than failed.
runtime-hardening: not applicable — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; network egress policy is a cluster-native control that may live at the platform/firewall layer, so there is nothing to assess here.
runtime-hardening: not applicable — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; seccomp/AppArmor/SELinux confinement is a workload-level control, so there is nothing to assess here.
runtime-hardening: not applicable — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; runtime threat-detection and admission-control policy are cluster-level controls, so there is nothing to assess here.
Run 01a1793d-cce4-7856-9945-14b776bb9c9d · every finding is also locatable in findings.md, and the complete scoring record (with exit codes + durations) in sidecar.json.
Issues: 68 · Warnings: 474 · Recommendations: 13 · Info: 1 — Appendix A · all findings · full markdown report.
Generated by Watchdog — deterministic code-health analysis. 26-10-2026 @ 17:24 UTC.
Downloadable artifacts
Machine-readable and reproducible from this commit + frozen rubric — drop them straight into a contract appendix, a CRA dossier, or a downstream SCA / VEX tool.