Public report of Dzoukr/Dapper.FSharp, published 23 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, 23 October 2026, 20:09 UTC · Survey ID cd_fec576bd910f40ab899654e0e6806602
Dzoukr/Dapper.FSharp
Measured 23 October 2026, 20:07 UTC, at code version a83c9d5
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.
Bus factor is not measured: No living knowledge left to concentrate.
IL efficiency is not measured: The target did not build.
CAI scoreWeak
CriticalWeakAdequateStrongExemplary
Down 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 small codebase: 5,405 lines of product code in 3 projects, tests not counted · Estimated rebuild effort: about 0.1 person-years · Weakest lens: Production Readiness, 16
Findings by how serious they are
9 critical143 serious145 minor
35 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
23 October 2026, 20:07 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 ▸
35of 38 dimensions measured by tools. The other 3 are advisory notes from an AI model, which explain the code but don't count towards the score.
164of 297 findings point to an exact file and line, so you can open each one in the code. The other 133 concern the repository as a whole, such as missing documentation.
38dimensions across 5 lenses, read from 5,405 lines of product code in 3 projects.
Dzoukr/Dapper.FSharp scores 42 out of 100 and is rated Weak, while four of its five lenses score higher still: Architecture at 100 and Security and Compliance at 96, both rated Exemplary, Code Health at 75, rated Adequate, and Maturity at 43, rated Weak.
The score is lower than those four because the weakest lens counts most, and here that is Production Readiness, which scores 16 and is rated Critical. Its CI/CD gates dimension scores 0 out of 10, and until that reaches 4, Production Readiness can't be rated higher than Adequate. The first actions are to resolve the 1 Leaked secret finding(s) in Secret Scanning and to resolve the 5 Vulnerable finding(s) in Dependency Hygiene, and if Production Readiness rose to 70, the score would rise from 42 to about 61.
Nine findings are critical: five in Dependency Hygiene, two in IaC & Container Security, one in Dependency Vulnerabilities and one in Secret Scanning.
Watchdog couldn't measure 34 dimensions in this code, among them License Compliance, Explicit Debt and Data Protection, so they are left out of the score. The product code is 5,405 lines, which would take an estimated 0.1 person-years, around €12,000, 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.
Watchdog compares every finding with the previous survey's. A finding that has only moved to another line in the same file counts as the same finding, so only new findings appear here. Advisory notes from the AI model are left out, because the model words them afresh in every survey.
Rebuild cost: about €12,000 · Estimate
Cost to rebuild
€4,100 to €20,000, for 68 to 215 hours of work, about 0.1 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 42. 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
Small: 5,405 lines of product code
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 Leaked secret finding(s) in Secret Scanning — start with REDACTED.
Raises the score by about 19 points · Low effort · Secret Scanning
2
Resolve the 5 Vulnerable finding(s) in Dependency Hygiene.
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 €12,000 to build again, about 0.1 person-years of work. Its weakest lens is Production Readiness, at 16 (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 Leaked secret finding(s) in Secret Scanning. Of all the actions in this report, it raises the score most for the work it takes: about 19 points for low effort, because it clears the 1 Secret Scanning findings. The next survey will show the change in the score.
Based on: the ranked actions in Top priorities, by score gain and effort
Architecture — module dependency graph
Project dependencies, layered top-to-bottom; arrows show direction. Any dashed red edge points upward or sideways — a layering smell or cycle. A clean layered graph has none.
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.
168 modules, with 67 dependencies between them. Every module uses only modules listed above it, so there are no loops.
The table shows the 40 modules with the most connections; 128 more are left out to keep it readable.
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.
MSSQL.Builders uses MSSQL.Builders.FQ, so a change to MSSQL.Builders.FQ can break MSSQL.Builders, while a change to MSSQL.Builders can't break MSSQL.Builders.FQ.
Position
Below the diagonal: MSSQL.Builders uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
MSSQL.Domain.JoinModule uses MSSQL.Domain, so a change to MSSQL.Domain can break MSSQL.Domain.JoinModule, while a change to MSSQL.Domain.JoinModule can't break MSSQL.Domain.
Position
Below the diagonal: MSSQL.Domain.JoinModule uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
MSSQL.GenericDeconstructor uses MSSQL.Domain, so a change to MSSQL.Domain can break MSSQL.GenericDeconstructor, while a change to MSSQL.GenericDeconstructor can't break MSSQL.Domain.
Position
Below the diagonal: MSSQL.GenericDeconstructor uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
MSSQL.IDbConnection uses MSSQL.Domain, so a change to MSSQL.Domain can break MSSQL.IDbConnection, while a change to MSSQL.IDbConnection can't break MSSQL.Domain.
Position
Below the diagonal: MSSQL.IDbConnection uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
MSSQL.JoinAnalyzer uses MSSQL.Domain, so a change to MSSQL.Domain can break MSSQL.JoinAnalyzer, while a change to MSSQL.JoinAnalyzer can't break MSSQL.Domain.
Position
Below the diagonal: MSSQL.JoinAnalyzer uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
MSSQL.LinqExpressionVisitors uses MSSQL.Domain, so a change to MSSQL.Domain can break MSSQL.LinqExpressionVisitors, while a change to MSSQL.LinqExpressionVisitors can't break MSSQL.Domain.
Position
Below the diagonal: MSSQL.LinqExpressionVisitors uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
MSSQL.WhereAnalyzer uses MSSQL.Domain, so a change to MSSQL.Domain can break MSSQL.WhereAnalyzer, while a change to MSSQL.WhereAnalyzer can't break MSSQL.Domain.
Position
Below the diagonal: MSSQL.WhereAnalyzer uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
MySQL.Builders uses MySQL.Builders.FQ, so a change to MySQL.Builders.FQ can break MySQL.Builders, while a change to MySQL.Builders can't break MySQL.Builders.FQ.
Position
Below the diagonal: MySQL.Builders uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
MySQL.Domain.JoinModule uses MySQL.Domain, so a change to MySQL.Domain can break MySQL.Domain.JoinModule, while a change to MySQL.Domain.JoinModule can't break MySQL.Domain.
Position
Below the diagonal: MySQL.Domain.JoinModule uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
MySQL.GenericDeconstructor uses MySQL.Domain, so a change to MySQL.Domain can break MySQL.GenericDeconstructor, while a change to MySQL.GenericDeconstructor can't break MySQL.Domain.
Position
Below the diagonal: MySQL.GenericDeconstructor uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
MySQL.IDbConnection uses MySQL.Domain, so a change to MySQL.Domain can break MySQL.IDbConnection, while a change to MySQL.IDbConnection can't break MySQL.Domain.
Position
Below the diagonal: MySQL.IDbConnection uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
MySQL.JoinAnalyzer uses MySQL.Domain, so a change to MySQL.Domain can break MySQL.JoinAnalyzer, while a change to MySQL.JoinAnalyzer can't break MySQL.Domain.
Position
Below the diagonal: MySQL.JoinAnalyzer uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
MySQL.WhereAnalyzer uses MySQL.Domain, so a change to MySQL.Domain can break MySQL.WhereAnalyzer, while a change to MySQL.WhereAnalyzer can't break MySQL.Domain.
Position
Below the diagonal: MySQL.WhereAnalyzer uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
PostgreSQL.Builders uses PostgreSQL.Domain, so a change to PostgreSQL.Domain can break PostgreSQL.Builders, while a change to PostgreSQL.Builders can't break PostgreSQL.Domain.
Position
Below the diagonal: PostgreSQL.Builders uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
PostgreSQL.JoinAnalyzer uses PostgreSQL.Domain, so a change to PostgreSQL.Domain can break PostgreSQL.JoinAnalyzer, while a change to PostgreSQL.JoinAnalyzer can't break PostgreSQL.Domain.
Position
Below the diagonal: PostgreSQL.JoinAnalyzer uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
PostgreSQL.WhereAnalyzer uses PostgreSQL.Domain, so a change to PostgreSQL.Domain can break PostgreSQL.WhereAnalyzer, while a change to PostgreSQL.WhereAnalyzer can't break PostgreSQL.Domain.
Position
Below the diagonal: PostgreSQL.WhereAnalyzer uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
SQLite.Builders uses SQLite.Domain, so a change to SQLite.Domain can break SQLite.Builders, while a change to SQLite.Builders can't break SQLite.Domain.
Position
Below the diagonal: SQLite.Builders uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
SQLite.JoinAnalyzer uses SQLite.Domain, so a change to SQLite.Domain can break SQLite.JoinAnalyzer, while a change to SQLite.JoinAnalyzer can't break SQLite.Domain.
Position
Below the diagonal: SQLite.JoinAnalyzer uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
SQLite.WhereAnalyzer uses SQLite.Domain, so a change to SQLite.Domain can break SQLite.WhereAnalyzer, while a change to SQLite.WhereAnalyzer can't break SQLite.Domain.
Position
Below the diagonal: SQLite.WhereAnalyzer uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
Tests.Database.DogVaccinations.ViewModule uses Tests.Database.DogVaccinations, so a change to Tests.Database.DogVaccinations can break Tests.Database.DogVaccinations.ViewModule, while a change to Tests.Database.DogVaccinations.ViewModule can't break Tests.Database.DogVaccinations.
Position
Below the diagonal: Tests.Database.DogVaccinations.ViewModule uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
Tests.Database.DogVaccinations.ViewModule uses Tests.Database.Dogs, so a change to Tests.Database.Dogs can break Tests.Database.DogVaccinations.ViewModule, while a change to Tests.Database.DogVaccinations.ViewModule can't break Tests.Database.Dogs.
Position
Below the diagonal: Tests.Database.DogVaccinations.ViewModule uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
Tests.Database.Dogs.ViewModule uses Tests.Database.Dogs, so a change to Tests.Database.Dogs can break Tests.Database.Dogs.ViewModule, while a change to Tests.Database.Dogs.ViewModule can't break Tests.Database.Dogs.
Position
Below the diagonal: Tests.Database.Dogs.ViewModule uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
Tests.Database.Dogs.ViewModule uses Tests.Database.Persons, so a change to Tests.Database.Persons can break Tests.Database.Dogs.ViewModule, while a change to Tests.Database.Dogs.ViewModule can't break Tests.Database.Persons.
Position
Below the diagonal: Tests.Database.Dogs.ViewModule uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
Tests.Database.DogsWeights.ViewModule uses Tests.Database.Dogs, so a change to Tests.Database.Dogs can break Tests.Database.DogsWeights.ViewModule, while a change to Tests.Database.DogsWeights.ViewModule can't break Tests.Database.Dogs.
Position
Below the diagonal: Tests.Database.DogsWeights.ViewModule uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
Tests.Database.VaccinationManufacturers.ViewModule uses Tests.Database.DogVaccinations, so a change to Tests.Database.DogVaccinations can break Tests.Database.VaccinationManufacturers.ViewModule, while a change to Tests.Database.VaccinationManufacturers.ViewModule can't break Tests.Database.DogVaccinations.
Position
Below the diagonal: Tests.Database.VaccinationManufacturers.ViewModule uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
MSSQL.Builders.Table uses MSSQL.Builders, so a change to MSSQL.Builders can break MSSQL.Builders.Table, while a change to MSSQL.Builders.Table can't break MSSQL.Builders.
Position
Below the diagonal: MSSQL.Builders.Table uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
MSSQL.Evaluator uses MSSQL.JoinAnalyzer, so a change to MSSQL.JoinAnalyzer can break MSSQL.Evaluator, while a change to MSSQL.Evaluator can't break MSSQL.JoinAnalyzer.
Position
Below the diagonal: MSSQL.Evaluator uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
MSSQL.Evaluator uses MSSQL.WhereAnalyzer, so a change to MSSQL.WhereAnalyzer can break MSSQL.Evaluator, while a change to MSSQL.Evaluator can't break MSSQL.WhereAnalyzer.
Position
Below the diagonal: MSSQL.Evaluator uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
MySQL.Builders.Table uses MySQL.Builders, so a change to MySQL.Builders can break MySQL.Builders.Table, while a change to MySQL.Builders.Table can't break MySQL.Builders.
Position
Below the diagonal: MySQL.Builders.Table uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
MySQL.Evaluator uses MySQL.JoinAnalyzer, so a change to MySQL.JoinAnalyzer can break MySQL.Evaluator, while a change to MySQL.Evaluator can't break MySQL.JoinAnalyzer.
Position
Below the diagonal: MySQL.Evaluator uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
MySQL.Evaluator uses MySQL.WhereAnalyzer, so a change to MySQL.WhereAnalyzer can break MySQL.Evaluator, while a change to MySQL.Evaluator can't break MySQL.WhereAnalyzer.
Position
Below the diagonal: MySQL.Evaluator uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
PostgreSQL.Evaluator uses PostgreSQL.Domain, so a change to PostgreSQL.Domain can break PostgreSQL.Evaluator, while a change to PostgreSQL.Evaluator can't break PostgreSQL.Domain.
Position
Below the diagonal: PostgreSQL.Evaluator uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
PostgreSQL.Evaluator uses PostgreSQL.JoinAnalyzer, so a change to PostgreSQL.JoinAnalyzer can break PostgreSQL.Evaluator, while a change to PostgreSQL.Evaluator can't break PostgreSQL.JoinAnalyzer.
Position
Below the diagonal: PostgreSQL.Evaluator uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
PostgreSQL.Evaluator uses PostgreSQL.WhereAnalyzer, so a change to PostgreSQL.WhereAnalyzer can break PostgreSQL.Evaluator, while a change to PostgreSQL.Evaluator can't break PostgreSQL.WhereAnalyzer.
Position
Below the diagonal: PostgreSQL.Evaluator uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
SQLite.Evaluator uses SQLite.Domain, so a change to SQLite.Domain can break SQLite.Evaluator, while a change to SQLite.Evaluator can't break SQLite.Domain.
Position
Below the diagonal: SQLite.Evaluator uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
SQLite.Evaluator uses SQLite.JoinAnalyzer, so a change to SQLite.JoinAnalyzer can break SQLite.Evaluator, while a change to SQLite.Evaluator can't break SQLite.JoinAnalyzer.
Position
Below the diagonal: SQLite.Evaluator uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
SQLite.Evaluator uses SQLite.WhereAnalyzer, so a change to SQLite.WhereAnalyzer can break SQLite.Evaluator, while a change to SQLite.Evaluator can't break SQLite.WhereAnalyzer.
Position
Below the diagonal: SQLite.Evaluator uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
At a glance — Code Health · 75% · Adequate · gated by D4 ·
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
A03:2025 — Software Supply Chain Failures
5
High / Critical
A02:2025 — Security Misconfiguration
3
High / Critical
A07:2025 — Authentication Failures
1
High / Critical
Roadmap
Immediately resolve the leaked secret in REDACTED and address the five vulnerable dependencies to secure the codebase. Next, update the three outdated dependencies and begin cleaning up the twenty-one orphaned files, prioritizing IDbConnection.fs, LinqExpressionVisitors.fs, and Evaluator.fs. Finally, establish a structured documentation process by recording significant design decisions in a dedicated ADR folder to preserve architectural knowledge.
Ranked by impact ÷ effort. "Helps" is the estimated gain on the 0–100 health score.
Do this
Helps
Effort
Dimension
Resolve the 1 Leaked secret finding(s) in Secret Scanning — start with REDACTED.
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 — 9
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 — 143
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 — 145
Recorded, with no effect on how the codebase functions.
Present so the survey is complete, not because it needs doing.
Could not be resolved — 35
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. 35 of 38 evaluated dimensions are computed purely by tools and static analysis (confidence 1.0); 3 documentation/naming judgement(s) are LLM-assisted and labelled advisory. 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 — 38 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, 164 of 297 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.
D14 License Compliance — 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. Not scored — this repository's projects are MSBuild/NuGet projects, whose package licenses are exactly what this dimension reads, but no license could be resolved for them (the .NET license collector did not run, or restore failed). A gap in the analysis run, NOT a finding that the repository's licenses are compliant.
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. All 24 significant source file(s) were last meaningfully changed so long ago that no living knowledge remains — nothing since has been substantial enough to re-establish ownership (a broad, mechanical sweep that touches many files shallowly does not count, and neither does no activity at all). There is no concentration to measure, so the bus factor is not scored. This is not a clean bill: nobody currently holds working knowledge of this code (see D34 Knowledge Freshness). Counted over 24 of the 47 production source files in this repository: the rest are under the ~2,400-byte size floor this dimension measures over.
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. This repository's source is written only in languages whose packages are published through a manifest, and no manifest in the tree makes a publication act: either there is no package manifest of any ecosystem (no package.json, pyproject.toml, setup.py, gemspec, Cargo.toml, pom.xml, build.gradle, composer.json, pubspec.yaml or mix.exs), or every one present declares in its package manager's own terms that it is not published (an npm package marked "private": true, a Cargo package with publish = false, a pubspec with publish_to: none, a Composer "project", a Poetry project with package-mode = false, or the "Private :: Do Not Upload" classifier). With no publication act there is no intentionally-exposed surface for API consistency to be judged over.
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.
AX6 Interface segregation — 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 computed over the public interfaces this run's compilations declare, and none was loaded, 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.
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.
P8 Schema migrations — 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 reads EF Core usage in C# and the schema tooling its file scan recognises only, and no .NET project was loaded, and this repository's language is not one the scan models, so it had nothing of this repository's product 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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
X6 Hand-rolled structured-format parsing — 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 reads C# syntax, and Python, JavaScript/TypeScript, Go, Java/Kotlin/Scala, Ruby, PHP, Rust, Swift, Erlang, Elixir and Dart source only, and no C# was loaded and none of those languages was found in this repository, so it had nothing of this repository's product 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.
X7 Silent fallback defaults — 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 reads C#, Python, TypeScript/JavaScript, Rust, Go, Java, Kotlin, Scala, PHP, Ruby, Swift and Dart syntax only, and no C#, Python, TypeScript/JavaScript, Rust, Go, Java, Kotlin, Scala, PHP, Ruby, Swift or Dart was loaded for this repository, so it had nothing of this repository's product 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.
D11 Test Reliability: Flakiness is inferred from history/markers — Watchdog runs the suite once (for coverage), not the repeated runs under varied conditions that reveal nondeterminism, so a flaky test never recorded as failing is invisible here.
D12 Dependency Hygiene: Dependency health reads manifests and lockfiles — a vulnerability in a vendored/copied dependency, or risk from how a dependency is actually used, is outside this view.
D13 Secret Scanning: Secret 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").
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.
D19 Documentation Quality: Documentation quality is judged by an LLM over a bounded sample of docs — it reads what is written, not whether the docs match the running system, and it is advisory, not a measurement. Its critique rows are drawn from a closed category vocabulary and each row means the same thing in every run, so two scans can be compared row by row; the SET that fires is still a sample, and does not repeat exactly. Measured on one frozen input, six scans at one engine SHA: 2-5 critique rows per scan, 8 distinct rows across the six, 3 of those 8 seen in only one scan. So a D19 row is evidence about the documentation, but a COUNT of D19 rows is not a quantity — never read a change in it as an improvement or a regression.
D21 Naming Consistency: Naming quality is an LLM judgement over a bounded sample — it assesses clarity/consistency of the names it sees, not domain-correctness, and is advisory.
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.
D31 IaC & Container Security: IaC scanning checks Dockerfiles/Terraform/Kubernetes against best-practice rules — it cannot see the live cloud account, runtime configuration, or drift between the committed config and what is actually deployed.
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.
D44 Platform End-of-Life: The support table is FROZEN, so it goes out of date by losing RECALL: a release that ended support after the table was written is missed until the table is refreshed, and this dimension reading 10 is not evidence that a platform is current. Only platforms the repository DECLARES in a place this pass reads are seen — a runtime named only in a Dockerfile (D31's subject), in a CI workflow (D29's), or in a file this pass does not parse (go.mod, a Gemfile ruby directive) is invisible here, which is why a repository declaring none of them abstains rather than scoring. Only frameworks with a PUBLISHED support policy are tracked: React, Flask and Express publish none, so their age cannot be judged and their absence from a report is not a statement that they are supported.
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.
M4 Documentation accuracy: Onboarding quality is an LLM read of the docs/setup present — it cannot run the onboarding or measure how long a real new joiner takes; the verdict is sampled and advisory.
P4 Deployment & Rollback: Approval/branch-protection rules live in repository settings the scan cannot see — only their in-repo evidence (config files, workflows) is checked, so a control enforced purely in the host's settings reads as "not evidenced".
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.
The LLM boundary
LLM-set scores this run (3): D19, D21, M4 (model: Local LLM). For these, a model reads a bounded sample and sets the numeric score; each names its own sample and method on its card. They are sampled and advisory by design: they vary at the margins between runs and are never a deterministic measurement. Every other score in this report is tool-computed at confidence 1.0.
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.
4 method(s) exceeded the cyclomatic complexity threshold of 15; the worst was LinqExpressionVisitors.visitWhere at 25. A further 4 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 Evaluator.evalWhere at 23 — they are counted neither in the figure above nor in this dimension's score. 4 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: src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Evaluator.fs (Evaluator.evalWhere at 23), src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Evaluator.fs (Evaluator.evalWhere at 21), src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Evaluator.fs (Evaluator.evalWhere at 21), src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/Evaluator.fs (Evaluator.evalWhere at 21). 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.
Bring the 4 bodies over 15 down to 15 or less in Cyclomatic Complexity — start with LinqExpressionVisitors.visitWhere (cyclomatic 25), LinqExpressionVisitors.visitWhere (cyclomatic 22), LinqExpressionVisitors.visitWhere (cyclomatic 22). — 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 4 together lifts Cyclomatic Complexity from 9.1 to about 10.0/10, projected with the scoring formula itself and assuming each lands exactly at 15.
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.
Bring the 4 bodies over 15 down to 15 or less in Cognitive Complexity — start with LinqExpressionVisitors.visitWhere (cognitive 19), LinqExpressionVisitors.visitWhere (cognitive 19), LinqExpressionVisitors.visitWhere (cognitive 19). — 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 4 together lifts Cognitive Complexity from 9.4 to about 10.0/10, projected with the scoring formula itself and assuming each lands exactly at 15.
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 Classes9.3 / 10Stronggated by 1 serious finding✓ 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 1 TooManyMethods finding(s) in God Classes — start with Builders.fs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 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.
114 duplicated block group(s) detected. A further 9 rows report members as variants of one another; they aggregate block groups already counted above and are not themselves counted.
+ 74 more group(s) — more in Appendix A; the complete list is findings.md.
What to do
Resolve the 8 Duplicated block (6 lines × 4) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with Builders.fs (6), GenericDeconstructor.fs, OptionTypes.fs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (8 warning-level).
Resolve the 7 Duplicated block (7 lines × 4) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with Builders.fs (5), GenericDeconstructor.fs (2). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (7 warning-level).
Resolve the 6 Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with Evaluator.fs (3), Builders.fs (2), GenericDeconstructor.fs. — 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.
D11 · Test Reliability10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified
What it measures: Whether the tests pass reliably, with no flakiness.
Method: Suite re-run N times within tiered wall-clock budgets (unit to e2e); tests failing non-deterministically across runs flagged; guarded tests retried when #if guards detected.
What it measures: Whether dependencies are current, secure, and not bloated.
Method: Manifest scan via dotnet list package across all projects; worst-signal-per-package deduction (saturating for vulnerabilities, capped-linear for deprecation/outdated) per KLoC. Exhaustive, deterministic.
Resolve the 5 Vulnerable finding(s) in Dependency Hygiene. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (5 issue-level).
Resolve the 3 Outdated finding(s) in Dependency Hygiene. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (3 recommendation-level).
Resolve the 1 Deprecated finding(s) in Dependency Hygiene. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
Stand up a CI pipeline, then gate Dependency Hygiene 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: d12_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.
Resolve the 1 Leaked secret finding(s) in Secret Scanning — start with REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 issue-level).
Stand up a CI pipeline, then gate Secret Scanning 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: d13_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.
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: Whether the project's documentation is clear, complete, and useful.
Method: Judged by language model at low temperature (0.0-0.1) on a deterministic doc sample (READMEs plus first 25 architecture docs), with two-pass stability filtering. Advisory, sampled.
The repository's root README is clear and complete for an open-source library project: it states the purpose of Dapper.FSharp with a logo, lists features (no auto-attribute magic, support for anonymous records, LINQ Query Provider, full SELECT/INSERT/UPDATE/DELETE, OUTPUT clause, INSERT OR REPLACE), gives installation commands for NuGet and Paket, describes what's new in v4, links to an issue explaining the versioning rationale, and answers a FAQ covering why another library around Dapper and how it works. It also addresses reader questions (Do I need to create a record with all columns?; Can I map more records from one query?) under its own heading. The document is clipped mid-FAQ section, so any unshown sections in the outline are not penalized.
What to do
Improve Documentation Quality — currently 8.0/10. — The repository's root README is clear and complete for an open-source library project: it states the purpose of Dapper.FSharp with a logo, lists features (no auto-attribute magic, support for anonymous records, LINQ Query Provider, full SELECT/INSERT/UPDATE/DELETE, OUTPUT clause, INSERT OR REPLACE), gives installation commands for NuGet and Paket, describes what's new in v4, links to an issue explaining the versioning rationale, and answers a FAQ covering why another library around Dapper and how it works. It also addresses reader questions (Do I need to create a record with all columns?; Can I map more records from one query?) under its own heading. The document is clipped mid-FAQ section, so any unshown sections in the outline are not penalized.
What it measures: Whether names — types, methods, variables — are clear and consistent.
Method: Judged by language model at low temperature (0.0-0.1) on a deterministic random symbol sample (fixed size, not exhaustive), with disclosed confidence band. Advisory, sampled.
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.
84 % of calls cross a namespace and 0 % go through an interface, but 100 % of collaborators are co-located — so a call's collaborators sit together and tracing stays easy. Baseline: small — navigation cost is tolerated.
What it measures: Whether any secrets were ever committed — scanned across the full git history, not just now.
Method: Secret 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.
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).
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.
Resolve the 2 High IaC finding(s) in IaC & Container Security — start with REDACTED (2). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 issue-level).
Resolve the 1 Medium IaC finding(s) in IaC & Container Security — start with REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
Detailed fixes: d31_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.
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.
24 of 24 significant source file(s) are orphaned — their living knowledge has decayed to nothing, so no one currently understands them. The largest is src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs. Counted over 24 of the 47 production source files in this repository: the rest are under the ~2,400-byte size floor this dimension measures over.
Most significant orphaned file · ×3src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs:1
Dormant codebase
What to do
Resolve the 21 Orphaned file finding(s) in Knowledge Freshness — start with IDbConnection.fs (5), LinqExpressionVisitors.fs (4), Evaluator.fs (4). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (21 recommendation-level).
Resolve the 3 Most significant orphaned file finding(s) in Knowledge Freshness — start with Builders.fs (3). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (3 recommendation-level).
Resolve the 1 Dormant codebase finding(s) in Knowledge Freshness. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 recommendation-level).
Detailed fixes: d34_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.
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 anyone still ships security patches for the platform this repository RUNS ON — the runtime it pins and the framework majors its own constraints hold it to. Separate from D12 because the question differs: a current Django on an end-of-life Python is perfectly up to date and completely unsupported, and the fix is a migration rather than a version bump. What the repository says it merely SUPPORTS is never charged.
Method: End-of-life PLATFORM read from the repository's own declarations and graded against a FROZEN, dated table of vendor support dates — no network, no feed, no API, so this dimension answers identically inside a closed scan fence. Two subjects: a RUNTIME the project pins (a single or all-end-of-life TargetFramework, a .nvmrc or .python-version, a requires-python CAP) and a FRAMEWORK major a dependency constraint cannot move off (a caret, tilde or exact version; `vue@^2.7.16` pins Vue 2). A FLOOR is deliberately never charged — `requires-python = ">=3.8"` states what a package SUPPORTS, not what it runs on — and a multi-target project is charged only when EVERY target is out of support. Runtime 4.0/product capped 8.0, framework 1.5 capped 4.5. The table is safe to freeze because a statement about support that ended in the past cannot become false: it loses recall as it ages, never precision, and a test asserts every entry predates the freeze date. Disjoint from D31 (a container image's OS layer) and D29 (the toolchain a CI workflow installs). Abstains when the repository declares no platform this pass reads — never scores it clean.
0 end-of-life runtime(s) and 0 end-of-life framework(s), read from 3 platform declaration(s) and 0 dependency declaration(s). This dimension reads what the repository says about ITSELF — a pinned target framework, a version file, a capped requires-python, a Rust toolchain pin, a framework major a constraint cannot move off. A FLOOR is deliberately never charged: `requires-python = ">=3.8"` states what the package SUPPORTS, not what it runs on, and a well-maintained library declares exactly that while running its own CI on a current release. The end-of-life facts are FROZEN and dated, so this dimension needs no network and answers identically inside a closed scan fence; as the table ages it loses recall and never precision, because a statement about support that ended in the past cannot become false. The OS layer of a container image is D31's question and the toolchain a CI workflow installs is D29's; this row is neither.
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 · Code Health — Unreviewed-generation residue in this repository's F#: bindings whose whole body still raises a "not implemented" error (NotImplementedException, failwith "not implemented"), and placeholder text (lorem ipsum, changeme/replace_me…) left in string literals of 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.
A shipped binding's whole body still raises a "not implemented" error — generated scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface. (×4) — src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/LinqExpressionVisitors.fs:7, src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/LinqExpressionVisitors.fs:7, src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/LinqExpressionVisitors.fs:8, …
What to do
Finish or delete the bindings that still raise "not implemented", and replace placeholder text before shipping.
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.
What to do
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 README actually describes the code that exists (LLM-judged, advisory).
Method: Judged by language model at low temperature: README accuracy versus actual projects, within a disclosed tolerance. Advisory, not a measured number.
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 call was found in the 47 F# production file(s) this check read across 2 module(s). Each was searched for its ecosystem's logging libraries (F#: Microsoft.Extensions.Logging (ILogger), Serilog, NLog, log4net, Logary) and for a call on a receiver named `log`/`logger` (or ending in `Logger`/`_logger`) with a level verb. It cannot see logging through a repo-local wrapper named otherwise, or in source it did not read — this is 'no logging found by this walk', not a verdict that nothing here logs. If it is right, production issues will be hard to diagnose.
What to do
Log through `ILogger` (Microsoft.Extensions.Logging, or Serilog with a JSON sink) at meaningful points in the programs and services you run.
Consider OpenTelemetry tracing/metrics (OpenTelemetry.Extensions.Hosting with the ASP.NET Core instrumentation) and a health-check endpoint (ASP.NET Core's MapHealthChecks, or a /health route in your Giraffe/Suave app) for operability.
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 `semgrep --config=auto` plus gitleaks for committed secrets (F# is not a CodeQL language and has no language-specific SAST engine) — 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: `semgrep --config=auto` plus gitleaks for committed secrets (F# is not a CodeQL language and has no language-specific SAST engine) — 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 automated and safely reversible (probes, rolling updates, approval gates) — from manifests/pipeline files, not the live environment.
Method: Filesystem scan: deployment manifests/IaC (K8s YAML, Helm, Terraform) for rolling updates, probes, approval gates, migration hooks. Exhaustive, deterministic.
Deployment is orchestrated by compose, but no service declares a `healthcheck:` and nothing pins a previous image to fall back to — the runtime can tell that the container is up, not that it is serving, so a bad release is harder to detect and reverse.
What to do
Add a `healthcheck:` to the served compose service — probing the endpoint it already answers on where it has one — with `depends_on: condition: service_healthy` on whatever waits for it, and keep the deployed image tag immutable and recorded so rolling back is re-pointing at the previous tag rather than rebuilding.
Add an approval/environment gate (required reviewers / protection rules) before production promotion.
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.
Other · Code Health — Whether an argument guard throws the exception its own condition describes — a guard that rejects a value for being EMPTY and reports it as `NullPointerException` (Java, Kotlin, Scala), `ArgumentError.notNull` (Dart) or `ArgumentNullException` (F#'s `nullArg`) tells the caller a parameter was null when it provably was not.
Method: Roslyn syntax: `throw new ArgumentNullException(nameof(p))` statements controlled by an `if`, whose condition is read for a test that is true of a NON-null `p` — an emptiness test that dereferences it (`p.Count == 0`, `!p.Any()`) or a BCL predicate documented true of the empty value (`string.IsNullOrEmpty(p)`). Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.
Other · Code Health — Whether the work a diagnostic log line costs is paid only when that line is wanted — C# evaluates a call's arguments BEFORE the call, so a trace/debug message joined or projected out of a collection is built in full on every pass, and then discarded by a sink the shipped configuration leaves switched off.
Method: Roslyn syntax: log calls at a diagnostic level (a `Log`-prefixed method naming Trace/Debug/Verbose, or a bare `Debug`/`Trace`/`Verbose` on a receiver named for a logger), whose argument list is read for a call whose cost scales with a sequence — a LINQ operator, a materialisation, `string.Join`, a serializer — with no enclosing level check or conditional-compilation region. On a repository with no .NET source it reads JavaScript/TypeScript off the engine’s own token stream (test, vendored and minified paths not) with the same rule: a `debug`/`trace`/`verbose` call on a receiver named for a logger, or a `log`-prefixed method naming the level, whose argument calls an array operator (`map`/`filter`/`reduce`/`sort`/…), `Array.from`, `Object.keys/values/entries`, `JSON.stringify`/`util.inspect` over anything but a literal, or an array `join` — outside any arrow or function passed as an argument, which the logger calls only when the level is on — with no enclosing `if`, `&&` or `?:` whose condition names a level, a level string, or the `NODE_ENV`/`__DEV__`/`DEV` build switch. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.
Do you agree with this assessment?
X27 · Collection changed while being enumerated10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged
Other · Code Health — Whether a `for … in` loop leaves the mutable .NET collection it is walking alone — F#'s own lists, arrays, maps and sets cannot be changed by a loop body, but a `ResizeArray`, `Dictionary`, `Queue` or other BCL collection walked by `for x in c do` is walked through its enumerator, so a body that adds to or removes from `c` makes the next `MoveNext` throw `InvalidOperationException` and the remaining items are never seen.
Method: Roslyn syntax + semantics: `foreach` statements whose body calls a structural mutator (`Add`/`Remove`/`Clear`/`Insert`/…) on the very expression the loop is enumerating. Two arms. ARM A — the source is a concrete fragile BCL collection, or a live `Keys`/`Values` view over one, and the mutator resolves to that same collection's own member; concurrent and immutable collections and arrays are outside the population by construction, since their enumerators survive a structural change. ARM B — the source is an argument-less accessor CALL on a receiver whose body is in source: the accessor must return a stored field VERBATIM and a sibling member must structurally change that same field, both read off the implementations rather than from the members' names. A mutation the loop provably exits immediately after (`break`/`return`/`throw`/`goto`), or one written inside a nested loop or a lambda, is counted and never reported. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.
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.
Not evidenced — 4 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.
P5 DR & Backup — not evidenced — repo shows no backup/RTO/RPO controls; absence of evidence is not evidence of a working control
Not included — 76 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 — Not applicable: this repository's F# imports no dependency-injection container and defines no container of its own — nothing that both registers and resolves bindings, and nothing that names two lifetimes — so nothing holds one lifetime's instance while handing out another's.
AX2 Stateful singletons — No container singleton was found, so there is no shared instance for concurrent requests to race on. No F# function in this code takes an ASP.NET Core or Suave HttpContext (a Giraffe, Saturn, Falco, Oxpecker or Suave handler) and no F# class is an ASP.NET Core controller, so no request handler shares module state between request threads.
AX5 Architecture & structure — not assessed — architecture style/structure is computed from a project graph (projects, types, module namespaces) 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
AX6 Interface segregation — not assessed — interface segregation is computed over a type surface 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
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 — This repository has nothing the runtime tiers could boot or serve — no markup, no UI framework or web-server dependency, no UI component source, no native UI project and no API definition — nothing here is a surface to boot — so runtime a11y/egress/header evidence has no subject here. Not applicable: this is neither a gap in the scan nor a finding about your code.
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 — ~8907 lines of test source are present (.fs) 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.
D14 License Compliance — Package licences not resolved for an MSBuild/NuGet repository
D16 Bus Factor — dormant codebase — no living knowledge left to concentrate
D17 Explicit Debt — the C# workspace loaded 0 projects, so explicit-debt density could not be measured
D18 Solution Shape — D18 scores the shape of a C#/VB .NET solution; this repository's .NET projects are all F# (.fsproj), which the C#/VB workspace does not load, so the dimension does not apply.
D20 ADR Quality — N/A — ADRs are expected on deployable products with a user-facing host, not consumed libraries; no ADR log is required here.
D22 Internal API Consistency — No intentionally-exposed public API to evaluate for consistency.
D23 Boundary Type-Coupling — No bounded-context organisation was detected either — neither a context-shaped layout, nor 2+ sibling source directories each declaring an aggregate root, nor 2+ projects each declaring an entity of their own. Declaring this codebase's bounded contexts (≥2) would let cross-boundary type coupling be assessed. Declare them in `.codehealth/config.yaml` at the repository root (create it if absent), mapping each context name to the module-path or namespace prefixes that belong to it — e.g. `architecture:` → `contexts:` → `Billing: ["src/billing", "Acme.Billing"]`, `Catalog: ["src/catalog", "Acme.Catalog"]`.
D24 Comment Value — No inline comments to assess — comment value is not applicable here.
D25 ADR Conformance — no ADRs to check
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.
D43 Malicious Dependencies — Not scored — no dependency manifest in a supported ecosystem was read for this repository. A gap in the analyzer's language coverage, NOT a finding that the repository is free of vulnerable dependencies (a Python pyproject.toml/requirements.txt (pip/uv/Poetry), a Swift Package.swift/Package.resolved, a Cargo manifest, a Go module (go.mod/go.sum), a Gradle version catalogue, a Maven POM, an sbt build (build.sbt), composer.json, package.json, a Dart pubspec.yaml, an Elixir mix.exs/mix.lock (Hex), a rebar.config / erlang.mk DEPS (Hex), a Ruby Gemfile/Gemfile.lock or .gemspec (Bundler/RubyGems) — not scanned yet).
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 (.fs) 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 — applicable but not scored (2 of 3 signals for this style — below the bar we score at): 39 value object(s); a Domain/Aggregates/ValueObjects layer
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
P12 CI test-gate honesty — no CI workflow found
P7 Outbound HTTP resilience — not measured — the application kind could not be determined for this repo
P8 Schema migrations — 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
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 F# code has 6,272 production line(s), 4 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
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.
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.
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 — 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
X7 Silent fallback defaults — 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
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.
Duplicated block (6 lines × 4) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:106— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:106-111 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs:104-109 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Builders.fs:103-108 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/Builders.fs:94-99 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs` 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 53 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 655 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 (6 lines × 4) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:113— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:113-118 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs:111-116 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Builders.fs:110-115 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/Builders.fs:101-106 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs` 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 53 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 655 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 (6 lines × 4) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:137— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:137-142 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs:135-140 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Builders.fs:134-139 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/Builders.fs:125-130 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs` 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 53 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 655 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 (6 lines × 4) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:145— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:145-150 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs:143-148 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Builders.fs:142-147 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/Builders.fs:133-138 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs` 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 53 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 655 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 (6 lines × 4) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:153— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:153-158 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs:151-156 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Builders.fs:150-155 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/Builders.fs:141-146 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs` 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 53 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 655 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 (6 lines × 4) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:174— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:174-179 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs:172-177 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Builders.fs:171-176 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/Builders.fs:162-167 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs` 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 53 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 655 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 (6 lines × 4) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs:99— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs:99-104 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs:91-96 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs:102-107 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/GenericDeconstructor.fs:91-96 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs` 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 12 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 104 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. 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 (6 lines × 4) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/OptionTypes.fs:8— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/OptionTypes.fs:8-13 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/OptionTypes.fs:8-13 | src/Dapper.FSharp/OptionTypes.fs:67-72 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/OptionTypes.fs:8-13 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/OptionTypes.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/OptionTypes.fs` 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 3 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 25 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 (7 lines × 4) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:180— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:180-186 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs:178-184 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Builders.fs:177-183 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/Builders.fs:168-174 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs` 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 53 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 655 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. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:180` 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 (7 lines × 4) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:375— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:375-381 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs:389-395 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Builders.fs:388-394 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/Builders.fs:342-348 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs` 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 53 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 655 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 (7 lines × 4) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:401— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:401-407 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs:415-421 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Builders.fs:414-420 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/Builders.fs:368-374 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs` 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 53 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 655 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. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:401` it runs out through the closing brace of the declaration holding it and carries on into the declaration that follows — the window is the tail of one member plus the head of the next, so no call can be substituted for those exact lines, and the smallest declaration that contains all of them is the type they sit in. The repeated unit is the member each site sits in: where those members' bodies are the same, move one whole member to the shared location and have the others delegate to it; where the copies are a run of near-identical overloads or wrappers that differ only in their signatures, the repetition IS the run — a one-line delegation has no helper inside it to lift — so generate the run from the set it enumerates, or accept it and keep each member's own documentation with it.
Duplicated block (7 lines × 4) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:408— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:408-414 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs:422-428 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Builders.fs:421-427 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/Builders.fs:375-381 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs` 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 53 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 655 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 (7 lines × 4) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:502— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:502-508 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs:516-522 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Builders.fs:515-521 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/Builders.fs:468-474 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs` 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 53 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 655 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 (7 lines × 4) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs:62— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs:62-68 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs:62-68 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs:65-71 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/GenericDeconstructor.fs:62-68 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs` 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 12 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 104 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 (7 lines × 4) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs:106— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs:106-112 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs:98-104 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs:109-115 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/GenericDeconstructor.fs:98-104 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs` 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 12 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 104 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 (6 lines × 2) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs:121— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs:121-126 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs:124-129 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs` 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 13 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 119 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 (6 lines × 2) src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Evaluator.fs:152— src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Evaluator.fs:152-157 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Evaluator.fs:164-169 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Evaluator.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Evaluator.fs` 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 13 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 132 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 (6 lines × 2) src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Evaluator.fs:161— src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Evaluator.fs:161-166 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Evaluator.fs:179-184 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Evaluator.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Evaluator.fs` 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 13 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 132 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 (6 lines × 2) src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Builders.fs:133— src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Builders.fs:133-138 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Builders.fs:141-146 — 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) src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Builders.fs:149— src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Builders.fs:149-154 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Builders.fs:157-162 — 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) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Evaluator.fs:55— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Evaluator.fs:55-60 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Evaluator.fs:65-70 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Evaluator.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Evaluator.fs` 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 10 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 93 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 (5 lines × 4) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:161— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:161-165 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs:159-163 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Builders.fs:158-162 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/Builders.fs:149-153 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs` 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 53 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 655 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 (5 lines × 4) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:318— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:318-322 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs:323-334 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Builders.fs:322-333 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/Builders.fs:298-302 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs` 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 53 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 655 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 (5 lines × 4) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:324— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:324-328 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs:336-347 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Builders.fs:335-346 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/Builders.fs:304-308 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs` 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 53 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 655 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 (5 lines × 4) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:330— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:330-334 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs:349-360 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Builders.fs:348-359 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/Builders.fs:310-314 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs` 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 53 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 655 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 (5 lines × 4) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:367— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:367-372 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs:381-386 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Builders.fs:380-385 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/Builders.fs:335-339 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs` 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 53 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 655 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. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:367` it runs out through the closing brace of the declaration holding it and carries on into the declaration that follows — the window is the tail of one member plus the head of the next, so no call can be substituted for those exact lines, and the smallest declaration that contains all of them is the type they sit in. The repeated unit is the member each site sits in: where those members' bodies are the same, move one whole member to the shared location and have the others delegate to it; where the copies are a run of near-identical overloads or wrappers that differ only in their signatures, the repetition IS the run — a one-line delegation has no helper inside it to lift — so generate the run from the set it enumerates, or accept it and keep each member's own documentation with it.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 4) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs:20— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs:20-24 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs:20-24 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs:23-27 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/GenericDeconstructor.fs:20-24 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs` 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 12 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 104 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.
LinqExpressionVisitors.visitWhere (cognitive 19) src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/LinqExpressionVisitors.fs:199— LinqExpressionVisitors.visitWhere has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: match/switch 7 (14 pts), if/else 2 (4 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 9). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.
LinqExpressionVisitors.visitWhere (cognitive 19) src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/LinqExpressionVisitors.fs:200— LinqExpressionVisitors.visitWhere has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: match/switch 7 (14 pts), if/else 2 (4 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 9). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.
LinqExpressionVisitors.visitWhere (cognitive 19) src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/LinqExpressionVisitors.fs:199— LinqExpressionVisitors.visitWhere has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: match/switch 7 (14 pts), if/else 2 (4 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 9). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.
LinqExpressionVisitors.visitWhere (cognitive 19) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/LinqExpressionVisitors.fs:199— LinqExpressionVisitors.visitWhere has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: match/switch 7 (14 pts), if/else 2 (4 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 9). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.
Duplicated block (17 lines × 4) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:349— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:349-365 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs:363-379 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Builders.fs:362-378 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/Builders.fs:317-333 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs` 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 53 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 655 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 (17 lines × 4) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:383— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:383-399 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs:397-413 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Builders.fs:396-412 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/Builders.fs:350-366 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs` 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 53 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 655 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 (17 lines × 4) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:452— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:452-468 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs:466-482 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Builders.fs:465-481 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/Builders.fs:419-435 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs` 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 53 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 655 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 (17 lines × 4) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Domain.fs:4— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Domain.fs:4-20 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Domain.fs:4-20 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Domain.fs:4-20 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/Domain.fs:4-20 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Domain.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Domain.fs` 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 5 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 112 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 × 4) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:94— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:94-104 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs:92-102 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Builders.fs:91-101 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/Builders.fs:82-92 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs` 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 53 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 655 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 × 4) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:512— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:512-522 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs:526-536 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Builders.fs:525-535 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/Builders.fs:478-488 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs` 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 53 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 655 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 × 4) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Evaluator.fs:43— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Evaluator.fs:43-53 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Evaluator.fs:46-56 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Evaluator.fs:53-63 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/Evaluator.fs:41-51 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Evaluator.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Evaluator.fs` 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 9 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 125 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 × 4) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Evaluator.fs:78— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Evaluator.fs:78-88 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Evaluator.fs:81-91 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Evaluator.fs:88-98 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/Evaluator.fs:75-85 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Evaluator.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Evaluator.fs` 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 9 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 125 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. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Evaluator.fs:78` 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 (8 lines × 4) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Evaluator.fs:95— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Evaluator.fs:95-102 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Evaluator.fs:98-105 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Evaluator.fs:105-112 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/Evaluator.fs:92-99 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Evaluator.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Evaluator.fs` 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 9 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 125 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. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Evaluator.fs:95` it begins part-way through the construct above it, 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 (8 lines × 4) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Evaluator.fs:121— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Evaluator.fs:121-129 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Evaluator.fs:115-122 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Evaluator.fs:122-129 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/Evaluator.fs:108-116 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Evaluator.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Evaluator.fs` 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 9 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 125 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 (8 lines × 4) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/LinqExpressionVisitors.fs:211— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/LinqExpressionVisitors.fs:211-218 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/LinqExpressionVisitors.fs:211-218 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/LinqExpressionVisitors.fs:212-219 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/LinqExpressionVisitors.fs:211-218 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/LinqExpressionVisitors.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/LinqExpressionVisitors.fs` 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 327 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 (8 lines × 4) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Evaluator.fs:30— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Evaluator.fs:30-37 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Evaluator.fs:33-40 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Evaluator.fs:38-45 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/Evaluator.fs:28-35 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Evaluator.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Evaluator.fs` 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 9 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 125 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 (7 lines × 3) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:138— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:138-144 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs:136-142 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/Builders.fs:126-132 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs` 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 53 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 655 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 (7 lines × 3) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:146— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:146-152 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs:144-150 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/Builders.fs:134-140 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs` 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 53 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 655 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 (7 lines × 3) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:154— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:154-160 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs:152-158 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/Builders.fs:142-148 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs` 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 53 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 655 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 (7 lines × 3) src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Builders.fs:96— src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Builders.fs:96-102 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Builders.fs:389-395 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Builders.fs:530-536 — 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.
Unfinished stub — raises a "not implemented" error src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/LinqExpressionVisitors.fs:7— A shipped binding's whole body still raises a "not implemented" error — generated scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface.
Unfinished stub — raises a "not implemented" error src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/LinqExpressionVisitors.fs:7— A shipped binding's whole body still raises a "not implemented" error — generated scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface.
Unfinished stub — raises a "not implemented" error src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/LinqExpressionVisitors.fs:8— A shipped binding's whole body still raises a "not implemented" error — generated scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface.
Unfinished stub — raises a "not implemented" error src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/LinqExpressionVisitors.fs:7— A shipped binding's whole body still raises a "not implemented" error — generated scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface.
LinqExpressionVisitors.visitWhere (cyclomatic 22) src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/LinqExpressionVisitors.fs:199— LinqExpressionVisitors.visitWhere has cyclomatic complexity 22 (threshold 15). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Where every arm is uniform — the same kind of value, with no behaviour of its own — a table keyed by the case is the shorter form; wherever the arms carry different data or different behaviour, keep them as cases, because collapsing those trades an explicit, reviewable set of cases for nothing.
LinqExpressionVisitors.visitWhere (cyclomatic 22) src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/LinqExpressionVisitors.fs:199— LinqExpressionVisitors.visitWhere has cyclomatic complexity 22 (threshold 15). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Where every arm is uniform — the same kind of value, with no behaviour of its own — a table keyed by the case is the shorter form; wherever the arms carry different data or different behaviour, keep them as cases, because collapsing those trades an explicit, reviewable set of cases for nothing.
LinqExpressionVisitors.visitWhere (cyclomatic 22) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/LinqExpressionVisitors.fs:199— LinqExpressionVisitors.visitWhere has cyclomatic complexity 22 (threshold 15). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Where every arm is uniform — the same kind of value, with no behaviour of its own — a table keyed by the case is the shorter form; wherever the arms carry different data or different behaviour, keep them as cases, because collapsing those trades an explicit, reviewable set of cases for nothing.
Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs:113— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs:113-119 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs:116-122 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs` 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 13 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 119 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 (7 lines × 2) src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Evaluator.fs:4— src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Evaluator.fs:4-10 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Evaluator.fs:6-13 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Evaluator.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Evaluator.fs` 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 13 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 132 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 (7 lines × 2) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/IDbConnection.fs:48— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/IDbConnection.fs:48-54 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/IDbConnection.fs:47-53 — 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.
D4 · Code Duplication· Members sharing a duplicated core (4 members, 50+ identical tokens) · ×2
Members sharing a duplicated core (4 members, 50+ identical tokens) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/IDbConnection.fs:1— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/IDbConnection.fs:1-54 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/IDbConnection.fs:1-45 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/IDbConnection.fs:1-53 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/IDbConnection.fs:1-48 — 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) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/JoinAnalyzer.fs:1— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/JoinAnalyzer.fs:1-36 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/JoinAnalyzer.fs:1-36 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/JoinAnalyzer.fs:1-36 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/JoinAnalyzer.fs:1-36 — 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 (20 lines × 4) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Domain.fs:46— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Domain.fs:46-65 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Domain.fs:46-65 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Domain.fs:48-67 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/Domain.fs:46-65 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Domain.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Domain.fs` 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 5 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 112 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 (20 lines × 4) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs:69— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs:69-88 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs:69-88 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs:72-91 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/GenericDeconstructor.fs:69-88 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs` 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 12 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 104 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 (20 lines × 3) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:392— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:392-411 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs:406-425 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Builders.fs:405-424 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs` 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 53 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 655 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 (20 lines × 3) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Domain.fs:84— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Domain.fs:84-103 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Domain.fs:79-98 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Domain.fs:81-100 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Domain.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Domain.fs` 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 5 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 112 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. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Domain.fs:84` 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 (13 lines × 4) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:279— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:279-291 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs:277-289 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Builders.fs:276-288 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/Builders.fs:259-271 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs` 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 53 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 655 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 (13 lines × 4) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:481— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:481-493 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs:495-507 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Builders.fs:494-506 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/Builders.fs:447-459 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs` 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 53 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 655 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 (3–13 lines × 4) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:90— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:90-102 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs:88-100 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Builders.fs:87-99 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/Builders.fs:77-79 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs` 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 53 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 655 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. 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, `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:90` calls `GetOuterTableMapping` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/Builders.fs:77` 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 (3–13 lines × 4) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Evaluator.fs:149— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Evaluator.fs:149-161 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Evaluator.fs:143-145 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Evaluator.fs:146-158 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/Evaluator.fs:138-140 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Evaluator.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Evaluator.fs` 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 9 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 125 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. 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, `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Evaluator.fs:140` calls `ToString`, `_` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Evaluator.fs:149` 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 × 2) src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs:105— src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs:105-113 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/GenericDeconstructor.fs:105-113 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/GenericDeconstructor.fs` 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 13 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 113 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 × 2) src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Builders.fs:460— src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Builders.fs:460-468 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Builders.fs:520-528 — 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 × 6) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:137— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:137-141 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:145-149 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs:135-139 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs:143-147 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/Builders.fs:125-129 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/Builders.fs:133-137 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs` 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 53 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 655 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 (5 lines × 6) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:153— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:153-157 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:161-165 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs:151-155 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs:159-163 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/Builders.fs:141-145 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/Builders.fs:149-153 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs` 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 53 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 655 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.
LinqExpressionVisitors.visitWhere (cyclomatic 25) src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/LinqExpressionVisitors.fs:200— LinqExpressionVisitors.visitWhere has cyclomatic complexity 25 (threshold 15). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Where every arm is uniform — the same kind of value, with no behaviour of its own — a table keyed by the case is the shorter form; wherever the arms carry different data or different behaviour, keep them as cases, because collapsing those trades an explicit, reviewable set of cases for nothing.
TooManyMethods: SelectExpressionBuilder`1 src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:67— TooManyMethods — 32 methods. The bar is 30 methods; this is 2 over it, 1.07× 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.
D4 · Code Duplication· Near-duplicate member family (4 members, 408 shared lines) · ×1
Near-duplicate member family (4 members, 408 shared lines) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:1— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:1-546 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs:1-560 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Builders.fs:1-563 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/Builders.fs:1-512 — These 4 members are variants of one another: a block of 408 lines reported below appears in every one of them, and the pairwise near-duplicate rows they would otherwise produce are collapsed into this row. Read them 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.
D4 · Code Duplication· Near-duplicate member family (4 members, 326 shared lines) · ×1
Near-duplicate member family (4 members, 326 shared lines) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/LinqExpressionVisitors.fs:1— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/LinqExpressionVisitors.fs:1-336 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/LinqExpressionVisitors.fs:1-336 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/LinqExpressionVisitors.fs:1-340 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/LinqExpressionVisitors.fs:1-336 — These 4 members are variants of one another: a block of 326 lines reported below appears in every one of them, and the pairwise near-duplicate rows they would otherwise produce are collapsed into this row. Read them 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.
D4 · Code Duplication· Near-duplicate member family (4 members, 73 shared lines) · ×1
Near-duplicate member family (4 members, 73 shared lines) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs:1— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs:1-136 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs:1-115 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs:1-139 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/GenericDeconstructor.fs:1-115 — These 4 members are variants of one another: a block of 73 lines reported below appears in every one of them, and the pairwise near-duplicate rows they would otherwise produce are collapsed into this row. Read them 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.
D4 · Code Duplication· Near-duplicate member family (4 members, 71 shared lines) · ×1
Near-duplicate member family (4 members, 71 shared lines) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Evaluator.fs:1— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Evaluator.fs:1-194 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Evaluator.fs:1-167 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Evaluator.fs:1-191 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/Evaluator.fs:1-169 — These 4 members are variants of one another: a block of 71 lines reported below appears in every one of them, and the pairwise near-duplicate rows they would otherwise produce are collapsed into this row. Read them 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.
D4 · Code Duplication· Near-duplicate member family (4 members, 59 shared lines) · ×1
Near-duplicate member family (4 members, 59 shared lines) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Domain.fs:1— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Domain.fs:1-103 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Domain.fs:1-98 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Domain.fs:1-100 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/Domain.fs:1-94 — These 4 members are variants of one another: a block of 59 lines reported below appears in every one of them, and the pairwise near-duplicate rows they would otherwise produce are collapsed into this row. Read them 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.
D4 · Code Duplication· Near-duplicate member family (4 members, 38 shared lines) · ×1
Near-duplicate member family (4 members, 38 shared lines) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/WhereAnalyzer.fs:1— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/WhereAnalyzer.fs:1-46 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/WhereAnalyzer.fs:1-46 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/WhereAnalyzer.fs:1-49 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/WhereAnalyzer.fs:1-46 — These 4 members are variants of one another: a block of 38 lines reported below appears in every one of them, and the pairwise near-duplicate rows they would otherwise produce are collapsed into this row. Read them 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.
D4 · Code Duplication· Near-duplicate member family (4 members, 16 shared lines) · ×1
Near-duplicate member family (4 members, 16 shared lines) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/OptionTypes.fs:1— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/OptionTypes.fs:1-28 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/OptionTypes.fs:1-28 | src/Dapper.FSharp/OptionTypes.fs:1-87 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/OptionTypes.fs:1-28 — These 4 members are variants of one another: a block of 16 lines reported below appears in every one of them, and the pairwise near-duplicate rows they would otherwise produce are collapsed into this row. Read them 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 (148–149 lines × 4) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/LinqExpressionVisitors.fs:4— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/LinqExpressionVisitors.fs:4-151 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/LinqExpressionVisitors.fs:4-151 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/LinqExpressionVisitors.fs:4-152 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/LinqExpressionVisitors.fs:4-151 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/LinqExpressionVisitors.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/LinqExpressionVisitors.fs` 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 327 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 (111 lines × 4) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/LinqExpressionVisitors.fs:226— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/LinqExpressionVisitors.fs:226-336 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/LinqExpressionVisitors.fs:226-336 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/LinqExpressionVisitors.fs:230-340 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/LinqExpressionVisitors.fs:226-336 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/LinqExpressionVisitors.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/LinqExpressionVisitors.fs` 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 327 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 (59 lines × 4) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/LinqExpressionVisitors.fs:152— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/LinqExpressionVisitors.fs:152-210 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/LinqExpressionVisitors.fs:152-210 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/LinqExpressionVisitors.fs:153-211 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/LinqExpressionVisitors.fs:152-210 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/LinqExpressionVisitors.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/LinqExpressionVisitors.fs` 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 327 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 (57 lines × 2) src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs:310— src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs:310-366 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Builders.fs:309-365 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Builders.fs` 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 46 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 651 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 (42–43 lines × 3) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Evaluator.fs:16— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Evaluator.fs:16-57 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Evaluator.fs:19-60 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/Evaluator.fs:13-55 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Evaluator.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Evaluator.fs` 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 9 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 125 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 (39–41 lines × 3) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:42— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:42-82 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs:43-81 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Builders.fs:42-80 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs` 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 53 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 655 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. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:42` 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.
Duplicated block (32 lines × 3) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Domain.fs:5— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Domain.fs:5-36 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Domain.fs:5-36 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/Domain.fs:5-36 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Domain.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Domain.fs` 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 5 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 112 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 (31 lines × 2) src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Domain.fs:61— src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Domain.fs:61-91 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Domain.fs:63-93 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Domain.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Domain.fs` 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 5 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 111 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. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Domain.fs:61` 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 (29 lines × 4) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/JoinAnalyzer.fs:7— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/JoinAnalyzer.fs:7-35 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/JoinAnalyzer.fs:7-35 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/JoinAnalyzer.fs:7-35 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/JoinAnalyzer.fs:7-35 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/JoinAnalyzer.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/JoinAnalyzer.fs` 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 1 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 29 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 (29 lines × 2) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:312— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:312-340 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/Builders.fs:292-320 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/Builders.fs` 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 49 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 572 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 (28 lines × 4) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:205— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:205-232 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs:203-230 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Builders.fs:202-229 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/Builders.fs:189-216 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs` 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 53 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 655 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. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:205` 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 (26 lines × 4) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:251— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:251-276 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs:249-274 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Builders.fs:248-273 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/Builders.fs:231-256 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs` 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 53 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 655 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 (22–23 lines × 4) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Domain.fs:21— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Domain.fs:21-42 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Domain.fs:21-42 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Domain.fs:23-44 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/Domain.fs:21-43 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Domain.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Domain.fs` 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 5 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 112 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. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Domain.fs:21` 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 (23 lines × 3) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:358— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:358-380 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs:372-394 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Builders.fs:371-393 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs` 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 53 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 655 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 (22 lines × 4) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:28— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:28-49 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs:29-50 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Builders.fs:28-49 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/Builders.fs:26-47 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs` 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 53 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 655 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 (21–22 lines × 4) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/WhereAnalyzer.fs:25— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/WhereAnalyzer.fs:25-45 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/WhereAnalyzer.fs:25-45 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/WhereAnalyzer.fs:27-48 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/WhereAnalyzer.fs:25-45 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/WhereAnalyzer.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/WhereAnalyzer.fs` 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 2 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 40 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 (21 lines × 4) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:524— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:524-544 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs:538-558 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Builders.fs:537-557 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/Builders.fs:490-510 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs` 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 53 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 655 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. 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 (21 lines × 2) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs:81— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs:81-101 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs:84-104 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs` 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 13 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 119 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 (11–18 lines × 4) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:306— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:306-316 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs:304-321 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Builders.fs:303-320 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/Builders.fs:286-296 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs` 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 53 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 655 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 (18 lines × 4) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:417— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:417-434 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs:431-448 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Builders.fs:430-447 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/Builders.fs:384-401 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs` 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 53 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 655 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 (17–18 lines × 4) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/WhereAnalyzer.fs:6— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/WhereAnalyzer.fs:6-22 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/WhereAnalyzer.fs:6-22 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/WhereAnalyzer.fs:7-24 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/WhereAnalyzer.fs:6-22 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/WhereAnalyzer.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/WhereAnalyzer.fs` 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 2 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 40 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. 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 (3–18 lines × 4) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:10— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:10-27 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs:11-28 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Builders.fs:10-27 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/Builders.fs:23-25 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs` 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 53 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 655 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 (4–17 lines × 4) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:494— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:494-510 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs:508-524 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Builders.fs:508-511 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/Builders.fs:460-476 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs` 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 53 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 655 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. 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 (16 lines × 4) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:120— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:120-135 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs:118-133 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Builders.fs:117-132 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/Builders.fs:108-123 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs` 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 53 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 655 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 (16 lines × 3) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:162— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:162-177 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs:160-175 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Builders.fs:159-174 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs` 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 53 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 655 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 (16 lines × 2) src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Builders.fs:184— src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Builders.fs:184-199 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Builders.fs:230-245 — 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 `src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Builders.fs:184` it begins part-way through the construct above it, 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 (15 lines × 4) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Evaluator.fs:131— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Evaluator.fs:131-145 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Evaluator.fs:124-138 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Evaluator.fs:131-145 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/Evaluator.fs:118-132 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Evaluator.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Evaluator.fs` 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 9 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 125 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. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Evaluator.fs:149` calls `Append` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Evaluator.fs:147` 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 (14–15 lines × 2) src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Evaluator.fs:11— src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Evaluator.fs:11-24 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Evaluator.fs:14-28 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Evaluator.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Evaluator.fs` 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 13 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 132 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 (15 lines × 2) src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Evaluator.fs:108— src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Evaluator.fs:108-122 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Evaluator.fs:115-129 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Evaluator.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Evaluator.fs` 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 13 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 132 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 (13–14 lines × 6) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:187— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:187-200 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:233-246 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs:185-198 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs:231-244 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/Builders.fs:175-187 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/Builders.fs:217-229 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs` 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 53 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 655 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. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:187` it begins part-way through the construct above it, 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.
Duplicated block (14 lines × 4) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:292— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:292-305 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs:290-303 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Builders.fs:289-302 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/Builders.fs:272-285 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs` 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 53 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 655 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 (13 lines × 8) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:211— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:211-223 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:257-269 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs:209-221 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs:255-267 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Builders.fs:208-220 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Builders.fs:254-266 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/Builders.fs:195-207 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/Builders.fs:237-249 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs` 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 53 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 655 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 (12 lines × 6) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:197— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:197-208 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:243-254 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs:195-206 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs:241-252 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Builders.fs:194-205 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Builders.fs:240-251 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs` 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 53 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 655 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 (12 lines × 4) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:437— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:437-448 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs:451-462 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Builders.fs:450-461 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/Builders.fs:404-415 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs` 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 53 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 655 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 (12 lines × 3) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs:99— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs:99-110 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs:91-102 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/GenericDeconstructor.fs:91-102 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs` 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 12 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 104 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 (12 lines × 2) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Evaluator.fs:71— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Evaluator.fs:71-82 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/Evaluator.fs:68-79 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Evaluator.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/Evaluator.fs` 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 10 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 137 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 (10–11 lines × 2) src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Evaluator.fs:166— src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Evaluator.fs:166-176 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Evaluator.fs:181-190 — 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 (10 lines × 4) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/OptionTypes.fs:18— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/OptionTypes.fs:18-27 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/OptionTypes.fs:18-27 | src/Dapper.FSharp/OptionTypes.fs:77-86 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/OptionTypes.fs:18-27 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/OptionTypes.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/OptionTypes.fs` 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 3 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 25 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 (10 lines × 3) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs:14— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs:14-23 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs:14-23 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/GenericDeconstructor.fs:14-23 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs` 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 12 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 104 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 (2–10 lines × 12) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs:25— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs:25-34 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs:46-47 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs:59-60 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs:25-34 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs:46-47 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs:59-60 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs:34-37 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs:49-50 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs:62-63 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/GenericDeconstructor.fs:25-34 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/GenericDeconstructor.fs:46-47 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/GenericDeconstructor.fs:59-60 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs` 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 12 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 104 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. 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 (9–10 lines × 2) src/Dapper.FSharp/OptionTypes.fs:40— src/Dapper.FSharp/OptionTypes.fs:40-48 | src/Dapper.FSharp/OptionTypes.fs:53-62 — 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 × 6) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:447— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:447-455 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:507-515 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs:461-469 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs:521-529 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/Builders.fs:414-422 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/Builders.fs:473-481 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs` 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 53 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 655 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 (8–9 lines × 4) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:470— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:470-478 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs:484-492 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Builders.fs:483-491 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/Builders.fs:437-444 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs` 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 53 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 655 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. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:470` it runs out through the closing brace of the declaration holding it and carries on into the declaration that follows — the window is the tail of one member plus the head of the next, so no call can be substituted for those exact lines, and the smallest declaration that contains all of them is the type they sit in. The repeated unit is the member each site sits in: where those members' bodies are the same, move one whole member to the shared location and have the others delegate to it; where the copies are a run of near-identical overloads or wrappers that differ only in their signatures, the repetition IS the run — a one-line delegation has no helper inside it to lift — so generate the run from the set it enumerates, or accept it and keep each member's own documentation with it.
Duplicated block (9 lines × 4) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs:5— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs:5-13 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs:5-13 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs:8-16 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/GenericDeconstructor.fs:5-13 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs` 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 12 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 104 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 × 3) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/OptionTypes.fs:4— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/OptionTypes.fs:4-12 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/OptionTypes.fs:4-12 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/OptionTypes.fs:4-12 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/OptionTypes.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/OptionTypes.fs` 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 3 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 25 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 (4–8 lines × 4) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:84— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:84-87 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs:79-85 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Builders.fs:78-84 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/Builders.fs:68-75 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs` 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 53 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 655 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. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:84` it begins part-way through the construct above it, 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 (8 lines × 2) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs:129— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs:129-136 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs:132-139 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs` 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 13 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 119 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 (7 lines × 9) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:99— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:99-105 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:376-382 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:517-523 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs:97-103 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs:390-396 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs:531-537 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/Builders.fs:87-93 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/Builders.fs:343-349 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/Builders.fs:483-489 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs` 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 53 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 655 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 (7 lines × 8) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:450— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:450-456 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:510-516 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs:464-470 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs:524-530 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Builders.fs:463-469 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Builders.fs:523-529 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/Builders.fs:417-423 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/Builders.fs:476-482 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs` 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 53 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 655 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 (2–7 lines × 12) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs:35— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs:35-36 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs:48-54 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs:60-61 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs:35-36 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs:48-54 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs:60-61 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs:38-39 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs:51-57 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs:63-64 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/GenericDeconstructor.fs:35-36 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/GenericDeconstructor.fs:48-54 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/GenericDeconstructor.fs:60-61 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs` 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 12 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 104 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. 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 (3–7 lines × 4) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Evaluator.fs:70— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Evaluator.fs:70-76 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Evaluator.fs:73-79 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Evaluator.fs:78-80 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/Evaluator.fs:67-73 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Evaluator.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Evaluator.fs` 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 9 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 125 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. 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, `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Evaluator.fs:69` calls `fun`, `sprintf`, `reduce` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Evaluator.fs:78` 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 (2–6 lines × 4) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs:37— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs:37-42 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs:37-42 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs:39-40 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/GenericDeconstructor.fs:37-42 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs` 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 12 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 104 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. 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 (3–6 lines × 4) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/IDbConnection.fs:6— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/IDbConnection.fs:6-11 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/IDbConnection.fs:6-11 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/IDbConnection.fs:9-11 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/IDbConnection.fs:6-11 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/IDbConnection.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/IDbConnection.fs` 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 1 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 6 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. 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 (5 lines × 8) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:187— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:187-191 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:233-237 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs:185-189 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs:231-235 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Builders.fs:184-188 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Builders.fs:230-234 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/Builders.fs:175-179 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/Builders.fs:217-221 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs` 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 53 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 655 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. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:187` it begins part-way through the construct above it, 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 (5 lines × 3) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs:126— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs:126-130 | src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs:109-113 | src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/GenericDeconstructor.fs:109-113 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs` 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 12 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 104 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 (5 lines × 2) src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Evaluator.fs:163— src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Evaluator.fs:163-167 | src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Evaluator.fs:160-164 — `src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Evaluator.fs` and `src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Evaluator.fs` 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 10 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 93 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.
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 call was found in the 47 F# production file(s) this check read across 2 module(s). Each was searched for its ecosystem's logging libraries (F#: Microsoft.Extensions.Logging (ILogger), Serilog, NLog, log4net, Logary) and for a call on a receiver named `log`/`logger` (or ending in `Logger`/`_logger`) with a level verb. It cannot see logging through a repo-local wrapper named otherwise, or in source it did not read — this is 'no logging found by this walk', not a verdict that nothing here logs. If it is right, production issues will be hard to diagnose.
Orphaned file src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/Builders.fs:1— No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for.
Orphaned file src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/LinqExpressionVisitors.fs:1— No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for.
Orphaned file src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/LinqExpressionVisitors.fs:1— No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for.
Orphaned file src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/LinqExpressionVisitors.fs:1— No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for.
Orphaned file src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/LinqExpressionVisitors.fs:1— No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for.
Orphaned file src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Evaluator.fs:1— No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for.
Orphaned file src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Evaluator.fs:1— No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for.
Orphaned file src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Evaluator.fs:1— No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for.
Orphaned file src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/Evaluator.fs:1— No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for.
Orphaned file src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs:1— No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for.
Orphaned file src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs:1— No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for.
Orphaned file src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/GenericDeconstructor.fs:1— No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for.
Orphaned file src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/GenericDeconstructor.fs:1— No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for.
Orphaned file src/Dapper.FSharp/IDbConnection.fs:1— No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for.
Orphaned file src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/IDbConnection.fs:1— No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for.
Orphaned file src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/IDbConnection.fs:1— No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for.
Orphaned file src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/OptionTypes.fs:1— No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for.
Orphaned file src/Dapper.FSharp/SQLite/IDbConnection.fs:1— No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for.
Orphaned file src/Dapper.FSharp/OptionTypes.fs:1— No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for.
Orphaned file src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/IDbConnection.fs:1— No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for.
Orphaned file BuildHelpers.fs:1— No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for.
Outdated: Microsoft.Data.SqlClient.Extensions.Abstractions — Microsoft.Data.SqlClient.Extensions.Abstractions 1.0.0 → 7.1.1 available (referenced by Dapper.FSharp.Tests).
Outdated: Microsoft.Data.SqlClient.Internal.Logging — Microsoft.Data.SqlClient.Internal.Logging 1.0.0 → 7.1.1 available (referenced by Dapper.FSharp.Tests).
Outdated: MySql.Data — MySql.Data 8.0.31 → 26.10.0 available (referenced by Dapper.FSharp.Tests).
D34 · Knowledge Freshness· Most significant orphaned file · ×3
Most significant orphaned file src/Dapper.FSharp/MySQL/Builders.fs:1— One of the orphaned files carrying the most lost knowledge — ranked by size weighted by the file's role in the codebase, the same weighting behind the score above, so core code outranks equally large plumbing. A reasonable place to start a read-through before the aggregate risk above bites.
Most significant orphaned file src/Dapper.FSharp/PostgreSQL/Builders.fs:1— One of the orphaned files carrying the most lost knowledge — ranked by size weighted by the file's role in the codebase, the same weighting behind the score above, so core code outranks equally large plumbing. A reasonable place to start a read-through before the aggregate risk above bites.
Most significant orphaned file src/Dapper.FSharp/MSSQL/Builders.fs:1— One of the orphaned files carrying the most lost knowledge — ranked by size weighted by the file's role in the codebase, the same weighting behind the score above, so core code outranks equally large plumbing. A reasonable place to start a read-through before the aggregate risk above bites.
Dormant codebase — 24 of 24 significant files have no living knowledge — the codebase as a whole is dormant, not 24 separate risks. Counted over 24 of the 47 production source files in this repository: the rest are under the ~2,400-byte size floor this dimension measures over. Re-engage owners or document before change.
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 SAST — No static application security testing detected. For this repository's stack, add `semgrep --config=auto` plus gitleaks for committed secrets (F# is not a CodeQL language and has no language-specific SAST engine) — 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.
P4 · Deployment & Rollback· No rollback/health safety · ×1
No rollback/health safety — Deployment is orchestrated by compose, but no service declares a `healthcheck:` and nothing pins a previous image to fall back to — the runtime can tell that the container is up, not that it is serving, so a bad release is harder to detect and reverse.
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.)
Outdated: Dapper — Dapper 2.1.72 → 2.1.89 available (referenced by Dapper.FSharp).
Outdated: FSharp.Core — FSharp.Core 10.1.201 → 10.1.402 available (referenced by Dapper.FSharp).
Outdated: Microsoft.Bcl.AsyncInterfaces — Microsoft.Bcl.AsyncInterfaces 10.0.5 → 10.0.13 available (referenced by Dapper.FSharp).
Outdated: Microsoft.Build.Tasks.Git — REDACTED → 10.0.402 available (referenced by Dapper.FSharp).
Outdated: Microsoft.SourceLink.Common — Microsoft.SourceLink.Common 10.0.201 → 10.0.402 available (referenced by Dapper.FSharp).
Outdated: Microsoft.SourceLink.GitHub — Microsoft.SourceLink.GitHub 10.0.201 → 10.0.402 available (referenced by Dapper.FSharp).
Outdated: System.IO.Hashing — System.IO.Hashing 10.0.5 → 10.0.13 available (referenced by Dapper.FSharp).
Outdated: Azure.Core — Azure.Core 1.52.0 → 1.63.0 available (referenced by Dapper.FSharp.Tests).
Outdated: Azure.Monitor.OpenTelemetry.Exporter — Azure.Monitor.OpenTelemetry.Exporter 1.7.0 → 1.10.0 available (referenced by Dapper.FSharp.Tests).
Outdated: coverlet.collector — coverlet.collector 8.0.1 → 10.1.0 available (referenced by Dapper.FSharp.Tests).
Outdated: Google.Protobuf — Google.Protobuf 3.26.0 → 3.36.2 available (referenced by Dapper.FSharp.Tests).
Outdated: Microsoft.ApplicationInsights — Microsoft.ApplicationInsights 3.0.0 → 3.2.0 available (referenced by Dapper.FSharp.Tests).
Outdated: Microsoft.Bcl.Cryptography — Microsoft.Bcl.Cryptography 10.0.5 → 10.0.13 available (referenced by Dapper.FSharp.Tests).
Outdated: Microsoft.CodeCoverage — Microsoft.CodeCoverage 18.3.0 → 18.11.0 available (referenced by Dapper.FSharp.Tests).
Outdated: Microsoft.Data.SqlClient — Microsoft.Data.SqlClient 7.0.0 → 7.1.1 available (referenced by Dapper.FSharp.Tests).
Outdated: Microsoft.Data.SqlClient.SNI.runtime — Microsoft.Data.SqlClient.SNI.runtime 6.0.2 → 7.1.0 available (referenced by Dapper.FSharp.Tests).
Outdated: Microsoft.Data.Sqlite — Microsoft.Data.Sqlite 10.0.5 → 10.0.13 available (referenced by Dapper.FSharp.Tests).
Outdated: Microsoft.Data.Sqlite.Core — Microsoft.Data.Sqlite.Core 10.0.5 → 10.0.13 available (referenced by Dapper.FSharp.Tests).
Outdated: Microsoft.Extensions.Caching.Abstractions — Microsoft.Extensions.Caching.Abstractions 10.0.5 → 10.0.13 available (referenced by Dapper.FSharp.Tests).
Outdated: Microsoft.Extensions.Caching.Memory — Microsoft.Extensions.Caching.Memory 10.0.5 → 10.0.13 available (referenced by Dapper.FSharp.Tests).
Outdated: Microsoft.Extensions.Configuration — Microsoft.Extensions.Configuration 10.0.5 → 10.0.13 available (referenced by Dapper.FSharp.Tests).
Outdated: Microsoft.Extensions.Configuration.Abstractions — Microsoft.Extensions.Configuration.Abstractions 10.0.5 → 10.0.13 available (referenced by Dapper.FSharp.Tests).
Outdated: Microsoft.Extensions.Configuration.Binder — Microsoft.Extensions.Configuration.Binder 10.0.5 → 10.0.13 available (referenced by Dapper.FSharp.Tests).
Outdated: Microsoft.Extensions.Configuration.FileExtensions — Microsoft.Extensions.Configuration.FileExtensions 10.0.5 → 10.0.13 available (referenced by Dapper.FSharp.Tests).
Outdated: Microsoft.Extensions.Configuration.Json — Microsoft.Extensions.Configuration.Json 10.0.5 → 10.0.13 available (referenced by Dapper.FSharp.Tests).
+ 85 more in this group — see findings.md.
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.
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.
none (no readable dependency manifest): not applicable — Not scored — no dependency manifest in a supported ecosystem was read for this repository. A gap in the analyzer's language coverage, NOT a finding that the repository is free of vulnerable dependencies (a Python pyproject.toml/requirements.txt (pip/uv/Poetry), a Swift Package.swift/Package.resolved, a Cargo manifest, a Go module (go.mod/go.sum), a Gradle version catalogue, a Maven POM, an sbt build (build.sbt), composer.json, package.json, a Dart pubspec.yaml, an Elixir mix.exs/mix.lock (Hex), a rebar.config / erlang.mk DEPS (Hex), a Ruby Gemfile/Gemfile.lock or .gemspec (Bundler/RubyGems) — not scanned yet).
0
—
Run 01a16a60-61bb-7a90-8051-04f9c4bea482 · every finding is also locatable in findings.md, and the complete scoring record (with exit codes + durations) in sidecar.json.
Issues: 9 · Warnings: 143 · Recommendations: 35 · Info: 110 — Appendix A · all findings · full markdown report.
Generated by Watchdog — deterministic code-health analysis. 23-10-2026 @ 20:07 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.