Public report of LorisYounger/VPet, 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, 12:21 UTC · Survey ID cd_7df47384ccbe4cc592cd0a03e20a8cbc
LorisYounger/VPet
Measured 23 October 2026, 12:18 UTC, at code version 3798909
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.
Test distribution is not measured: No automated tests.
Boundary Type-Coupling is not measured: Bounded contexts not declared.
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 medium codebase: 32,249 lines of product code in 5 projects, tests not counted · Estimated rebuild effort: about 1.4 person-years · Weakest lens: Production Readiness, 24
Findings by how serious they are
37 critical401 serious86 minor
4 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, 12:18 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 ▸
63of 67 dimensions measured by tools. The other 4 are advisory notes from an AI model, which explain the code but don't count towards the score.
501of 524 findings point to an exact file and line, so you can open each one in the code. The other 23 concern the repository as a whole, such as missing documentation.
67dimensions across 6 lenses, read from 32,249 lines of product code in 5 projects.
LorisYounger/VPet scores 38 out of 100 and is rated Weak, while five of its six lenses score higher still: Architecture at 96, rated Exemplary, Security and Compliance at 89, rated Strong, Performance at 60, rated Adequate, and Code Health at 42 and Maturity at 39, both rated Weak.
The score is lower than those five because the weakest lens counts most, and here that is Production Readiness, which scores 24 and is rated Critical. Its Code Coverage 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 No automated tests finding(s) in Code Coverage and to resolve the 1 No tests found finding(s) in Test Distribution, and if Production Readiness rose to 70, the score would rise from 38 to about 48.
37 findings are critical: 35 in Explicit Debt, one in Change Coupling and one in Code Coverage.
Watchdog couldn't measure IL Efficiency and Runtime evidence locked — no reproducible boot in this code, so those dimensions are left out of the score. The product code is 32,249 lines, which would take an estimated 1.4 person-years, around €200,000, 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.
Fixed since the last survey: 20 findings
These 20 critical or serious findings were in the previous survey, on 9 October 2026, and are gone from this one.
Coupling · Off the main sequence: VPet-Simulator.Core
Exception handling · Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) VPet-Simulator.Core/Handle/Function.cs
Exception handling · Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) VPet-Simulator.Windows/Function/MWController.cs
Exception handling · Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) VPet-Simulator.Windows/Function/WorkshopVerificationClient.cs
Exception handling · Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs
Exception handling · Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs
Exception handling · Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/MPController.cs
Exception handling · Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winGameSetting.xaml.cs
Rebuild cost: about €200,000 · Estimate
Cost to rebuild
€64,000 to €330,000, for 1,071 to 3,526 hours of work, about 1.4 person-years for 1 to 3 engineers
Difficulty of the problem
Standard, judged from the kind of software and how it is built. Code that solves a harder problem, such as payments or medical bookings, costs more per line to write.
Quality factor
×0.7 at a score of 38. Better code takes more work to write, so the factor is ×1.0 at a score of 70, lower below it and higher above it.
Size
Medium: 32,249 lines of product code, of which 24% is declarations and boilerplate, 16% straight logic and 60% logic with branches
Comment lines
The estimate prices 26,620 lines. Comment lines count towards the size of 32,249 lines but aren't priced as work.
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.
Top priorities
The three actions that raise the score most for the work they take. The full ranked list is in the Roadmap.
1
Resolve the 1 No automated tests finding(s) in Code Coverage.
Raises the score by about 11 points · Low effort · Code Coverage
2
Resolve the 1 No tests found finding(s) in Test Distribution.
Raises the score by about 11 points · Low effort · Test Distribution
3
Resolve the 1 No ADRs found finding(s) in ADR Quality.
Raises the score by about 4 points · Low effort · ADR Quality
Diagnosis: what the measurements show together
Each conclusion below combines several dimensions into one point that no single dimension shows, and lists the measurements it rests on.
Where the investment is most exposed · Value at risk
This code would cost about €200,000 to build again, about 1.4 person-years of work. Its weakest lens is Production Readiness, at 24 (Critical). Production Readiness is about whether the product is ready to run in production and to change without breaking. Because the weakest lens counts most in the score, work on Production Readiness also moves the score most.
Based on: the rebuild estimate · the Production Readiness grade · how much each lens counts
What to do: Start with the Production Readiness actions in Top priorities.
If you do one thing first · First action
Resolve the 1 No automated tests finding(s) in Code Coverage. Of all the actions in this report, it raises the score most for the work it takes: about 11 points for low effort, because it clears the 1 Code Coverage findings. The next survey will show the change in the score.
Based on: the ranked actions in Top priorities, by score gain and effort
What hard-to-read code costs each year · Cost
Four dimensions measure how easy the code is to work in: two measure how tangled its logic is, one how much of it is copied, and one how well each part sticks to a single job. In this codebase they average 6.7 out of 10. Code at that level is slower to change than clean code, and Watchdog estimates the extra work at 3% to 7% on every change. The history of the code shows how much it changes: about 31,954 lines over the last 90 days, which is about 129,591 lines a year. At that pace, the extra work comes to an estimated 10.3 to 61.5 engineer-days a year, and it grows as more code changes.
How this is estimated: The number of changed lines is measured from the history of the code. The rest rests on two assumptions of Watchdog's own: code scoring 8 out of 10 or more adds no extra work, and each point below 8 adds 2.5% to 5.6% to every change; and an engineer changes 150 to 400 lines in a day. The result is a range for planning, not a measurement.
Based on: Cyclomatic Complexity · Cognitive Complexity · Code Duplication · Cohesion (LCOM4) · the code's change history
What to do: Start with the files listed under Churn × Complexity Hotspots, which change often and are hard to read, because that is where the extra work is paid most often.
Architecture — 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.
15 modules, with 17 dependencies between them. Every module uses only modules listed above it, so there are no loops.
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.
VPet.Solution.ViewModels uses VPet.Solution, so a change to VPet.Solution can break VPet.Solution.ViewModels, while a change to VPet.Solution.ViewModels can't break VPet.Solution.
Position
Below the diagonal: VPet.Solution.ViewModels uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
29 pairs of types, where a type in VPet_Simulator.Windows.Interface uses a type in VPet_Simulator.Core. Showing 25 of them; the rest are in namespace-graph.json in this report's bundle.
VPet_Simulator.Windows.Interface uses VPet_Simulator.Core, so a change to VPet_Simulator.Core can break VPet_Simulator.Windows.Interface, while a change to VPet_Simulator.Windows.Interface can't break VPet_Simulator.Core.
Position
Below the diagonal: VPet_Simulator.Windows.Interface uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
VPet.Solution.Models.SaveViewer uses VPet_Simulator.Core, so a change to VPet_Simulator.Core can break VPet.Solution.Models.SaveViewer, while a change to VPet.Solution.Models.SaveViewer can't break VPet_Simulator.Core.
Position
Below the diagonal: VPet.Solution.Models.SaveViewer uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
VPet.Solution.Models.SaveViewer uses VPet_Simulator.Windows.Interface, so a change to VPet_Simulator.Windows.Interface can break VPet.Solution.Models.SaveViewer, while a change to VPet.Solution.Models.SaveViewer can't break VPet_Simulator.Windows.Interface.
Position
Below the diagonal: VPet.Solution.Models.SaveViewer uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
VPet.Solution.Models.SettingEditor uses VPet.Solution.Models, so a change to VPet.Solution.Models can break VPet.Solution.Models.SettingEditor, while a change to VPet.Solution.Models.SettingEditor can't break VPet.Solution.Models.
Position
Below the diagonal: VPet.Solution.Models.SettingEditor uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
VPet.Solution.Models.SettingEditor uses VPet_Simulator.Core, so a change to VPet_Simulator.Core can break VPet.Solution.Models.SettingEditor, while a change to VPet.Solution.Models.SettingEditor can't break VPet_Simulator.Core.
Position
Below the diagonal: VPet.Solution.Models.SettingEditor uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
VPet.Solution.Models.SettingEditor uses VPet_Simulator.Windows.Interface, so a change to VPet_Simulator.Windows.Interface can break VPet.Solution.Models.SettingEditor, while a change to VPet.Solution.Models.SettingEditor can't break VPet_Simulator.Windows.Interface.
Position
Below the diagonal: VPet.Solution.Models.SettingEditor uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
VPet_Simulator.Windows uses VPet_Simulator.Core, so a change to VPet_Simulator.Core can break VPet_Simulator.Windows, while a change to VPet_Simulator.Windows can't break VPet_Simulator.Core.
Position
Below the diagonal: VPet_Simulator.Windows uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
54 pairs of types, where a type in VPet_Simulator.Windows uses a type in VPet_Simulator.Windows.Interface. Showing 25 of them; the rest are in namespace-graph.json in this report's bundle.
VPet_Simulator.Windows uses VPet_Simulator.Windows.Interface, so a change to VPet_Simulator.Windows.Interface can break VPet_Simulator.Windows, while a change to VPet_Simulator.Windows can't break VPet_Simulator.Windows.Interface.
Position
Below the diagonal: VPet_Simulator.Windows uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
VPet.Solution.ViewModels.SaveViewer uses VPet.Solution, so a change to VPet.Solution can break VPet.Solution.ViewModels.SaveViewer, while a change to VPet.Solution.ViewModels.SaveViewer can't break VPet.Solution.
Position
Below the diagonal: VPet.Solution.ViewModels.SaveViewer uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
VPet.Solution.ViewModels.SaveViewer uses VPet.Solution.Models.SaveViewer, so a change to VPet.Solution.Models.SaveViewer can break VPet.Solution.ViewModels.SaveViewer, while a change to VPet.Solution.ViewModels.SaveViewer can't break VPet.Solution.Models.SaveViewer.
Position
Below the diagonal: VPet.Solution.ViewModels.SaveViewer uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
VPet.Solution.ViewModels.SettingEditor uses VPet.Solution, so a change to VPet.Solution can break VPet.Solution.ViewModels.SettingEditor, while a change to VPet.Solution.ViewModels.SettingEditor can't break VPet.Solution.
Position
Below the diagonal: VPet.Solution.ViewModels.SettingEditor uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
VPet.Solution.ViewModels.SettingEditor uses VPet.Solution.Models.SettingEditor, so a change to VPet.Solution.Models.SettingEditor can break VPet.Solution.ViewModels.SettingEditor, while a change to VPet.Solution.ViewModels.SettingEditor can't break VPet.Solution.Models.SettingEditor.
Position
Below the diagonal: VPet.Solution.ViewModels.SettingEditor uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
VPet_Simulator.Windows.WinDesign.Gallery uses VPet_Simulator.Windows.Interface, so a change to VPet_Simulator.Windows.Interface can break VPet_Simulator.Windows.WinDesign.Gallery, while a change to VPet_Simulator.Windows.WinDesign.Gallery can't break VPet_Simulator.Windows.Interface.
Position
Below the diagonal: VPet_Simulator.Windows.WinDesign.Gallery uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
VPet_Simulator.Windows.WinDesign.Gallery uses VPet_Simulator.Windows, so a change to VPet_Simulator.Windows can break VPet_Simulator.Windows.WinDesign.Gallery, while a change to VPet_Simulator.Windows.WinDesign.Gallery can't break VPet_Simulator.Windows.
Position
Below the diagonal: VPet_Simulator.Windows.WinDesign.Gallery uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
VPet.Solution.Views.SettingEditor uses VPet.Solution.Models.SettingEditor, so a change to VPet.Solution.Models.SettingEditor can break VPet.Solution.Views.SettingEditor, while a change to VPet.Solution.Views.SettingEditor can't break VPet.Solution.Models.SettingEditor.
Position
Below the diagonal: VPet.Solution.Views.SettingEditor uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
VPet.Solution.Views.SettingEditor uses VPet.Solution.ViewModels.SettingEditor, so a change to VPet.Solution.ViewModels.SettingEditor can break VPet.Solution.Views.SettingEditor, while a change to VPet.Solution.Views.SettingEditor can't break VPet.Solution.ViewModels.SettingEditor.
Position
Below the diagonal: VPet.Solution.Views.SettingEditor uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
At a glance — Code Health · 42% · Weak · gated by D2, X1 ·
First, establish a CI workflow that builds and runs tests on every push or pull request to ensure immediate feedback. Next, resolve the identified gaps in code coverage and test distribution by adding the missing automated tests. Finally, document significant design decisions using Architecture Decision Records in a dedicated folder to preserve context and rationale for future reference.
Ranked by impact ÷ effort. "Helps" is the estimated gain on the 0–100 health score.
Do this
Helps
Effort
Dimension
Resolve the 1 No automated tests finding(s) in Code Coverage.
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 — 37
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 — 401
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 — 86
Recorded, with no effect on how the codebase functions.
Present so the survey is complete, not because it needs doing.
Could not be resolved — 4
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. 63 of 67 evaluated dimensions are computed purely by tools and static analysis (confidence 1.0); 4 documentation/naming judgement(s) are LLM-assisted and labelled advisory. Overall confidence is 0.9 — 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 — 67 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, 501 of 524 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.
D16 Bus Factor — not measured this run — This is a true statement about the repository that carries nothing for its owner to act on, so it is reported here rather than as a defect in their code. Single-maintainer repository — bus factor is not applicable (28 contributor(s) across 1319 commit(s) sampled, automation and bot accounts excluded). One of them holds 86% of the history; the other 27 hold 0.5% each on average, below the 5% at which there is somebody to hand the work to. That is a single maintainer with drive-by contributors, not a team whose knowledge has concentrated — so the bus factor is not applicable and there is nothing here for the owner to act on.
D18 Solution Shape — measured, with a gap in what it reached — Watchdog measured this, but not all of it. What it did not reach is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — so the numbers on that dimension cover less than the repository, and the part left out is not evidence that it would have passed. `dotnet build` reported 2 error(s), and the diagnostics it printed were: BG1002: File 'Res/TopLogo2019.PNG' cannot be found.. None of them is a .NET compiler diagnostic, which is the only signal this check reads as "the code does not compile", so the failure is recorded as a build-environment gap rather than a code defect. The usual causes are a project that targets a platform this run cannot build (a Windows-only target framework on a Linux worker) or a build step that shells out to a tool the image does not carry. Solution Shape is scored on structure and is NOT capped. Semantic analysis is independent of this build and covers every project that loaded — but a project whose restore did not complete has no resolved references, so treat its results as absent rather than clean. ★ The reach of that test, stated so this classification can be checked rather than taken on trust: it reads the C# (CS), Visual Basic (BC) and F# (FS) compiler series, and treats SDK, NuGet-restore and MSBuild codes (NETSDK, NU, MSB) as evidence that the build did not run rather than that the code is broken — read the diagnostics named above and judge for yourself. You can widen what we reach: if this build is meant to run off its own platform, without host tooling we do not carry, the diagnostics named above are what stopped it. If it is deliberately platform-bound — a Windows-only desktop product, say — there is nothing to do here: the note records our reach, not a defect in your build.
D22 Internal API Consistency — not measured this run — This is a true statement about the repository that carries nothing for its owner to act on, so it is reported here rather than as a defect in their code. The loaded project set declares no packable project and no `.Contracts` project, so there is no intentionally-exposed surface for API consistency to be judged over.
D23 Boundary Type-Coupling — 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. Large codebase (32,249 production LoC in the .NET projects) with no declared bounded contexts — cross-boundary type coupling is unassessed Bounded contexts cannot be inferred from a codebase that is not physically organised by them (D-321), so with none declared there are no boundaries for the coupling pass to measure across. You can widen what we reach: name this codebase's bounded contexts (≥2 module groups, e.g. per subsystem) so cross-boundary type coupling can 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"]`.
D32 Data Compliance (PII/GDPR) — 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. `VPet.Solution/ViewModelInitialize.cs` produced a parse error, so every rule in this engine's `gdpr.yml` was absent there. That absence is NOT a clean result: these rules detect personal data crossing a boundary into a log sink, a URL or browser storage, and a file that was never parsed cannot report any of the three. The rest of the tree analysed normally and its rows above stand; only these files are unaccounted for. You can widen what we reach: fix the syntax error (or exclude the file deliberately) and re-scan to cover it.
D39 IL Efficiency — 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. IL NOT MEASURED: the analyzer's build of this repository exited 1 and the cause could not be attributed, so no assemblies were produced and there was no IL to read. We do not read it as a defect in the repository: an unattributed failure leans OURS. D18 owns the question of whether this repository builds; it was not answered here.
AXB1 Runtime evidence locked — no reproducible boot — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. Subject: 3 markup document(s) — HTML, Razor, JSX, Vue, Svelte or server templates. The Runtime Evidence tier boots an app only via docker-compose, an Aspire AppHost, a Dockerfile, an npm dev script, a web service's own toolchain entry point (cargo, go, dotnet, Python, Spring Boot), or an Android app's own Gradle wrapper (run on an emulator); an Apple or Flutter app needs a host it lacks. None applied, so no live runtime a11y/egress/header evidence was collected. You can widen what we reach: add a docker-compose.yml (or an Aspire AppHost) that brings the app up with its dependencies. Watchdog then boots it in an isolated sandbox and gathers real runtime evidence — you change nothing in your pipeline (no CI step, no SDK).
IC1 Incompleteness & stubs — measured, with a gap in what it reached — Watchdog measured this, but not all of it. What it did not reach is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — so the numbers on that dimension cover less than the repository, and the part left out is not evidence that it would have passed. 164 further occurrence(s) are not listed individually; the score already reflects all 204.
P5 DR & Backup — not measured this run — This is a true statement about the repository that carries nothing for its owner to act on, so it is reported here rather than as a defect in their code. No backup/snapshot/replication config, RTO/RPO or restore-procedure documentation was found — and no production persistence was detected either (no data-access packages, no data-store services, no database resources), so there is nothing in this repository whose loss a DR control would recover. If this system's data lives in a platform or ops repo we can't see, that's where the DR evidence belongs.
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.
D8 Code Coverage: Coverage is measured by building and running the test suite inside Watchdog's isolated image — the target repo is never modified, and nothing on your systems runs. So coverage exists only when the suite builds and runs within the inline time budget; one that needs external services, can't build, or exceeds the budget yields no coverage (D8 then degrades to not-measured, not a low score). Line coverage also says nothing about assertion quality.
D9 Test Distribution: The test-pyramid shape is inferred from project/folder naming and references, with a single test host bucketed per-file by its path tier and content signals — a suite that names tiers unconventionally and gives no per-file signal can still be mis-bucketed.
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").
D14 License Compliance: License compatibility is checked against declared package metadata and a policy — mislabelled or missing license metadata, and obligations that depend on how you distribute, are not resolved here.
D15 Churn × Complexity Hotspots: Churn hotspots come from git history — a freshly imported or squashed repository has no churn signal, and recent rewrites can mask a historically risky file.
D17 Explicit Debt: Acknowledged-debt signals (TODO/FIXME, suppressions, dead code) are textual — undocumented debt that nobody marked, and debt that lives in design rather than annotations, is invisible. Committed machine-written code (scaffolded migrations, designer/codegen output, generated stubs) is excluded — it is never the team's dead code to delete.
D18 Solution Shape: Build integrity reflects whether the solution compiled in this environment — a build that needs a private feed, a specific SDK, or a generated file absent from the repo can read as broken when it is merely unreproducible here.
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.
D20 ADR Quality: ADR quality is an LLM read of the decision records present — it cannot know about decisions made and never recorded, and its verdict is sampled and advisory.
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.
D24 Comment Value: Comment value (WHY vs WHAT) is an LLM judgement over a bounded sample — it is advisory and cannot weigh a comment against the precise code change it was written to explain.
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").
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.
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 (4): D19, D21, D24, 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.
39 method(s) exceeded the cyclomatic complexity threshold of 15; the worst was MainWindow.MainWindow_Event_TakeItem at 144. A further 2 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 MainWindow.TakeItem at 18 — they are counted neither in the figure above nor in this dimension's score.
+ 34 more group(s) — more in Appendix A; the complete list is findings.md.
What to do
Bring the 10 bodies over 30 down to 30 or less in Cyclomatic Complexity — start with MainWindow.MainWindow_Event_TakeItem (cyclomatic 144), MainWindow.GameLoad (cyclomatic 121), CoreMOD.CoreMOD.ctor (cyclomatic 80). — 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 10 together lifts Cyclomatic Complexity from 5.6 to about 7.3/10, projected with the scoring formula itself and assuming each lands exactly at 30; a cleaner split scores higher.
Stand up a CI pipeline, then gate Cyclomatic Complexity in it to reach Verified (currently Documented). — This repository has no CI pipeline, so there is nothing to add a gate to yet — the pipeline comes first. Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.
Detailed fixes: d1_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.
What it measures: How hard the code is for a person to follow, beyond raw branching.
Method: Cognitive complexity per method (Sonar-style nesting-penalized score), computed exhaustively over production code, excluding test projects. Deterministic.
+ 72 more group(s) — more in Appendix A; the complete list is findings.md.
What to do
Bring the 3 bodies over 120 down to 120 or less in Cognitive Complexity — start with CoreMOD.CoreMOD.ctor (cognitive 247), MainWindow.GameLoad (cognitive 182), MainWindow.lowStrength (cognitive 178). — 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 3 together lifts Cognitive Complexity from 2.6 to about 4.0/10, projected with the scoring formula itself and assuming each lands exactly at 120; a cleaner split scores higher.
Stand up a CI pipeline, then gate Cognitive Complexity in it to reach Verified (currently Documented). — This repository has no CI pipeline, so there is nothing to add a gate to yet — the pipeline comes first. Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.
Detailed fixes: d2_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.
Do you agree with this assessment?
D3 · God Classes8.4 / 10Strong✓ 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 11 MethodTooLong finding(s) in God Classes — start with winGameSetting.xaml.cs (3), MainWindow.cs (2), winCharacterPanel.xaml.cs (2). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (11 warning-level).
Resolve the 5 FileTooLong finding(s) in God Classes — start with MainWindow.cs, winGameSetting.xaml.cs, winCharacterPanel.xaml.cs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (5 warning-level).
Resolve the 4 ClassTooLong finding(s) in God Classes — start with winCharacterPanel.xaml.cs, MPFriends.xaml.cs, winWorkMenu.xaml.cs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (4 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.
70 duplicated block group(s) detected. One further row reports members as variants of one another; it aggregates block groups already counted above and is not itself counted.
+ 29 more group(s) — more in Appendix A; the complete list is findings.md.
What to do
Resolve the 7 Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with Setting.cs (4), MainWindow.cs (2), winMPBetterBuy.xaml.cs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (7 warning-level).
Resolve the 5 Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with winWorkMenu.xaml.cs, Setting.cs, winGameSetting.xaml.cs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (5 warning-level).
Resolve the 5 Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with MainWindow.cs (2), MainDisplay.cs, MainLogic.cs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (5 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.
Low cohesion: Main (LCOM4 5)VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/Main.xaml.cs:18
What to do
Resolve the 1 Low cohesion finding(s) in Cohesion (LCOM4) — start with Main.xaml.cs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
Stand up a CI pipeline, then gate Cohesion (LCOM4) in it to reach Verified (currently Documented). — This repository has no CI pipeline, so there is nothing to add a gate to yet — the pipeline comes first. Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Verified — provenance only; does not change the score.
Detailed fixes: d6_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.
Do you agree with this assessment?
D8 · Code Coverage0.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified
What it measures: How much of the code is actually exercised by tests.
Method: Coverage from coverlet runs or committed reports (Cobertura/OpenCover/lcov), computed per-file with structured exclusions for generated, trivial, and glue code. When the suite can't be built/run in-image AND no report is committed, coverage is reported NOT-MEASURED (excluded from the score) with the precondition to make it measurable — never a LoC-ratio proxy folded in as if measured. Deterministic.
No automated tests — no test code was found in this repository.
No automated tests
What to do
Resolve the 1 No automated tests finding(s) in Code Coverage. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 issue-level).
Stand up a CI pipeline, then gate Code Coverage 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: d8_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.
Do you agree with this assessment?
D9 · Test Distribution0.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified
What it measures: Whether the test suite has a healthy mix of unit / integration / end-to-end tests.
Method: Test projects classified (Unit/Integration/BDD/E2E) from compiled metadata; test methods counted exhaustively across projects with placement-agnostic disk fallback. Deterministic.
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.
What it measures: Whether any secrets (keys, tokens, passwords) have leaked into the code.
Method: In-process native secret scanner (entropy plus signature patterns) across all tracked files; no external tool. A clean result is a measured 10, not no-data zero. Deterministic.
What it measures: Whether the licenses of third-party packages are compatible with your policy.
Method: Third-party package licenses resolved from declared package metadata and checked against the configured policy (allow/deny/copyleft). Deterministic; clean = no incompatible license found at metadata depth.
0 of 130 packages use a banned license. ★ DEPTH: this repository's MSBuild projects declare 17 direct `PackageReference`(s), and 103 further package(s) were reached beyond them by closing the graph over nuget.org's own nuspec dependency graph — so a banned licence pulled in only by a dependency's OWN dependencies is inside this verdict. A package whose licence nuget.org could not be asked for is not graded, and version ranges are taken at their lower bound, so this is the closure as that graph states it rather than a restored consumer's exact resolution.
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.
Resolve the 9 Hotspot finding(s) in Churn × Complexity Hotspots — start with MainWindow.cs, CoreMOD.cs, winGameSetting.xaml.cs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (9 warning-level).
Detailed fixes: d15_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.
What it measures: Acknowledged debt left in the code — TODOs, dead code, suppressed warnings.
Method: Roslyn syntactic debt markers (suppressions/TODO/FIXME/HACK/empty-catch/commented-code/Obsolete) plus SymbolFinder dead-code analysis; weighted-debt-per-KLoC density deducted 2.0x per unit. Deterministic, exhaustive.
Dead code: StrGetString · ×15VPet-Simulator.Core/Graph/GraphCore.cs:294
+ 2 more group(s) — more in Appendix A; the complete list is findings.md.
What to do
Resolve the 21 EmptyCatchBlock finding(s) in Explicit Debt — start with MainWindow.xaml.cs (4), winGameSetting.xaml.cs (4), winSaveManager.xaml.cs (3). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (21 issue-level).
Resolve the 13 NoWarnInCsproj finding(s) in Explicit Debt — start with VPet-Simulator.Windows.csproj (12), VPet-Simulator.Core.csproj. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (13 issue-level).
Resolve the 1 AnalyzerSeverityNone finding(s) in Explicit Debt — start with .editorconfig. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 issue-level).
Stand up a CI pipeline, then gate Explicit Debt in it to reach Verified (currently Documented). — This repository has no CI pipeline, so there is nothing to add a gate to yet — the pipeline comes first. Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.
Detailed fixes: d17_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.
What it measures: Whether the solution is laid out in a sensible, conventional structure.
Method: Solution structure: project count, decomposition, shell-project detection, build success (confirmed failures cap the score); traced to actual .sln files and binaries. Deterministic.
5 projects, 124 source files, 32249 hand-written lines of code (32249 production / 0 test — the split is derived per file: test is what its project, its own path, or a compile-guarded region marks as test, and a file carrying no test signal counts as production), plus 245 generated (machine-written code — designer, scaffolded and tool-emitted files — excluded from quality), 5 inter-project edges (build NOT measured — `dotnet build` did not complete in the analyzer, so the build half of this dimension is unmeasured rather than failed: the score above rests on structure alone and is not capped. The diagnostics that stopped it are named under Limitations.)
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.
VPet-Simulator's root README is clear and complete for a repository-level overview: it states what the project is (a free WPF desktop pet simulator), gives Steam/nuget download links, describes the software as 'free', 'open source', and 'supports creative workshop mods', lists features like 32×4×3 animation types, explains how to add new functionality via code plugins, and provides a contact channel. It also documents the repository's structure (VPet-Simulator.Windows, Tool, Core modules) with a software-architecture section that is clipped mid-sentence ('MainWindows 主窗体...'). The VPet-Simulator.Windows/mod/0000_core/image/work README is internal to its directory and does not concern the root project — it documents only the work image subdirectory of the Windows module, so no repository-level defect applies. No missing-*/contributing or license guidance for the root; all visible content is present.
Improve Documentation Quality — currently 8.0/10. — VPet-Simulator's root README is clear and complete for a repository-level overview: it states what the project is (a free WPF desktop pet simulator), gives Steam/nuget download links, describes the software as 'free', 'open source', and 'supports creative workshop mods', lists features like 32×4×3 animation types, explains how to add new functionality via code plugins, and provides a contact channel. It also documents the repository's structure (VPet-Simulator.Windows, Tool, Core modules) with a software-architecture section that is clipped mid-sentence ('MainWindows 主窗体...'). The VPet-Simulator.Windows/mod/0000_core/image/work README is internal to its directory and does not concern the root project — it documents only the work image subdirectory of the Windows module, so no repository-level defect applies. No missing-*/contributing or license guidance for the root; all visible content is present.
Detailed fixes: d19_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.
Do you agree with this assessment?
D20 · ADR Quality0.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified
What it measures: Whether architecture decisions are recorded well (context, decision, consequences).
Method: Per-ADR judgment by language model at low temperature with two-pass stability; confidence is share of ADRs evaluated; enforcement-field presence detected deterministically. Advisory.
What it measures: Whether 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.
0 naming inconsistencies across 200 sampled symbols.
✓ On the Gold path — maintain.
Detailed fixes: d21_recommendation.md.
Do you agree with this assessment?
D24 · Comment ValueExemplary◐ Sampled · advisory
What it measures: Whether comments are worth it — explaining WHY (valuable) rather than WHAT (redundant).
Method: Judged by language model at low temperature (0.0-0.1) on deterministically sampled inline comments with surrounding code; findings verified back to sampled comments by substring match. 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.
74 % of calls cross a namespace and 9 % go through an interface, but 100 % of collaborators are co-located — so a call's collaborators sit together and tracing stays easy. Baseline: medium — clean/modular boundaries expected.
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).
semgrep found no security issues. semgrep hit a parse error in 1 file(s) — `VPet.Solution/ViewModelInitialize.cs` (line 82) — so no absence of findings in the named regions is evidence of anything; rows reported elsewhere in those files are real. Fix the syntax error (or exclude the file deliberately) and re-scan to cover them. In 1 of those file(s) — `VPet.Solution/ViewModelInitialize.cs` — the break is a C# primary constructor, which semgrep's grammar cannot parse and which hides the type from every rule scoped to it; those files were re-scanned from a shadow copy with the constructor's parameter list blanked (line and column preserving), which restores the type to the rules, and 0 additional row(s) came from that pass. Only the header's own parameter list is unread in them.
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.
1 of 83 significant source file(s) are orphaned — their living knowledge has decayed to nothing, so no one currently understands them. The largest is VPet-Simulator.Windows/Design/AutoUniformGrid.cs. Counted over 83 of the 124 production source files in this repository: the rest are under the ~2,400-byte size floor this dimension measures over.
What it measures: Whether files that change together actually belong together — pairs that repeatedly co-change in git history despite having no explicit code dependency, surfacing the hidden/logical coupling (and boundaries in the wrong place) a static scan can't see.
Method: Pairwise co-occurrence over the per-commit file sets in git history (production source only — tests and generated dropped): Degree-of-Coupling = shared ÷ min individual revisions, reported above noise floors (each file ≥10 revisions, ≥5 shared commits, ≥50% strength); sweeping commits excluded. Deterministic over fixed history.
Coverage: Population: PRODUCTION source files only — test and generated files are dropped before pairing, so a class co-changing with its own test (trivially ~100%) can't drown the real production↔production coupling. Pairs ranked by Degree-of-Coupling. A non-source file is never a coupling PARTICIPANT either: documentation, schemas, config and data files are dropped with the rest, so a code↔docs pair — a command and the reference page that restates it — is not reported however strongly the two co-change; nor is coupling that runs THROUGH a build step or config file.
Resolve the 1 Boundary-crossing change coupling finding(s) in Change Coupling — start with PetLoader.cs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 issue-level).
Resolve the 1 Change coupling finding(s) in Change Coupling — start with MainLogic.cs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
Detailed fixes: d35_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.
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 6 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 — Whether any singleton service captures a scoped/transient dependency — a silent lifetime/threading bug.
Method: Roslyn scan: DI registrations parsed from AddSingleton/Scoped/Transient; each singleton checked for captured shorter-lifetime dependencies. Exhaustive, deterministic.
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.
Method: Roslyn line-count by code ROLE: every source file classified Domain/Application/Infrastructure/Test/Generated by namespace + path convention (the shared CodeRoleClassifier), then significant lines summed per role. Deterministic; the advisory score is the business-logic (domain+application) share of production code.
Coverage: Population: ALL source files, each bucketed into ONE of five roles (Domain/Application/Infrastructure/Test/Generated) by namespace + path convention — a file whose layer isn't named in the convention falls to Application (the neutral default), and the split is line-count, not semantic depth or business value.
What to do
The domain core is a small share of production code, but most of the rest matched no layer vocabulary at all — so this is not yet an anemic-domain finding. The namespace/path convention could not place that code, which makes the composition above a statement about the naming, not about the design. Name the layers (or check that the repository's conventions differ from the ones this check knows) before reading a thin domain into it.
Other · Architecture — Whether the project-reference graph is acyclic (cycles block independent build/deploy and signal eroding boundaries).
Method: Project reference cycles via elementary-DFS over real .csproj references, using the engine shared with D5/D7; cyclic versus acyclic. Exhaustive, deterministic.
Other · Architecture — Whether dependencies point inward (Domain ← Application ← Infrastructure/Web) — the clean-architecture dependency rule, checked across the project graph.
Method: Layer violations by name-segment inference (Domain/Core to Application to Infrastructure/Web) over the project-reference graph. Exhaustive over all projects, deterministic.
Other · Architecture — Whether the codebase has a recognisable, scale-appropriate structure (a named architectural style, or modular enough for its size) rather than being an ad-hoc ball of mud.
Method: Roslyn plus csproj analysis: architecture style detection (DDD, clean, vertical-slice, CQRS) and structure fitness for repo size. Deterministic.
Other · Architecture — Whether interfaces stay focused rather than fat — the Interface-Segregation principle (SOLID 'I').
Method: Roslyn scan: public interface declared-member counts (accessors fold into their property/event); fat-interface threshold (over 15 declared members) flagged per type. Each finding also reports the distinct-OPERATION count — members counted by name, so an overload group counts once — which decides whether it states the caller-side ISP harm or the implementer-side burden of an overload set. TypeScript: exported interfaces that declare behaviour, counted over their REQUIRED operations (method signatures and function-typed properties with no `?`, once per signature) — data-shape interfaces and ambient .d.ts declarations are outside the population; JavaScript declares no interfaces and is not applicable. Deterministic, type-level.
`IController` declares 16 members: `MoveWindows`, `GetWindowsDistanceLeft`, `GetWindowsDistanceRight`, `GetWindowsDistanceUp`, `GetWindowsDistanceDown`, `IfInActivateScreen`, `SetNowScreenActivate`, `ZoomRatio`, `PressLength`, `ShowPanel`, `ResetPosition`, `CheckPosition`, `EnableFunction`, `InteractionCycle`, `RePositionActive`, `AutoChangeWindow`. Counted as the author wrote them — a property is ONE member and its get/set accessors are not counted separately, and an event counts once. A wide interface forces every implementer and caller to depend on methods they don't use (the Interface-Segregation 'I' in SOLID). Split it into focused role-interfaces. — VPet-Simulator.Core/Handle/IController.cs:6
`IGameSave` declares 33 members: `Name`, `HostName`, `Money`, `Exp`, `ExpBonus`, `Level`, `LevelUpNeed`, `Strength`, `StrengthMax`, `StoreStrength`, `ChangeStrength`, `StrengthChange`, `StrengthFood`, `StoreStrengthFood`, `StrengthChangeFood`, `ChangeStrengthFood`, `StrengthDrink`, `StoreStrengthDrink`, `ChangeStrengthDrink`, `StrengthChangeDrink`, `FeelingChange`, `ChangeFeeling`, `Feeling`, `FeelingMax`, `Health`, `Likability`, `LikabilityMax`, `CleanChange`, `StoreTake`, `EatFood`, `Mode`, `CalMode`, `ToLine`. Counted as the author wrote them — a property is ONE member and its get/set accessors are not counted separately, and an event counts once. A wide interface forces every implementer and caller to depend on methods they don't use (the Interface-Segregation 'I' in SOLID). Split it into focused role-interfaces. — VPet-Simulator.Core/Handle/IGameSave.cs:8
`IMainWindow` declares 65 members: `PrefixSave`, `Args`, `IsSteamUser`, `SteamID`, `SteamAuthorID`, `Set`, `Pets`, `TalkAPI`, `TalkBoxCurr`, `Core`, `Main`, `Buff`, `version`, `Version`, `lastclicktime`, `Plugins`, `Foods`, `BuffEffects`, `LowFoodText`, `LowDrinkText`, `ClickTexts`, `SelectTexts`, `GetClickText`, `Photos`, `ImageSources`, `FileSources`, `SetZoomLevel`, `Save`, `LoadDIY`, `ShowSetting`, `ShowBetterBuy`, `ShowGallery`, `Close`, `Restart`, `MouseHitThrough`, `HashCheck`, `AudioPlayingVolume`, `CloseConfirm`, `HashCheckOff`, `Windows`, and 25 more. Counted as the author wrote them — a property is ONE member and its get/set accessors are not counted separately, and an event counts once. A wide interface forces every implementer and caller to depend on methods they don't use (the Interface-Segregation 'I' in SOLID). Split it into focused role-interfaces. — VPet-Simulator.Windows.Interface/IMainWindow.cs:20
`ISetting` declares 38 members: `ZoomLevel`, `SetZoomLevel`, `VoiceVolume`, `SetVoiceVolume`, `AutoSaveInterval`, `SetAutoSaveInterval`, `BackupSaveMaxNum`, `TopMost`, `SetTopMost`, `LastCacheDate`, `Language`, `SetLanguage`, `PressLength`, `InteractionCycle`, `LogicInterval`, `SetLogicInterval`, `AllowMove`, `SetAllowMove`, `SmartMove`, `SetSmartMove`, `EnableFunction`, `SetEnableFunction`, `SmartMoveInterval`, `SetSmartMoveInterval`, `MessageBarOutside`, `StartRecordLast`, `StartRecordLastPoint`, `StartRecordPoint`, `MusicCatch`, `MusicMax`, `Resolution`, `AutoBuy`, `AutoGift`, `HideFromTaskControl`, `this[]`, `MPNOTouch`, `PetGraph`, `DeBug`. Counted as the author wrote them — a property is ONE member and its get/set accessors are not counted separately, and an event counts once. A wide interface forces every implementer and caller to depend on methods they don't use (the Interface-Segregation 'I' in SOLID). Split it into focused role-interfaces. — VPet-Simulator.Windows.Interface/ISetting.cs:10
`IMPFriend` declares 24 members: `LobbyID`, `FriendID`, `IsMe`, `IsFriend`, `IsBlocked`, `IsPlayingThisGame`, `IsOnline`, `IsAway`, `IsBusy`, `IsSnoozing`, `Name`, `SteamLevel`, `Avatar`, `Core`, `ImageSources`, `SetPetGraph`, `Main`, `DisplayAuto`, `DisplayGraph`, `DisplayMessage`, `InConvenience`, `InConvenience`, `DisplayFoodAnimation`, `NOTouch`. Counted as the author wrote them — a property is ONE member and its get/set accessors are not counted separately, and an event counts once. Those 24 declarations carry 23 distinct name(s), so part of the width is overloading rather than separate responsibilities — but 23 operations clears the >15 bar on its own, so the row is about responsibilities, not signatures. A wide interface forces every implementer and caller to depend on methods they don't use (the Interface-Segregation 'I' in SOLID). Split it into focused role-interfaces. — VPet-Simulator.Windows.Interface/MutiPlayer/IMPFriend.cs:12
What to do
Split fat interfaces into focused role-interfaces so clients depend only on what they use.
Other · Code Health — Unreviewed-generation residue: shipped members still throwing NotImplementedException, and placeholder string literals left in non-test, non-generated code. Scored as a quality signature, never as a claim about authorship.
Method: Roslyn syntax scan: NotImplementedException throws and placeholder string literals in non-test, non-generated shipped code. Deterministic, code-shape signature.
A shipped member still throws NotImplementedException — generated scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface. (×4) — VPet-Simulator.Windows/Design/Converters/BoolToIntConverter.cs:15, VPet-Simulator.Windows/Design/Converters/DiscountPriceConverter.cs:18, VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winReport.xaml.cs:47, …
What to do
Finish or delete NotImplementedException stubs and replace placeholder literals before shipping.
Other · Code Health — Unfinished work detected by code SHAPE, not keywords: members that only throw a "not implemented" exception, methods that take inputs and return a constant, async methods that never await, dead `if (false)` / `#if false` branches, and skeleton types most of whose members are holes. A real, objective slice of technical debt.
Method: Roslyn syntax scan: incompleteness by code shape (constant-returning methods, async-never-await, #if false branches, guards that return what the code already falls through to, tests an earlier guard already decided, comparisons against NaN, skeleton types), not keyword-gated. Deterministic, code-shape heuristic.
The `if` and its `else` contain the same 1 statement, so no input can make the condition matter. Implement the distinction that was intended, or drop the branch and keep the body. (×2) — VPet-Simulator.Core/Graph/GraphInfo.cs:122, VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.xaml.cs:241
The first 1 statement of the `if` and of the `else` are identical, so it runs on both paths regardless of the condition. Lift it above the `if` — leaving it duplicated inside makes the branches read as though they handled this differently. (×2) — VPet-Simulator.Windows.Interface/Mod/Food.cs:178, VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winGameSetting.xaml.cs:1514
`winMPBetterBuy.xaml` wires an event to `ScrollViewer_PreviewMouseWheel`, whose body is empty — the markup attaches a listener that does nothing. Implement the handler, or remove the attribute that wires it. — VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/winMPBetterBuy.xaml.cs:170
`winBetterBuy.xaml` wires an event to `ScrollViewer_PreviewMouseWheel`, whose body is empty — the markup attaches a listener that does nothing. Implement the handler, or remove the attribute that wires it. — VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winBetterBuy.xaml.cs:208
`Timer_Elapsed` is a shipped member whose whole body throws NotImplementedException — scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface. — VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winReport.xaml.cs:47
A line of code has been commented out rather than removed — dead weight that rots and confuses. Delete it (version control remembers). (×33) — VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/Main.xaml.cs:322, VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/Main.xaml.cs:326, VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/Main.xaml.cs:418, …
What to do
Finish or delete the unfinished stubs (NotImplementedException / empty / constant-returning bodies) — they are dead surface that looks live.
Clear the softer debt: remove commented-out code and dead branches, re-enable or delete skipped tests, and replace blanket warning suppressions with targeted ones.
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.
173 code files changed in the last 6 months but the README was not touched — it may no longer reflect the system.
What to do
Add a build/run (quick start) section to the root README — the first thing a newcomer needs.
Explain in the README how to run the tests. Add a section called Testing to the README in the repository's top folder, saying how to run the test suite.
Add an 'Architecture' / 'How it works' section to the root README — the high-level shape.
Add a README to the 5 of 5 project(s) that lack one — worth up to 2 pts.
Review the README against recent changes; refresh the parts that drifted.
Maturity · Maturity — Whether key decisions (ADRs) and the high-level shape (C4/diagrams) are written down.
Method: Filesystem scan: ADR folder/naming conventions or content, plus Mermaid/PlantUML/C4/architecture.md discovery. Exhaustive, deterministic.
No Architecture Decision Records found — no conventional ADR directory, no numbered `NNNN-title` documents in any markup this check reads, and nothing ADR-shaped by content. Design rationale recorded elsewhere (a design-notes tree, a mailing list, pull-request discussion) is not visible to this check and is not re-findable per decision, so a future maintainer cannot ask why one choice was made and get an answer.
No C4/Structurizr/PlantUML/Mermaid/Graphviz/D2 diagram, no drawn diagram named for the architecture, no file named `architecture` or `design` in any markup this check reads, and nothing in the README, docs or contributor guides that announces the shape — no `## Architecture` heading, no "architecture overview"/"high-level design" phrasing, no "the architecture is …" introduction, no guided code tour. A shape laid out in prose that never names itself as the architecture is not visible to this check, and neither is one kept outside the repository, so this row reports the absence of a re-findable shape document — not evidence that nobody wrote the shape down.
What to do
Record your significant design decisions. Write one short document per decision, giving its date, the situation, the decision and its consequences, and keep them together with your other design documents. A docs/adr folder with each file named by number and title is the easiest place to find them.
Add a C4 context/container diagram (Structurizr, PlantUML or Mermaid) or an architecture.md overview.
Maturity · Maturity — Whether the repo is organised deliberately — src/test separation and consistent project naming.
Method: Filesystem scan: src/test folder separation and namespace-prefix consistency (majority RootNamespace agreement). Exhaustive across projects, deterministic.
Production code isn't grouped under a src/ folder — it's spread across several top-level directories, so there's no one place that says 'this is the product'.
What to do
Group production code under src/ (or split deliberately, e.g. backend/ + frontend/) so production and tooling code aren't mixed at the root.
Start a test surface where your build system looks for one (tests/, test/, spec/, or your ecosystem's test source set) — the separation follows from putting the first tests in the right place.
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 · Observability7.0 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified
Readiness · Readiness — Whether the code is diagnosable in production — structured logging, tracing/metrics, health checks.
`VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/Main.xaml.cs` reports through `Console.Write…` at line 381 although other files in its project log through a logger. Console lines carry no level, category or structured properties and never reach the log pipeline or its exporters. — VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/Main.xaml.cs:381
`VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/Main.xaml.cs` reports through `Console.Write…` at line 385 although other files in its project log through a logger. Console lines carry no level, category or structured properties and never reach the log pipeline or its exporters. — VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/Main.xaml.cs:385
`VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/Main.xaml.cs` reports through `Console.Write…` at line 389 although other files in its project log through a logger. Console lines carry no level, category or structured properties and never reach the log pipeline or its exporters. — VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/Main.xaml.cs:389
`VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/Main.xaml.cs` reports through `Console.Write…` at line 393 although other files in its project log through a logger. Console lines carry no level, category or structured properties and never reach the log pipeline or its exporters. — VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/Main.xaml.cs:393
`VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/Main.xaml.cs` reports through `Console.Write…` at line 596 although other files in its project log through a logger. Console lines carry no level, category or structured properties and never reach the log pipeline or its exporters. — VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/Main.xaml.cs:596
`VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/MainDisplay.cs` reports through `Console.Write…` at line 380 although other files in its project log through a logger. Console lines carry no level, category or structured properties and never reach the log pipeline or its exporters. — VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/MainDisplay.cs:380
`VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs` reports through `Console.Write…` at line 379 although other files in its project log through a logger. Console lines carry no level, category or structured properties and never reach the log pipeline or its exporters. — VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs:379
`VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs` reports through `Console.Write…` at line 1457 although other files in its project log through a logger. Console lines carry no level, category or structured properties and never reach the log pipeline or its exporters. — VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs:1457
`VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winGameSetting.xaml.cs` reports through `Console.Write…` at line 44 although other files in its project log through a logger. Console lines carry no level, category or structured properties and never reach the log pipeline or its exporters. — VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winGameSetting.xaml.cs:44
`VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winGameSetting.xaml.cs` reports through `Console.Write…` at line 46 although other files in its project log through a logger. Console lines carry no level, category or structured properties and never reach the log pipeline or its exporters. — VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winGameSetting.xaml.cs:46
`VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winGameSetting.xaml.cs` reports through `Console.Write…` at line 48 although other files in its project log through a logger. Console lines carry no level, category or structured properties and never reach the log pipeline or its exporters. — VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winGameSetting.xaml.cs:48
`VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winGameSetting.xaml.cs` reports through `Console.Write…` at line 50 although other files in its project log through a logger. Console lines carry no level, category or structured properties and never reach the log pipeline or its exporters. — VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winGameSetting.xaml.cs:50
What to do
Replace `Console.Write…` in service code with the project's injected `ILogger<T>` (message templates with named properties), so delivery outcomes and failures reach the log pipeline with a level and a category.
For more than a log file, an `ActivitySource`/`EventSource` the user can switch on gives you a structured trace to attach to a bug report. A health-check endpoint does not apply here: nothing orchestrates or load-balances a binary the user launches.
Readiness · Readiness — Whether SAST, secret/dependency scanning and performance benchmarking are wired in (presence, not runtime).
Method: Filesystem scan: SAST configuration, dependency-update automation, secret scanning, and a benchmark harness or benchmark step — in this repository's own ecosystem. Exhaustive, deterministic.
No static application security testing detected. For this repository's stack, add CodeQL's csharp pack, or a .NET security analyzer package (or `semgrep --config=auto`, which runs on any language) — 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: CodeQL's csharp pack, or a .NET security analyzer package — or `semgrep --config=auto`, which runs on any language — locally for now, since there is no CI pipeline here yet, and as a step of the first workflow you add so a security regression fails the build instead of landing.
Enable Dependabot/Renovate or a dependency-review gate.
Add gitleaks/trufflehog in CI to block PRs that introduce committed secrets.
Readiness · Readiness — Whether releases are traceable — a maintained changelog and explicit version stamping.
Method: Filesystem scan: changelog file presence and version tags in csproj or git tags. Exhaustive, deterministic.
No CHANGELOG/HISTORY/RELEASES file — what shipped when isn't easy to reconstruct for support or audit. (Versioning/tagging makes releases traceable, but a changelog records the what.)
What to do
Keep a changelog (e.g. Keep-a-Changelog) recording what shipped in each release.
Readiness · Performance — Whether asynchronous code stays responsive — it avoids sync-over-async blocking (a .NET .Wait()/.GetAwaiter().GetResult(), a time.sleep or blocking HTTP call inside a Python coroutine, a *Sync call inside an async JavaScript function, block_on inside a Rust async fn, runBlocking inside a Kotlin suspend function, block() inside a Reactor publisher) that stalls a thread or event loop and risks deadlock, and, where the code is a reusable library on .NET, awaits with ConfigureAwait(false) so it never captures and stalls its caller's context.
Method: Production-source scan: sync-over-async blocking counted everywhere — .Wait()/.GetAwaiter().GetResult() in .NET; off .NET, read from the language model, a blocking call inside an async function (Python, TS/JS, Rust, Kotlin, Swift, Dart) or inside a Java method returning a Reactor Mono/Flux or a Scala method returning a Future or effect — and, for a .NET library with ≥5 awaits, the share of awaits using ConfigureAwait(false). Deterministic, syntax/text detection.
8 blocking call(s) on async work (.Wait()/.GetAwaiter().GetResult()) — these waste a thread and can deadlock wherever a synchronization context is in play (a UI thread, or a caller that has one).
`.Wait()` blocks this thread until the async work completes — it wastes a thread-pool thread for as long as the work runs and can deadlock wherever a synchronization context is in play (a UI thread, or a caller that has one). (×6) — VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/Main.xaml.cs:192, VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/Main.xaml.cs:202, VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/Main.xaml.cs:238, …
`avatarTask.Wait()` blocks this thread until the async work completes — it wastes a thread-pool thread for as long as the work runs and can deadlock wherever a synchronization context is in play (a UI thread, or a caller that has one). (×2) — VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/MPFriends.xaml.cs:301, VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/winMutiPlayer.xaml.cs:645
What to do
Make the call chain async end-to-end and await it — never block on a Task with .Wait()/.GetAwaiter().GetResult().
Other · Security — Cryptographic hygiene (weak hash/cipher, password key-derivation). This codebase has no web surface, so transport/header/cookie/CSRF controls are N/A and only crypto is scored.
Method: Roslyn plus filesystem scan: HSTS/security headers, secure cookies, input validation, middleware order, weak crypto (MD5/SHA1/DES); HTTPS-metadata context-aware. On a repository with no .NET source it reads JavaScript/TypeScript, Dart, Ruby, Scala, Rust or Elixir source itself (test, vendored, generated and minified paths not) for the arms that hold whether or not the code serves HTTP: a weak hash or cipher, key material fixed in the source, a TLS client that accepts any certificate, and (JavaScript/TypeScript, Ruby, Scala, Rust and Elixir) an obsolete TLS version; the server controls are not assessed there, and a Dart, Ruby, Scala, Rust or Elixir repository that serves no HTTP of its own is N/A on them. Deterministic.
MD5/SHA1 is constructed here, and both are collision-broken. If this digest protects anything — a signature, an integrity or tamper check, a credential, or any value an attacker can influence — that is a real weakness: use SHA-256+ for content integrity, or a KDF (PBKDF2/Argon2/BCrypt) for password storage. If it only derives a non-security identifier (a cache key, a file or mutex name), collision resistance carries no security consequence here; make that intent explicit instead — a non-cryptographic hash such as `System.IO.Hashing.XxHash64`/`Crc32` says it in code — since the algorithm alone cannot distinguish the two uses. (×2) — VPet-Simulator.Windows.Interface/GameSave_v2.cs:48, VPet-Simulator.Windows.Interface/GameSave_v2.cs:84
What to do
Review each MD5/SHA1 use by what it protects: replace it with SHA-256+ (or a KDF for passwords) where the digest is security-relevant, and switch it to a non-cryptographic hash (`System.IO.Hashing.XxHash64`/`Crc32`) where it only derives an identifier such as a cache key or a mutex name. This repository constructs a collision-broken hash (MD5/SHA1) at 2 sites, not one: `VPet-Simulator.Windows.Interface/GameSave_v2.cs:48` (MD5), `VPet-Simulator.Windows.Interface/GameSave_v2.cs:84` (MD5). Each is a separate decision — fixing only the line this row cites leaves the others in place.
Other · Code Health — Whether the code avoids sync-over-async (deadlock-prone blocking on tasks) and async void.
Method: Roslyn syntax scan: async methods scanned for .Wait()/.GetAwaiter().GetResult() and async-void outside event handlers. Deterministic, hard fact per invocation.
Blocking on a Task with `.Wait()`/`.GetAwaiter().GetResult()` can deadlock (and wastes a thread). Prefer awaiting it: make the caller `async` and `await` instead. Where a synchronous entry point must stay — a public sync API you cannot break, or a process entry point that must not return until the work finishes — the block belongs in ONE documented bridge and never inside code that is already async; and where it already is that bridge, give the wait a TIMEOUT so a hung task fails the call instead of hanging the process. (×6) — VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/Main.xaml.cs:192, VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/Main.xaml.cs:202, VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/Main.xaml.cs:238, …
Reading `.Result` of a task that has not completed blocks this thread until it does — the same block as `.Wait()`: under a synchronization context (Blazor, a UI thread, classic ASP.NET) it deadlocks, and on the thread pool it parks a thread for as long as the work runs. `await` the task instead (make the caller `async`); where a synchronous entry point must stay, keep the block in ONE documented bridge with a timeout. — VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/MainLogic.cs:62
`async void` can't be awaited and its exceptions crash the process instead of propagating. Return `Task` — or, where the delegate contract requires void (timer/event/callback registrations), make this a thin void shim that awaits a Task-returning inner method inside try/catch so exceptions are contained. (×13) — VPet-Simulator.Core/Graph/PNGAnimation.cs:118, VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/winMutiPlayer.xaml.cs:52, VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/winMutiPlayer.xaml.cs:76, …
`File.ReadAllText` blocks the thread on I/O while `File.ReadAllTextAsync` exists to wait without one — inside a method that is already `async`, await the twin. — VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs:1740
`Thread.Sleep` parks the thread for the whole delay: no other work runs on it, and under load the pool must grow to make up for it. `await Task.Delay(…)` suspends only this method. (×7) — VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs:2204, VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.xaml.cs:197, VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/MPFriends.xaml.cs:143, …
`winMutiPlayer.LoopP2PPacket` is a synchronous helper that blocks (`Thread.Sleep`): called from an `async` method it parks the thread exactly as the inline call would. Make the helper `async` and `await` it (`await Task.Delay`, `SemaphoreSlim.WaitAsync`, a `TaskCompletionSource` instead of the poll). — VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/winMutiPlayer.xaml.cs:227
Other · Code Health — Whether any branch is dead by construction — a switch arm whose label can never equal a case-normalised subject, or an `else if` whose predicate the arm above has already swallowed.
Method: Roslyn syntax + semantics: switch labels compared against the subject's own case normaliser, and if/else-if chains checked for a literal an earlier arm's containment test already swallows. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.
Do you agree with this assessment?
X13 · Undrained process stream10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged
Other · Code Health — Whether a child process that has BOTH standard streams redirected drains both — reading one to the end while the other is never read deadlocks once the child fills the unread pipe.
Method: Roslyn syntax + semantics: ProcessStartInfo launches with both streams redirected, checked for a drain of each stream across the enclosing type. 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 `spawn` imported from `child_process` whose stdout and stderr are both pipes (no options, no `stdio`, or `stdio` of `'pipe'`), bound to a local that never leaves its scope, where exactly one of the two streams is read, the other never, and the child’s `close`/`exit` (or the read stream’s end) is awaited; a shell redirect in the call’s arguments or a `kill` of the child suppresses it. The same rule reads Python’s `subprocess.Popen`, Dart’s `Process.start`, Ruby’s `Open3.popen3`, and Scala’s JDK process starts (`new ProcessBuilder(…).start()` with no `redirectErrorStream`/`redirectError`/`redirectOutput`/`inheritIO`, `Runtime.getRuntime.exec`) where one of `getInputStream`/`getErrorStream` is read and the other never while `waitFor()` is called or the read stream is read to its end. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.
Other · Security — Whether a hand-rolled public/private IP check can be walked past — a method that unwraps IPv4-mapped IPv6 but returns the opposite verdict for the same host written as IPv4-compatible, 6to4 or NAT64.
Method: Roslyn syntax + semantics: methods that unwrap IPv4-mapped IPv6 and hand-roll IPv4 range carve-outs, checked for whether the IPv6 branch also accounts for the IPv4-compatible, 6to4 and NAT64 embeddings. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.
Do you agree with this assessment?
X15 · Unvalidated length from an untrusted reader10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged
Other · Security — Whether a length read out of the stream being parsed is bounded before it is allocated or read — an unchecked count taken from the input lets the input choose the allocation.
Method: Roslyn syntax + semantics: integer lengths read from a BinaryReader and spent on a bulk read or an array allocation, checked for any comparison or bounding call on the value anywhere in the method. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.
Other · Code Health — Whether a loop that shortens a string until it fits a length budget has a floor — one with none grinds the value down to the empty string, or past it into a negative-length `Substring`.
Method: Roslyn syntax + semantics: while/do loops whose body's only effect on a string is to drop its last character, checked for whether anything — a direct comparison on the length, a body guard, a break — bounds that length below. 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 `while`/`do` loop whose body’s one assignment to a value is `x = x.slice(0, -1)` or `x = x.slice|substring|substr(0, x.length - 1)`, driven by a condition that reads `x.length` only as a term of a larger expression — never compared directly, never tested for truthiness, and with no other read of `x` — and whose body has no `break`, `return`, `throw` or `if` naming `x`. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.
Do you agree with this assessment?
X17 · Uncapped recursion over a caller-supplied document10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged
Other · Security — Whether a walk that recurses through a JSON/XML tree handed in by its caller bounds how deep it will go — an uncapped walk lets the document's nesting choose the stack depth, and the resulting StackOverflowException cannot be caught.
Method: Roslyn syntax + semantics: methods that take a JSON/XML document node and call themselves with a child of it, reachable from an externally-callable member of the same type that accepts a document, checked for any depth parameter, descent counter or threaded arithmetic anywhere in the walk. On a repository with no .NET source it reads TypeScript off the engine’s own token stream (test, vendored, generated and minified paths and `.d.ts` not) with the same rule: a function or method with a parameter typed as a document value — `unknown`, `any`, `object`, `Record<string, unknown|any>`, a JSON alias (`JsonValue`, `JSONObject`, …) or a DOM node global the file does not rebind — that calls itself (bare, or through `this` for a method, or hands itself to a call over the value as in `value.map(walk)`) with something it took out of that value and never through an ancestor accessor such as `closest()` or `parentElement`, that is exported or reached from an exported function (a public method of the same exported class) taking such a value, and that names no depth, level, nesting, recursion, remaining or budget anywhere and threads no `+`/`-` arithmetic through a self-call. Plain JavaScript is not read: with no annotation nothing tells a parsed document from a tree the code built itself. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.
Other · Code Health — Whether a type's disposal matches what it OWNS — releasing what it created, leaving alone what it was handed, and not declaring a finalizer for state that has nothing unmanaged to finalize.
Method: Roslyn syntax + semantics: every assignment to a disposable field is read to decide whether the type CREATED the value or was handed it, and the type's disposal is checked against that answer — an injected interface it disposes, a value it constructed and never releases, a finalizer on a type holding nothing unmanaged, and a disposable local whose every reference is a plain member read. A value handed to a container that disposes its contents (a parent control's `Controls` collection, a component `IContainer`) is released by that container and is not reported; generated code is out of population. On a repository with no .NET source the same ownership questions are read in JavaScript/TypeScript off the engine’s own token stream (test, vendored, generated and minified paths not): a class declaring `dispose()`, `[Symbol.dispose]()` or `[Symbol.asyncDispose]()` that disposes a field it was handed through a constructor parameter typed as a repository interface or resolved by a dependency-injection container; that assigns a field only ever from `new X(…)` of a disposable class and neither releases it anywhere in the class nor names it in its disposal member or a method that member calls, nor hands it to anything else; and a `const`/`let` local built from literals only whose every reference opens a statement operating on a non-release member of it. A class is disposable when every repository declaration of its name declares or inherits a disposal member, or when it is a documented library disposable (`vscode` EventEmitter, CancellationTokenSource and Disposable; three.js geometries, materials, textures, render targets, renderers, controls and composers). The finalizer arm has no JavaScript counterpart: a class cannot declare one. Dart is read for the owned-and-never-released arm: a Flutter `State` (or a class declaring `dispose()`/`close()`) whose library-private field is written only with direct creations of a framework controller, `FocusNode`, `StreamController` or periodic `Timer` (or a `.listen(…)` into a field declared `StreamSubscription`), which nothing in the class or its library releases (`dispose`/`close`/`cancel`) and which is never handed on except as a named argument. Ruby is read for the owned-and-never-released arm and the abandoned-local arm: a class declaring an instance `close`, `dispose`, `shutdown`, `stop`, `disconnect` or `terminate` whose instance variable is written only with a blockless core descriptor creation (`File.open`/`new`, `Tempfile`, `Dir.open`, `IO.popen`, the `socket` and `openssl` socket classes) that no method of the class closes and that is never handed on (passed, returned, stored, exposed by `attr_reader`, delegated) — a class whose superclass or mixin lies outside the repository is not judged — and a blockless creation read through and dropped (`File.open(path).read`) or held in a local that is never closed, returned, passed or stored (a `&:read` block-pass, an `autoclose: false` borrow and a `fileno` hand-over are not abandonment). PHP is read for the same two arms: a class (not a trait, and not one using a trait) declaring an instance `close`, `dispose`, `shutdown`, `stop`, `disconnect` or `terminate` whose `private` property (or a `final` class's `protected` one) is written only with a direct core `fopen`, `tmpfile`, `popen`, `proc_open`, `fsockopen`, `stream_socket_client`/`server` or `opendir` that nothing in the class closes (`fclose`, `pclose`, `closedir`, `unset`, a reset to `null`) and that is never handed on, and a handle held in a function's local, or read through as the argument of a reader, that is never closed, returned, passed, captured or stored; a `php://` stream, `curl_init`, `SplFileObject`, `PDO` and a function the repository declares under the core name are not read. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.
`Main` implements `IDisposable` — so it has told every caller it holds something worth releasing — and it constructs `soundPlayer` itself (line 52), which makes that instance its own. But `soundPlayer` is named in none of the methods the disposal search covered: `Dispose` (line 510) — that is `Dispose` plus every method `Dispose` calls BY NAME, so a release reached through an interface, a delegate or a base class is not followed and is worth checking before acting. On what was read, the type's disposal releases everything except the one thing it owns. A disposable the owner never disposes is held until finalization if its type has a finalizer, and forever if it does not — which for a synchronisation primitive, a timer, a stream or a handle means the resource accumulates once per instance for the life of the process. Release it in `Dispose` (`soundPlayer?.Dispose();`), or, if it truly does not need releasing, drop `IDisposable` from the type so the claim and the behaviour agree. — VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/Main.xaml.cs:52
What to do
Each finding names the value and the span that decides who owns it — the `new` that created it, or the constructor parameter that handed it over. Confirm ownership from that span, then make the disposal match it: release what this type created, leave what it was injected with to whoever created THAT, and drop a finalizer whose type holds nothing unmanaged to release.
Other · Code Health — Whether a method that temporarily changes state belonging to the whole process — the working directory, an environment variable — puts it back on EVERY path: a restore reached only when nothing throws leaks the change to the rest of the process.
Method: Roslyn syntax + semantics: method bodies that write the process working directory or an environment variable and write it back in the same body, checked for whether that restore sits in a `finally`/`catch` or only on the straight-line path. On a repository with no .NET source the same rule reads production JavaScript/TypeScript off the engine’s own token stream (test, vendored and minified paths not): `process.chdir`, `process.env.NAME =`/`["NAME"] =` and `delete process.env.NAME`, and Deno’s `Deno.chdir`/`Deno.env.set`/`Deno.env.delete`, paired per function body (a nested function or arrow is its own body, and module top-level code is none), where the last write puts back a local the body captured from the same global or deletes a variable the first write set, with at least one statement between them; a write in a `catch`/`finally` of that body silences it. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.
Other · Code Health — Whether async methods accept a CancellationToken so work can be cancelled (adoption curve).
Method: Roslyn scan: every async method (excluding framework-fixed overrides/Blazor handlers) checked for CancellationToken parameter presence. Deterministic, adoption percentage. 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 question: every named async function that itself makes a request an AbortSignal can cancel (global `fetch`, axios and its file-local instances, ky, ofetch) counts, and it is compliant when its parameters or body name a signal or it hands one of its own parameters to the request as options; signatures a framework fixes (JSX event handlers, route and lifecycle exports, request-first handlers, `override`, `'use server'` modules, TanStack `mutationFn`) are exempt unless they take a signal. Deterministic, adoption percentage.
Only 2/28 async methods accept a CancellationToken, so in-flight work can't be stopped early when the caller gives up — whatever ends it in your host (shutdown signal, timeout, abandoned request, user cancel). Thread a token through the call chain and honour it at each await and loop; where a method genuinely cannot be interrupted, omitting it is a deliberate choice — judge against your hosting model.
No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started. (×26) — VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/Main.xaml.cs:80, VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/Main.xaml.cs:109, VPet-Simulator.Core/Graph/APNGAnimation.cs:103, …
What to do
Thread a CancellationToken through async methods so work stops promptly on cancellation.
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 `ArgumentNullException` 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 a `when` guard is free of side effects — a guard that increments a counter or assigns while deciding whether its arm matches applies that change during PATTERN MATCHING, on an arm that may not be selected, and skips it entirely when a short-circuit to its left answers first.
Method: Roslyn syntax: `when` guards on case labels and switch-expression arms, read for a mutation (`++`/`--`/assignment) sitting in a position the guard's own `&&`/`||`/`??`/`?:`/`?.` can skip. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.
Other · Code Health — Whether a method that TAKES a lock or semaphore and gives it back from a flag-guarded `finally` returns the value that flag implies — reporting success while the guard hands the primitive back admits a second caller the exclusion was there to keep out, and reporting failure while the guard keeps it leaves nothing to ever give it back.
Method: Roslyn syntax: `try` statements whose `finally` releases a synchronisation primitive under a bare local-bool guard, where the method also TOOK that same primitive before the `try`, checked for a `return` of a bool literal whose value disagrees with the flag state the method's own straight-line assignments put it in. 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?
X24 · Document value interpolated into markup unescaped10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged
Other · Security — Whether text read out of the document being converted is escaped before it is written into generated markup — a value the document's author chose, interpolated into an attribute the surrounding literal delimits, can close that attribute and open another.
Method: Roslyn semantic model over the whole compilation: a string-typed `Value`/`InnerText`/`InnerXml`/`Text` member declared inside `DocumentFormat.OpenXml` or `System.Xml` is a taint SOURCE, propagated through assignments, returns, arguments, tuple elements and string composition to its transitive closure, then read at interpolated-string holes that sit in a markup position the surrounding literal itself delimits. Escaper/encoder calls and enclosing validator conditions cut the flow. Flow- and container-insensitive by construction. A second arm needs no provenance at all and reports a type that CONTRADICTS ITSELF — the same expression escaped at one delimited markup hole and interpolated raw at another hole in the same markup position of the same type, which the type's own escaping proves is a defect without knowing where the value came from. On a repository with no .NET source it reads JavaScript/TypeScript off the token stream with the same rule: a DOM read of raw document text (`getAttribute`, `textContent`, `innerText`, `nodeValue`) is the source, propagated through local bindings and string composition, and judged at template-literal and concatenation holes in the same two delimited markup positions; escapers and validating conditions cut it, and documentation-site, test, vendored and minified scripts are not read. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.
Other · Code Health — Whether a value the caller is invited to supply is the value the type actually uses — a constructor parameter stored in a private field that nothing ever reads while the default it was given is spelled out a second time at the site that should have read it, a keyed lookup that falls back to a different setting than the one its key names while the same type falls back to the matching one for that same key, or a culture-sensitive parse given no format provider by a type that feeds its own settable culture to the same kind of parse elsewhere, or a number an entry point writes to standard output under the host's culture while the same entry point formats with the invariant culture elsewhere. Either way, every caller who supplies a value silently gets something else.
Method: Roslyn syntax: private instance fields of a non-partial type assigned in a constructor from one of its own parameters with a `??` fallback, checked for whether anything in the type body reads the field and whether that same fallback expression is spelled out again outside the constructor; and `??` fallbacks onto a member access from a lookup call carrying exactly one string literal, grouped by that key across the type and checked for a fallback member whose folded name disagrees with the key while a sibling site for the same key agrees with it. On a repository with no .NET source the first two arms read JavaScript/TypeScript off the engine’s own token stream (tests included, bundles and vendored paths not): a `#x`, `private` or `private` parameter-property instance field filled in the constructor from a parameter (or one member of one) through `??`/`||` or a parameter default, never read anywhere in the file by name, whose constructed default is spelled again in the class body; and `lookup("key") ?? s.member` grouped by key per class, or per module outside every class. The culture arm has no JavaScript counterpart: its parses take no locale. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.
Other · Code Health — Whether a value handed from a callback to the body that waits on it crosses on something built to be crossed — a `Queue<T>`/`List<T>`/`Dictionary<K,V>` written inside an event handler and read back outside it is mutated by two flows at once, and the semaphore or completion source beside it orders how MANY items exist while leaving the collection's own head, tail and backing array unprotected.
Method: Roslyn syntax: method, accessor, local-function and lambda bodies that declare BOTH a non-thread-safe generic collection (`Queue`/`Stack`/`List`/`Dictionary`/`HashSet`/`Sorted*`/`LinkedList`) and a synchronisation primitive (`SemaphoreSlim`/`TaskCompletionSource`/`ManualResetEvent(Slim)`/`AutoResetEvent`/`CountdownEvent`) as locals, then read for a `+=`-registered lambda that raises that primitive while the body outside every lambda waits on it — and, in that scope, a mutating call on the collection inside the lambda paired with a mention of it outside. Any `lock` in the scope abstains it. On a repository with no .NET source the same handoff is read in Java off the engine’s own token stream (test source sets, vendored and demonstration paths not): an `ArrayList`/`LinkedList`/`ArrayDeque`/`PriorityQueue`/`Hash*`/`LinkedHash*`/`Tree*` local and a `CountDownLatch`/`Semaphore`/`CompletableFuture` local, a lambda or anonymous class that raises the primitive and mutates the collection, and a wait outside it; any `synchronized` or `lock()` abstains the body. Because each of those primitives orders what the callback wrote before raising it, only a touch that provably overlaps the callback is convicted: one after the registration and before the next wait, or one in a loop registered-before, waiting on every pass and not declaring the collection. 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 `foreach` leaves the collection it is walking alone — a body that adds to or removes from the very collection the loop is enumerating invalidates the enumerator it is holding, so the next `MoveNext` throws `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?
X29 · Per-element action decided by a fixed element10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged
Other · Code Health — Whether a decision taken once per element is taken ABOUT that element — a test inside a counted loop that reads a fixed subscript of the very collection its guarded statement indexes by the loop variable applies element zero's answer to all of them, so the elements that differ from it are all handled wrongly, and in the same direction.
Method: Roslyn syntax only, no semantic model: every `for` statement declaring exactly ONE loop variable, and every `if` inside its body that is not under a nested loop or a lambda. A site enters the population when the `if`’s condition never mentions the loop variable while the statement it guards indexes some collection by that variable ALONE (`c[i]`; `c[i + 1]` and `c[i, j]` are outside it). A finding additionally needs the AGREEING TWIN at the same-collection grain: the condition must read THAT SAME collection at a subscript that does not move — written into the condition, or reached through a local declared BEFORE the loop, so an alias bound inside the body is not followed. Both collection expressions must be simple identifiers. On a repository with no .NET source the same rule reads JavaScript/TypeScript off the engine’s own token stream (tests included, bundles and vendored paths not): a `for (let|var|const x = …; …; …)` with one declarator and a braced body, an alias followed only when it is declared before the loop in a block that encloses it and never assigned inside the loop. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.
Other · Code Health — Whether exceptions are handled rather than silently swallowed or rethrown with lost stack traces.
Method: Roslyn syntax scan: every catch clause counted; empty catches and bare rethrows flagged. Population is all catch clauses, not estimated. Deterministic, hard fact.
An empty catch block silently discards the error — failures vanish with no log and no rethrow. Log it, handle it, or don't catch it. (×21) — VPet-Simulator.Core/Graph/Picture.cs:64, VPet-Simulator.Windows/Function/MWController.cs:117, VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs:2357, …
`catch` does nothing with the exception it caught — the body neither logs it, rethrows it, nor even names it, so the failure is discarded as completely as by an empty catch. Log it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, or let it propagate; if one specific failure genuinely cannot matter, catch exactly that exception type and say why in a comment on the catch. (×4) — VPet-Simulator.Windows/Function/CoreMOD.cs:376, VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.xaml.cs:104, VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winSaveManager.xaml.cs:207, …
What to do
Swallowed exception (empty catch)
Do you agree with this assessment?
X30 · Support guard that admits what it rejects10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged
Other · Code Health — Whether a guard written as a NEGATED `||` says what its author meant — `!(a || b || x != k)` is `!a && !b && x == k` by De Morgan, so a bail-out that mixes capabilities the code needs with a fault it refuses turns inside out: it fires only where the capabilities are ABSENT, and lets every value the fault term names walk straight into the body that cannot handle it.
Method: Roslyn syntax only, no semantic model: every logical-not whose operand is a parenthesised `||` chain of two or more disjuncts, flattened (a left-nested `a || b || c` read once would see `(a || b)` as one disjunct). A site enters the population on that shape alone. A finding additionally needs the disjuncts to DISAGREE in polarity: at least one bare boolean read — an identifier or member access, never an invocation, which is a predicate rather than a capability flag — and at least one `x != <constant>`, the only form that negates into an exact-value pin (`== null` negates into a looser requirement and is outside the fault set). Consistently-polarised disjunctions, all-fault or all-capability, are counted and never reported; a negated `&&` is outside the population entirely. No same-receiver gate: it was measured to cost a real defect and remove no false positive. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.
Do you agree with this assessment?
X32 · Type resolved by simple name across every loaded assembly10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged
Other · Code Health — Whether a plugin lookup names the type it means — searching every assembly loaded into the process for a candidate whose SIMPLE name equals a string supplied at runtime, and taking the first one found, is decided by assembly LOAD ORDER rather than by this source, so the same name can resolve to a different type on the next run.
Method: Roslyn syntax only, no semantic model: every invocation of `First`/`FirstOrDefault`/`Single`/`SingleOrDefault` whose OWN expression subtree contains both a `GetAssemblies()` call and a `GetTypes()`/`GetExportedTypes()` call — a single-element pick out of every type loaded into the process. A nested selector in the same chain sees no `GetAssemblies()` in its own subtree and is outside the population, so one lookup counts once however many links its chain has. A finding additionally needs both remaining halves: the selector must be `First`/`FirstOrDefault` (`Single`/`SingleOrDefault` reports the ambiguity rather than resolving it, and is counted and never reported), and the chain must carry an `==` comparison of `<lambda parameter>.Name` against something that is not a literal. The receiver must be a plain identifier bound by one of the chain’s own lambdas, which places `assembly.GetName().Name == "X"` outside the rule by construction. One exemption: a `.Name` test joined by `&&` to a `FullName`/`AssemblyQualifiedName` test on the same identifier is spared; joined by `||` it is not. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.
Other · Code Health — Whether nullable reference types are enabled and not undermined by heavy `!` suppression.
Method: Roslyn compiler-options scan: NullableContextOptions per project; null-forgiving (!) suppression density per 1k syntax nodes. Deterministic, adoption plus suppression penalty.
~5.2 `!` suppressions per 1k syntax nodes — 822 suppression(s) across the 159172 syntax node(s) in code where nullable warnings are ENABLED, which is the only code a `!` can suppress anything in (a `!` under `#nullable disable` is inert and is not counted, and its file's nodes are not in the denominator). Each one tells the compiler to trust you about null, suppressing the very safety NRTs provide.
What to do
Enable <Nullable>enable</Nullable> across all projects and resolve warnings rather than suppressing with `!`.
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.
Unscored — 3 check(s) recorded observations but carry no score
These checks ran and found something, but they do not carry a score — either by design (an advisory check reports evidence rather than grading it) or because they could not be scored here. They are excluded from the score for that reason, not because there was nothing to see.
SC1 Supply-chain hygiene — 1 observation(s) recorded · Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
X10 Duplicated predicate — 9 observation(s) recorded · Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score.
X7 Silent fallback defaults — 3 observation(s) recorded · Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score.
Not evidenced — 2 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.
P4 Deployment & Rollback — not evidenced — no deploy/rollback/approval signal in the repo; absence of evidence is not evidence of a manual release
P5 DR & Backup — not evidenced — repo shows no backup/RTO/RPO controls; absence of evidence is not evidence of a working control
Not included — 47 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 user-facing web UI (the repo is a library/CLI/worker/headless service) — accessibility is not applicable.
AC2 Forms & labels — No user-facing web UI (the repo is a library/CLI/worker/headless service) — accessibility is not applicable.
AC3 Page structure — No user-facing web UI (the repo is a library/CLI/worker/headless service) — accessibility is not applicable.
AC4 Keyboard semantics — No user-facing web UI (the repo is a library/CLI/worker/headless service) — accessibility is not applicable.
AC5 ARIA correctness — No user-facing web UI (the repo is a library/CLI/worker/headless service) — accessibility is not applicable.
AC6 Visual & motion safety — No user-facing web UI (the repo is a library/CLI/worker/headless service) — accessibility is not applicable.
AC7 A11y enforcement — No user-facing web UI (the repo is a library/CLI/worker/headless service) — accessibility is not applicable.
AX2 Stateful singletons — no singleton implementations detected
AX7 Slice cohesion — not applicable — not a vertical-slice architecture
AX8 Test isolation — no test/production split to check
AX9 CQS / query purity — no CQRS query handlers detected — query purity is not applicable to this codebase
AXB1 Runtime evidence locked — no reproducible boot — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
C1 Data Protection — No personal data detected in the analyzed source — no PII-typed entity/column names (Email, FirstName, DateOfBirth, …), no ASP.NET Identity / user-account model, and no stored user credentials. GDPR data-protection controls are therefore N/A here. If this is intentional, record the no-PII posture in an ADR; if the app does process personal data, name those fields conventionally so this dimension activates.
C2 Access Controls — No access-control surface detected in the analyzed source — no web/app surface to authorize (no HTTP API or web-UI project) and no authorization code at all (no [Authorize]/policies, no imperative guard methods). Access control is therefore N/A here — this is a library/CLI, which is authorized by its CALLER, not by itself. If this codebase grows request handlers, the dimension reactivates and a default-deny posture is expected then.
C3 Audit Trail — No personal data detected in the analyzed source — no PII-typed entity/column names (Email, FirstName, DateOfBirth, …), no ASP.NET Identity / user-account model, and no stored user credentials. GDPR data-protection controls are therefore N/A here. If this is intentional, record the no-PII posture in an ADR; if the app does process personal data, name those fields conventionally so this dimension activates.
C4 Data Retention — No personal data detected in the analyzed source — no PII-typed entity/column names (Email, FirstName, DateOfBirth, …), no ASP.NET Identity / user-account model, and no stored user credentials. GDPR data-protection controls are therefore N/A here. If this is intentional, record the no-PII posture in an ADR; if the app does process personal data, name those fields conventionally so this dimension activates.
C5 Data-Subject Rights — No personal data detected in the analyzed source — no PII-typed entity/column names (Email, FirstName, DateOfBirth, …), no ASP.NET Identity / user-account model, and no stored user credentials. GDPR data-protection controls are therefore N/A here. If this is intentional, record the no-PII posture in an ADR; if the app does process personal data, name those fields conventionally so this dimension activates.
D10 Test Quality — No tests were found in the analyzed repository to assess for quality.
D11 Test Reliability — No test suite was found to re-run, so reliability couldn't be assessed. Two searches produced that zero and both came back empty: the classifier that reads the loaded workspace recognised no suite it could run, and a walk of the source on disk — which covers the JS/TS `*.test.*` and `*.spec.*` conventions and probes for a Pester suite — found no test source in any other ecosystem either. Neither search reaches a suite that is missing from the loaded workspace and carries no name either walk recognises, so this is 'no suite found by those two searches', not a verdict that the repository has none.
D16 Bus Factor — single-maintainer repository — bus factor is not applicable
D22 Internal API Consistency — No intentionally-exposed public API to evaluate for consistency.
D23 Boundary Type-Coupling — Cross-context type coupling could not be assessed — this codebase's bounded contexts are neither declared nor inferable.
D25 ADR Conformance — no ADRs to check
D30 Dependency Vulnerabilities — nuget: the solution did not restore on the analyzer's .NET SDK (an SDK/target-framework/restore mismatch, common for an older codebase), so there was no restored dependency graph to scan
D31 IaC & Container Security — No Infrastructure-as-Code or container manifests found (Dockerfile, Docker Compose, Terraform, Kubernetes/Helm, CloudFormation, ARM, Bicep, Ansible); nothing to scan.
D32 Data Compliance (PII/GDPR) — 1 file(s) were not parsed by semgrep — the PII/GDPR ruleset never ran over them
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 analyzer's build of the target did not succeed
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
DM1 Domain Modelling — not scored — this repository shows none of the 3 signals this lens looks for
ED1 Event-Driven — not scored — this repository shows none of the 3 signals this lens looks for
ED5 Idempotency — no mutating command handlers or message consumers detected — idempotency check not applicable
ES1 Event Sourcing — not scored — this repository shows none of the 3 signals this lens looks for
P12 CI test-gate honesty — no CI workflow found
P7 Outbound HTTP resilience — not applicable — this isn't a service/API/worker
P8 Schema migrations — no EF Core usage detected
P9 Domain vs controller coverage — no coverage report found on disk — produce a coverage report in a standard format (Cobertura — `dotnet test --collect:"XPlat Code Coverage"` with a `coverlet.collector` PackageReference) and commit it — a hosted scan measures a clone of the repository, so a report that exists only in a working tree, a CI runner's or your own, never reaches it; the artefact is commonly gitignored, so `git add -f` that one file (or un-ignore its path) and commit it alongside the code it measures, or wire coverage collection into CI, to enable this cross-layer check
PF1 Benchmark discipline — Performance is assessed only for perf-relevant repos — a packaged library, one that ships benchmarks, or one already using allocation-aware APIs. This repo isn't one, so the Performance lens is not applicable and is excluded from the score.
PF2 Allocation hygiene — Performance is assessed only for perf-relevant repos — a packaged library, one that ships benchmarks, or one already using allocation-aware APIs. This repo isn't one, so the Performance lens is not applicable and is excluded from the score.
X4 Structured logging — This check asks whether log calls keep a message's values apart from its text, which needs a logger that can carry them as fields. This repository's C# was read, and every log call in it goes through a logger that takes one finished message — its own wrapper, log4net, Console or Debug — so an interpolated message there loses nothing the API could have kept. Calls through Microsoft.Extensions.Logging, Serilog, NLog or ZLogger, or any logger with a message-template overload, would be judged.
X6 Hand-rolled structured-format parsing — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
X9 Subsumed condition operand — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
Appendix A — Findings (grouped)
The findings behind the scores, grouped by severity, then by dimension and kind. The high-severity issues are enumerated in full below; items per group are capped at 25 with any overflow stated explicitly per group, never silently truncated. The complete machine-readable list of every finding (all severities) is the companion findings.md in this report's bundle.
EmptyCatchBlock VPet-Simulator.Core/Graph/Picture.cs:64— empty catch block — the error is discarded with nothing recorded, so a failure here leaves no trace anywhere. Record it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, or let it propagate. Where swallowing one specific failure really is correct — as it often is on a teardown/dispose path where throwing would mask the original failure — catch exactly that exception type and write down WHY in a comment on the catch. Both are needed: a comment on a catch-all still swallows every failure nobody anticipated, and a note that only restates the swallow ("ignored", "do nothing") is read as no explanation at all.
EmptyCatchBlock VPet-Simulator.Windows/Function/MWController.cs:117— empty catch block — the error is discarded with nothing recorded, so a failure here leaves no trace anywhere. Record it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, or let it propagate. Where swallowing one specific failure really is correct — as it often is on a teardown/dispose path where throwing would mask the original failure — catch exactly that exception type and write down WHY in a comment on the catch. Both are needed: a comment on a catch-all still swallows every failure nobody anticipated, and a note that only restates the swallow ("ignored", "do nothing") is read as no explanation at all.
EmptyCatchBlock VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs:2357— empty catch block — the error is discarded with nothing recorded, so a failure here leaves no trace anywhere. Record it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, or let it propagate. Where swallowing one specific failure really is correct — as it often is on a teardown/dispose path where throwing would mask the original failure — catch exactly that exception type and write down WHY in a comment on the catch. Both are needed: a comment on a catch-all still swallows every failure nobody anticipated, and a note that only restates the swallow ("ignored", "do nothing") is read as no explanation at all.
EmptyCatchBlock VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.xaml.cs:529— empty catch block — the error is discarded with nothing recorded, so a failure here leaves no trace anywhere. Record it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, or let it propagate. Where swallowing one specific failure really is correct — as it often is on a teardown/dispose path where throwing would mask the original failure — catch exactly that exception type and write down WHY in a comment on the catch. Both are needed: a comment on a catch-all still swallows every failure nobody anticipated, and a note that only restates the swallow ("ignored", "do nothing") is read as no explanation at all.
EmptyCatchBlock VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.xaml.cs:757— empty catch block — the error is discarded with nothing recorded, so a failure here leaves no trace anywhere. Record it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, or let it propagate. Where swallowing one specific failure really is correct — as it often is on a teardown/dispose path where throwing would mask the original failure — catch exactly that exception type and write down WHY in a comment on the catch. Both are needed: a comment on a catch-all still swallows every failure nobody anticipated, and a note that only restates the swallow ("ignored", "do nothing") is read as no explanation at all.
EmptyCatchBlock VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.xaml.cs:763— empty catch block — the error is discarded with nothing recorded, so a failure here leaves no trace anywhere. Record it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, or let it propagate. Where swallowing one specific failure really is correct — as it often is on a teardown/dispose path where throwing would mask the original failure — catch exactly that exception type and write down WHY in a comment on the catch. Both are needed: a comment on a catch-all still swallows every failure nobody anticipated, and a note that only restates the swallow ("ignored", "do nothing") is read as no explanation at all.
EmptyCatchBlock VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.xaml.cs:817— empty catch block — the error is discarded with nothing recorded, so a failure here leaves no trace anywhere. Record it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, or let it propagate. Where swallowing one specific failure really is correct — as it often is on a teardown/dispose path where throwing would mask the original failure — catch exactly that exception type and write down WHY in a comment on the catch. Both are needed: a comment on a catch-all still swallows every failure nobody anticipated, and a note that only restates the swallow ("ignored", "do nothing") is read as no explanation at all.
EmptyCatchBlock VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/MPController.cs:121— empty catch block — the error is discarded with nothing recorded, so a failure here leaves no trace anywhere. Record it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, or let it propagate. Where swallowing one specific failure really is correct — as it often is on a teardown/dispose path where throwing would mask the original failure — catch exactly that exception type and write down WHY in a comment on the catch. Both are needed: a comment on a catch-all still swallows every failure nobody anticipated, and a note that only restates the swallow ("ignored", "do nothing") is read as no explanation at all.
EmptyCatchBlock VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/winMutiPlayer.xaml.cs:455— empty catch block — the error is discarded with nothing recorded, so a failure here leaves no trace anywhere. Record it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, or let it propagate. Where swallowing one specific failure really is correct — as it often is on a teardown/dispose path where throwing would mask the original failure — catch exactly that exception type and write down WHY in a comment on the catch. Both are needed: a comment on a catch-all still swallows every failure nobody anticipated, and a note that only restates the swallow ("ignored", "do nothing") is read as no explanation at all.
EmptyCatchBlock VPet-Simulator.Windows/PetHelper.xaml.cs:65— empty catch block — the error is discarded with nothing recorded, so a failure here leaves no trace anywhere. Record it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, or let it propagate. Where swallowing one specific failure really is correct — as it often is on a teardown/dispose path where throwing would mask the original failure — catch exactly that exception type and write down WHY in a comment on the catch. Both are needed: a comment on a catch-all still swallows every failure nobody anticipated, and a note that only restates the swallow ("ignored", "do nothing") is read as no explanation at all.
EmptyCatchBlock VPet-Simulator.Windows/PetHelper.xaml.cs:70— empty catch block — the error is discarded with nothing recorded, so a failure here leaves no trace anywhere. Record it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, or let it propagate. Where swallowing one specific failure really is correct — as it often is on a teardown/dispose path where throwing would mask the original failure — catch exactly that exception type and write down WHY in a comment on the catch. Both are needed: a comment on a catch-all still swallows every failure nobody anticipated, and a note that only restates the swallow ("ignored", "do nothing") is read as no explanation at all.
EmptyCatchBlock VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winCharacterPanel.xaml.cs:321— empty catch block — the error is discarded with nothing recorded, so a failure here leaves no trace anywhere. Record it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, or let it propagate. Where swallowing one specific failure really is correct — as it often is on a teardown/dispose path where throwing would mask the original failure — catch exactly that exception type and write down WHY in a comment on the catch. Both are needed: a comment on a catch-all still swallows every failure nobody anticipated, and a note that only restates the swallow ("ignored", "do nothing") is read as no explanation at all.
EmptyCatchBlock VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winGameSetting.xaml.cs:494— empty catch block — the error is discarded with nothing recorded, so a failure here leaves no trace anywhere. Record it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, or let it propagate. Where swallowing one specific failure really is correct — as it often is on a teardown/dispose path where throwing would mask the original failure — catch exactly that exception type and write down WHY in a comment on the catch. Both are needed: a comment on a catch-all still swallows every failure nobody anticipated, and a note that only restates the swallow ("ignored", "do nothing") is read as no explanation at all.
EmptyCatchBlock VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winGameSetting.xaml.cs:551— empty catch block — the error is discarded with nothing recorded, so a failure here leaves no trace anywhere. Record it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, or let it propagate. Where swallowing one specific failure really is correct — as it often is on a teardown/dispose path where throwing would mask the original failure — catch exactly that exception type and write down WHY in a comment on the catch. Both are needed: a comment on a catch-all still swallows every failure nobody anticipated, and a note that only restates the swallow ("ignored", "do nothing") is read as no explanation at all.
EmptyCatchBlock VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winGameSetting.xaml.cs:679— empty catch block — the error is discarded with nothing recorded, so a failure here leaves no trace anywhere. Record it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, or let it propagate. Where swallowing one specific failure really is correct — as it often is on a teardown/dispose path where throwing would mask the original failure — catch exactly that exception type and write down WHY in a comment on the catch. Both are needed: a comment on a catch-all still swallows every failure nobody anticipated, and a note that only restates the swallow ("ignored", "do nothing") is read as no explanation at all.
EmptyCatchBlock VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winGameSetting.xaml.cs:868— empty catch block — the error is discarded with nothing recorded, so a failure here leaves no trace anywhere. Record it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, or let it propagate. Where swallowing one specific failure really is correct — as it often is on a teardown/dispose path where throwing would mask the original failure — catch exactly that exception type and write down WHY in a comment on the catch. Both are needed: a comment on a catch-all still swallows every failure nobody anticipated, and a note that only restates the swallow ("ignored", "do nothing") is read as no explanation at all.
EmptyCatchBlock VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winReport.xaml.cs:185— empty catch block — the error is discarded with nothing recorded, so a failure here leaves no trace anywhere. Record it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, or let it propagate. Where swallowing one specific failure really is correct — as it often is on a teardown/dispose path where throwing would mask the original failure — catch exactly that exception type and write down WHY in a comment on the catch. Both are needed: a comment on a catch-all still swallows every failure nobody anticipated, and a note that only restates the swallow ("ignored", "do nothing") is read as no explanation at all.
EmptyCatchBlock VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winSaveManager.xaml.cs:177— empty catch block — the error is discarded with nothing recorded, so a failure here leaves no trace anywhere. Record it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, or let it propagate. Where swallowing one specific failure really is correct — as it often is on a teardown/dispose path where throwing would mask the original failure — catch exactly that exception type and write down WHY in a comment on the catch. Both are needed: a comment on a catch-all still swallows every failure nobody anticipated, and a note that only restates the swallow ("ignored", "do nothing") is read as no explanation at all.
EmptyCatchBlock VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winSaveManager.xaml.cs:229— empty catch block — the error is discarded with nothing recorded, so a failure here leaves no trace anywhere. Record it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, or let it propagate. Where swallowing one specific failure really is correct — as it often is on a teardown/dispose path where throwing would mask the original failure — catch exactly that exception type and write down WHY in a comment on the catch. Both are needed: a comment on a catch-all still swallows every failure nobody anticipated, and a note that only restates the swallow ("ignored", "do nothing") is read as no explanation at all.
EmptyCatchBlock VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winSaveManager.xaml.cs:251— empty catch block — the error is discarded with nothing recorded, so a failure here leaves no trace anywhere. Record it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, or let it propagate. Where swallowing one specific failure really is correct — as it often is on a teardown/dispose path where throwing would mask the original failure — catch exactly that exception type and write down WHY in a comment on the catch. Both are needed: a comment on a catch-all still swallows every failure nobody anticipated, and a note that only restates the swallow ("ignored", "do nothing") is read as no explanation at all.
EmptyCatchBlock VPet.Solution/Models/ModLoader.cs:124— empty catch block — the error is discarded with nothing recorded, so a failure here leaves no trace anywhere. Record it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, or let it propagate. Where swallowing one specific failure really is correct — as it often is on a teardown/dispose path where throwing would mask the original failure — catch exactly that exception type and write down WHY in a comment on the catch. Both are needed: a comment on a catch-all still swallows every failure nobody anticipated, and a note that only restates the swallow ("ignored", "do nothing") is read as no explanation at all.
NoWarnInCsproj VPet-Simulator.Windows/VPet-Simulator.Windows.csproj:46— 1701 — this warning is switched off for the WHOLE project, in every file it builds, including code written years from now: nothing at the call site records that the rule was ever silenced, so the next reader has no reason to look here. Fix what the rule is reporting and drop the code from the list, or — if some occurrences really are legitimate — narrow the suppression to those sites and give each one its reason, so the rule keeps protecting the rest of the project.
NoWarnInCsproj VPet-Simulator.Windows/VPet-Simulator.Windows.csproj:53— 1701 — this warning is switched off for the WHOLE project, in every file it builds, including code written years from now: nothing at the call site records that the rule was ever silenced, so the next reader has no reason to look here. Fix what the rule is reporting and drop the code from the list, or — if some occurrences really are legitimate — narrow the suppression to those sites and give each one its reason, so the rule keeps protecting the rest of the project.
NoWarnInCsproj VPet-Simulator.Windows/VPet-Simulator.Windows.csproj:59— 1701 — this warning is switched off for the WHOLE project, in every file it builds, including code written years from now: nothing at the call site records that the rule was ever silenced, so the next reader has no reason to look here. Fix what the rule is reporting and drop the code from the list, or — if some occurrences really are legitimate — narrow the suppression to those sites and give each one its reason, so the rule keeps protecting the rest of the project.
NoWarnInCsproj VPet-Simulator.Windows/VPet-Simulator.Windows.csproj:66— 1701 — this warning is switched off for the WHOLE project, in every file it builds, including code written years from now: nothing at the call site records that the rule was ever silenced, so the next reader has no reason to look here. Fix what the rule is reporting and drop the code from the list, or — if some occurrences really are legitimate — narrow the suppression to those sites and give each one its reason, so the rule keeps protecting the rest of the project.
NoWarnInCsproj VPet-Simulator.Windows/VPet-Simulator.Windows.csproj:46— 1702 — this warning is switched off for the WHOLE project, in every file it builds, including code written years from now: nothing at the call site records that the rule was ever silenced, so the next reader has no reason to look here. Fix what the rule is reporting and drop the code from the list, or — if some occurrences really are legitimate — narrow the suppression to those sites and give each one its reason, so the rule keeps protecting the rest of the project.
NoWarnInCsproj VPet-Simulator.Windows/VPet-Simulator.Windows.csproj:53— 1702 — this warning is switched off for the WHOLE project, in every file it builds, including code written years from now: nothing at the call site records that the rule was ever silenced, so the next reader has no reason to look here. Fix what the rule is reporting and drop the code from the list, or — if some occurrences really are legitimate — narrow the suppression to those sites and give each one its reason, so the rule keeps protecting the rest of the project.
NoWarnInCsproj VPet-Simulator.Windows/VPet-Simulator.Windows.csproj:59— 1702 — this warning is switched off for the WHOLE project, in every file it builds, including code written years from now: nothing at the call site records that the rule was ever silenced, so the next reader has no reason to look here. Fix what the rule is reporting and drop the code from the list, or — if some occurrences really are legitimate — narrow the suppression to those sites and give each one its reason, so the rule keeps protecting the rest of the project.
NoWarnInCsproj VPet-Simulator.Windows/VPet-Simulator.Windows.csproj:66— 1702 — this warning is switched off for the WHOLE project, in every file it builds, including code written years from now: nothing at the call site records that the rule was ever silenced, so the next reader has no reason to look here. Fix what the rule is reporting and drop the code from the list, or — if some occurrences really are legitimate — narrow the suppression to those sites and give each one its reason, so the rule keeps protecting the rest of the project.
NoWarnInCsproj VPet-Simulator.Windows/VPet-Simulator.Windows.csproj:46— 0090 — this warning is switched off for the WHOLE project, in every file it builds, including code written years from now: nothing at the call site records that the rule was ever silenced, so the next reader has no reason to look here. Fix what the rule is reporting and drop the code from the list, or — if some occurrences really are legitimate — narrow the suppression to those sites and give each one its reason, so the rule keeps protecting the rest of the project.
NoWarnInCsproj VPet-Simulator.Windows/VPet-Simulator.Windows.csproj:53— 0090 — this warning is switched off for the WHOLE project, in every file it builds, including code written years from now: nothing at the call site records that the rule was ever silenced, so the next reader has no reason to look here. Fix what the rule is reporting and drop the code from the list, or — if some occurrences really are legitimate — narrow the suppression to those sites and give each one its reason, so the rule keeps protecting the rest of the project.
NoWarnInCsproj VPet-Simulator.Windows/VPet-Simulator.Windows.csproj:59— 0090 — this warning is switched off for the WHOLE project, in every file it builds, including code written years from now: nothing at the call site records that the rule was ever silenced, so the next reader has no reason to look here. Fix what the rule is reporting and drop the code from the list, or — if some occurrences really are legitimate — narrow the suppression to those sites and give each one its reason, so the rule keeps protecting the rest of the project.
NoWarnInCsproj VPet-Simulator.Windows/VPet-Simulator.Windows.csproj:66— 0090 — this warning is switched off for the WHOLE project, in every file it builds, including code written years from now: nothing at the call site records that the rule was ever silenced, so the next reader has no reason to look here. Fix what the rule is reporting and drop the code from the list, or — if some occurrences really are legitimate — narrow the suppression to those sites and give each one its reason, so the rule keeps protecting the rest of the project.
NoWarnInCsproj VPet-Simulator.Core/VPet-Simulator.Core.csproj:21— CS1591 — this project generates an XML documentation file as a build output, so its documentation is something it PUBLISHES to whoever consumes the assembly, and this entry switches off a rule whose only job is to report that documentation missing or malformed. The two decisions sit in the same file and the quiet one wins: the documentation this project ships has holes exactly where the rule would have pointed, no build says so, and the people who meet the gap are downstream — in their editor, at the moment they are trying to use the member. Write the documentation the rule is asking for and drop the code from the list; where only some elements genuinely cannot carry it, narrow the suppression to those sites and give each one its reason, so the rest of the API stays covered. If the documentation was never meant to be consumed, the honest fix is the other line — stop generating the file, so the project no longer publishes something it is choosing not to check.
AnalyzerSeverityNone .editorconfig:143— CA1416 — this rule is switched off for every file the section matches, in every project under this directory, and the only record that it was ever switched off is this line: nothing at the sites it would have reported says so, so a reader of that code has no reason to look here, and code added years from now inherits the decision silently. Fix what the rule reports and delete the entry, or — where some sites really are legitimate — leave the rule on and suppress it at those sites with their reasons, so it keeps protecting the rest of the tree. If the rule is genuinely unwanted here, say why — on this line after the entry, or in the comment run directly above it: a comment that only repeats the rule's own title is read as no explanation at all and leaves this row in place.
Boundary-crossing change coupling: PetLoader.cs ↔ MainWindow.xaml.cs VPet-Simulator.Core/Handle/PetLoader.cs:1— `VPet-Simulator.Core/Handle/PetLoader.cs` (context VPet-Simulator) and `VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.xaml.cs` (context VPet-Simulator.Windows) sit in DIFFERENT parts of the tree yet change together 62% of the time (8 of the 13 commits that touched whichever of the two files changed less often, counting a file under its earlier names as well — a repo-wide or module-wide sweep is evidence about the sweep rather than about any pair inside it and is left out of BOTH sides of this ratio, while a dependency bump, a formatter/rename sweep, or a commit whose edit to one of the two files was a tool directive such as //go:generate or whitespace only is left out of the shared count ONLY, so the two sides are not taken over identical commit sets) — the bounded-context boundary may be in the wrong place, or one context is leaking into the other. This is the behavioural boundary violation a static scan can't see. You can check this without leaving the row: of the 8 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `76274bbb` 为动画加载添加进度显示; `a1e894aa` 动画内存优化; `3ecc9aa5` 自动更替宠物名字 — run `git show` on any of them.
No automated tests — No automated tests — no test code was found in this repository. Untested code is the largest single risk to changing it safely. Start with the code you change most often: add a suite in a framework a runner can collect (xUnit, NUnit or MSTest), and run it in CI so the gap cannot reopen.
X2 · Cancellation propagation· Async method without CancellationToken · ×26
Async method without CancellationToken: Load_2_WaitGraph VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/Main.xaml.cs:80— No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
Async method without CancellationToken: Load_2_WaitGraph VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/Main.xaml.cs:109— No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
Async method without CancellationToken: startup VPet-Simulator.Core/Graph/APNGAnimation.cs:103— No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
Async method without CancellationToken: startup VPet-Simulator.Core/Graph/PNGAnimation.cs:118— No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
Async method without CancellationToken: ToNoneStream VPet-Simulator.Core/Handle/SayInfo.cs:183— No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
Async method without CancellationToken: GetSayText VPet-Simulator.Core/Handle/SayInfo.cs:201— No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
Async method without CancellationToken: GameLoad VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs:1624— No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
Async method without CancellationToken: GetVPetRoom VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.xaml.cs:927— No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
Async method without CancellationToken: GenerateAuthKey VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow_Function.cs:837— No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
Async method without CancellationToken: GameLoad VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/MPFriends.xaml.cs:332— No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
Async method without CancellationToken: JoinLobby VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/winMutiPlayer.xaml.cs:52— No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
Async method without CancellationToken: CreateLobby VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/winMutiPlayer.xaml.cs:76— No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
Async method without CancellationToken: GenRank VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winCharacterPanel.xaml.cs:479— No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
Async method without CancellationToken: MainTab_SelectionChanged VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winCharacterPanel.xaml.cs:966— No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
Async method without CancellationToken: Output_WorkShopSession VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winConsole.xaml.cs:247— No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
Async method without CancellationToken: RefreshWorkshopListFromSteamAsync VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winGameSetting.xaml.cs:637— No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
Async method without CancellationToken: ShowModList VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winGameSetting.xaml.cs:665— No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
Async method without CancellationToken: ShowWorkshopVerification VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winGameSetting.xaml.cs:876— No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
Async method without CancellationToken: GetWorkshopVerificationErrorAsync VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winGameSetting.xaml.cs:894— No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
Async method without CancellationToken: VerifyWorkshopModAsync VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winGameSetting.xaml.cs:923— No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
Async method without CancellationToken: ButtonEnable_MouseDown VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winGameSetting.xaml.cs:1024— No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
Async method without CancellationToken: DeleteWorkshopDraftAsync VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winGameSetting.xaml.cs:1097— No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
Async method without CancellationToken: ButtonPublish_MouseDown VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winGameSetting.xaml.cs:1115— No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
Async method without CancellationToken: ButtonAllow_Click VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winGameSetting.xaml.cs:1286— No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
Async method without CancellationToken: BC_Click VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winGameSetting.xaml.cs:2277— No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
Swallowed exception (empty catch) VPet-Simulator.Core/Graph/Picture.cs:64— An empty catch block silently discards the error — failures vanish with no log and no rethrow. Log it, handle it, or don't catch it.
Swallowed exception (empty catch) VPet-Simulator.Windows/Function/MWController.cs:117— An empty catch block silently discards the error — failures vanish with no log and no rethrow. Log it, handle it, or don't catch it.
Swallowed exception (empty catch) VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs:2357— An empty catch block silently discards the error — failures vanish with no log and no rethrow. Log it, handle it, or don't catch it.
Swallowed exception (empty catch) VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.xaml.cs:529— An empty catch block silently discards the error — failures vanish with no log and no rethrow. Log it, handle it, or don't catch it.
Swallowed exception (empty catch) VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.xaml.cs:757— An empty catch block silently discards the error — failures vanish with no log and no rethrow. Log it, handle it, or don't catch it.
Swallowed exception (empty catch) VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.xaml.cs:763— An empty catch block silently discards the error — failures vanish with no log and no rethrow. Log it, handle it, or don't catch it.
Swallowed exception (empty catch) VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.xaml.cs:817— An empty catch block silently discards the error — failures vanish with no log and no rethrow. Log it, handle it, or don't catch it.
Swallowed exception (empty catch) VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/MPController.cs:121— An empty catch block silently discards the error — failures vanish with no log and no rethrow. Log it, handle it, or don't catch it.
Swallowed exception (empty catch) VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/winMutiPlayer.xaml.cs:455— An empty catch block silently discards the error — failures vanish with no log and no rethrow. Log it, handle it, or don't catch it.
Swallowed exception (empty catch) VPet-Simulator.Windows/PetHelper.xaml.cs:65— An empty catch block silently discards the error — failures vanish with no log and no rethrow. Log it, handle it, or don't catch it.
Swallowed exception (empty catch) VPet-Simulator.Windows/PetHelper.xaml.cs:70— An empty catch block silently discards the error — failures vanish with no log and no rethrow. Log it, handle it, or don't catch it.
Swallowed exception (empty catch) VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winCharacterPanel.xaml.cs:321— An empty catch block silently discards the error — failures vanish with no log and no rethrow. Log it, handle it, or don't catch it.
Swallowed exception (empty catch) VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winGameSetting.xaml.cs:494— An empty catch block silently discards the error — failures vanish with no log and no rethrow. Log it, handle it, or don't catch it.
Swallowed exception (empty catch) VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winGameSetting.xaml.cs:551— An empty catch block silently discards the error — failures vanish with no log and no rethrow. Log it, handle it, or don't catch it.
Swallowed exception (empty catch) VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winGameSetting.xaml.cs:679— An empty catch block silently discards the error — failures vanish with no log and no rethrow. Log it, handle it, or don't catch it.
Swallowed exception (empty catch) VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winGameSetting.xaml.cs:868— An empty catch block silently discards the error — failures vanish with no log and no rethrow. Log it, handle it, or don't catch it.
Swallowed exception (empty catch) VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winReport.xaml.cs:185— An empty catch block silently discards the error — failures vanish with no log and no rethrow. Log it, handle it, or don't catch it.
Swallowed exception (empty catch) VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winSaveManager.xaml.cs:177— An empty catch block silently discards the error — failures vanish with no log and no rethrow. Log it, handle it, or don't catch it.
Swallowed exception (empty catch) VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winSaveManager.xaml.cs:229— An empty catch block silently discards the error — failures vanish with no log and no rethrow. Log it, handle it, or don't catch it.
Swallowed exception (empty catch) VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winSaveManager.xaml.cs:251— An empty catch block silently discards the error — failures vanish with no log and no rethrow. Log it, handle it, or don't catch it.
Swallowed exception (empty catch) VPet.Solution/Models/ModLoader.cs:124— An empty catch block silently discards the error — failures vanish with no log and no rethrow. Log it, handle it, or don't catch it.
Dead code: StrGetString VPet-Simulator.Core/Graph/GraphCore.cs:294— Method StrGetString — Roslyn's SymbolFinder walked every project the solution loads, including VPet-Simulator.Core, and found no reference to it. That walk cannot see three kinds of caller, so check them before removing it: code outside the solution file (a solution is a curated list, not the repository — a sibling test tree with its own .sln is invisible), a call resolved by reflection or dependency injection from the symbol's name, and any project the workspace could not load. This is 'no caller found by this walk', not a verdict that the symbol is unused.
Dead code: UpdateAllText VPet-Simulator.Core/Handle/SayInfo.cs:153— Method UpdateAllText — Roslyn's SymbolFinder walked every project the solution loads, including VPet-Simulator.Core, and found no reference to it. That walk cannot see three kinds of caller, so check them before removing it: code outside the solution file (a solution is a curated list, not the repository — a sibling test tree with its own .sln is invisible), a call resolved by reflection or dependency injection from the symbol's name, and any project the workspace could not load. This is 'no caller found by this walk', not a verdict that the symbol is unused.
Dead code: PassModRemove VPet-Simulator.Windows/Function/CoreMOD.cs:513— Method PassModRemove — Roslyn's SymbolFinder walked every project the solution loads, including VPet-Simulator.Windows, and found no reference to it. That walk cannot see three kinds of caller, so check them before removing it: code outside the solution file (a solution is a curated list, not the repository — a sibling test tree with its own .sln is invisible), a call resolved by reflection or dependency injection from the symbol's name, and any project the workspace could not load. This is 'no caller found by this walk', not a verdict that the symbol is unused.
Dead code: EvaluationSummary VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winCharacterPanel.xaml.cs:34— NamedType EvaluationSummary — Roslyn's SymbolFinder walked every project the solution loads, including VPet-Simulator.Windows, and found no reference to it. That walk cannot see three kinds of caller, so check them before removing it: code outside the solution file (a solution is a curated list, not the repository — a sibling test tree with its own .sln is invisible), a call resolved by reflection or dependency injection from the symbol's name, and any project the workspace could not load. This is 'no caller found by this walk', not a verdict that the symbol is unused.
Dead code: Timer_Elapsed VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winReport.xaml.cs:47— Method Timer_Elapsed — Roslyn's SymbolFinder walked every project the solution loads, including VPet-Simulator.Windows, and found no reference to it. That walk cannot see three kinds of caller, so check them before removing it: code outside the solution file (a solution is a curated list, not the repository — a sibling test tree with its own .sln is invisible), a call resolved by reflection or dependency injection from the symbol's name, and any project the workspace could not load. This is 'no caller found by this walk', not a verdict that the symbol is unused.
Dead code: MainGrid_SizeChanged VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winReport.xaml.cs:162— Method MainGrid_SizeChanged — Roslyn's SymbolFinder walked every project the solution loads, including VPet-Simulator.Windows, and found no reference to it. That walk cannot see three kinds of caller, so check them before removing it: code outside the solution file (a solution is a curated list, not the repository — a sibling test tree with its own .sln is invisible), a call resolved by reflection or dependency injection from the symbol's name, and any project the workspace could not load. This is 'no caller found by this walk', not a verdict that the symbol is unused.
Dead code: ShowInputBox VPet-Simulator.Windows.Interface/IMainWindow.cs:236— Method ShowInputBox — Roslyn's SymbolFinder walked every project the solution loads, including VPet-Simulator.Windows.Interface, and found no reference to it. That walk cannot see three kinds of caller, so check them before removing it: code outside the solution file (a solution is a curated list, not the repository — a sibling test tree with its own .sln is invisible), a call resolved by reflection or dependency injection from the symbol's name, and any project the workspace could not load. This is 'no caller found by this walk', not a verdict that the symbol is unused.
Dead code: SetVoiceVolume VPet-Simulator.Windows.Interface/ISetting.cs:32— Method SetVoiceVolume — Roslyn's SymbolFinder walked every project the solution loads, including VPet-Simulator.Windows.Interface, and found no reference to it. That walk cannot see three kinds of caller, so check them before removing it: code outside the solution file (a solution is a curated list, not the repository — a sibling test tree with its own .sln is invisible), a call resolved by reflection or dependency injection from the symbol's name, and any project the workspace could not load. This is 'no caller found by this walk', not a verdict that the symbol is unused.
Dead code: SetTopMost VPet-Simulator.Windows.Interface/ISetting.cs:59— Method SetTopMost — Roslyn's SymbolFinder walked every project the solution loads, including VPet-Simulator.Windows.Interface, and found no reference to it. That walk cannot see three kinds of caller, so check them before removing it: code outside the solution file (a solution is a curated list, not the repository — a sibling test tree with its own .sln is invisible), a call resolved by reflection or dependency injection from the symbol's name, and any project the workspace could not load. This is 'no caller found by this walk', not a verdict that the symbol is unused.
Dead code: SetEnableFunction VPet-Simulator.Windows.Interface/ISetting.cs:129— Method SetEnableFunction — Roslyn's SymbolFinder walked every project the solution loads, including VPet-Simulator.Windows.Interface, and found no reference to it. That walk cannot see three kinds of caller, so check them before removing it: code outside the solution file (a solution is a curated list, not the repository — a sibling test tree with its own .sln is invisible), a call resolved by reflection or dependency injection from the symbol's name, and any project the workspace could not load. This is 'no caller found by this walk', not a verdict that the symbol is unused.
Dead code: SelftoIMPFriend VPet-Simulator.Windows.Interface/MutiPlayer/IMPWindows.cs:23— Method SelftoIMPFriend — Roslyn's SymbolFinder walked every project the solution loads, including VPet-Simulator.Windows.Interface, and found no reference to it. That walk cannot see three kinds of caller, so check them before removing it: code outside the solution file (a solution is a curated list, not the repository — a sibling test tree with its own .sln is invisible), a call resolved by reflection or dependency injection from the symbol's name, and any project the workspace could not load. This is 'no caller found by this walk', not a verdict that the symbol is unused.
Dead code: CloseInstance VPet.Solution/ViewModelInitialize.cs:138— Method CloseInstance — Roslyn's SymbolFinder walked every project the solution loads, including VPet.Solution, and found no reference to it. That walk cannot see three kinds of caller, so check them before removing it: code outside the solution file (a solution is a curated list, not the repository — a sibling test tree with its own .sln is invisible), a call resolved by reflection or dependency injection from the symbol's name, and any project the workspace could not load. This is 'no caller found by this walk', not a verdict that the symbol is unused.
Dead code: LoadImageToMemoryStream VPet.Solution/ViewModelInitialize.cs:286— Method LoadImageToMemoryStream — Roslyn's SymbolFinder walked every project the solution loads, including VPet.Solution, and found no reference to it. That walk cannot see three kinds of caller, so check them before removing it: code outside the solution file (a solution is a curated list, not the repository — a sibling test tree with its own .sln is invisible), a call resolved by reflection or dependency injection from the symbol's name, and any project the workspace could not load. This is 'no caller found by this walk', not a verdict that the symbol is unused.
Dead code: LoadImageToMemoryStream VPet.Solution/ViewModelInitialize.cs:308— Method LoadImageToMemoryStream — Roslyn's SymbolFinder walked every project the solution loads, including VPet.Solution, and found no reference to it. That walk cannot see three kinds of caller, so check them before removing it: code outside the solution file (a solution is a curated list, not the repository — a sibling test tree with its own .sln is invisible), a call resolved by reflection or dependency injection from the symbol's name, and any project the workspace could not load. This is 'no caller found by this walk', not a verdict that the symbol is unused.
Dead code: SetShowChildByIndex VPet.Solution/ViewModelInitialize.cs:367— Method SetShowChildByIndex — Roslyn's SymbolFinder walked every project the solution loads, including VPet.Solution, and found no reference to it. That walk cannot see three kinds of caller, so check them before removing it: code outside the solution file (a solution is a curated list, not the repository — a sibling test tree with its own .sln is invisible), a call resolved by reflection or dependency injection from the symbol's name, and any project the workspace could not load. This is 'no caller found by this walk', not a verdict that the symbol is unused.
async void method: startup VPet-Simulator.Core/Graph/PNGAnimation.cs:118— `async void` can't be awaited and its exceptions crash the process instead of propagating. Return `Task` — or, where the delegate contract requires void (timer/event/callback registrations), make this a thin void shim that awaits a Task-returning inner method inside try/catch so exceptions are contained.
async void method: JoinLobby VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/winMutiPlayer.xaml.cs:52— `async void` can't be awaited and its exceptions crash the process instead of propagating. Return `Task` — or, where the delegate contract requires void (timer/event/callback registrations), make this a thin void shim that awaits a Task-returning inner method inside try/catch so exceptions are contained.
async void method: CreateLobby VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/winMutiPlayer.xaml.cs:76— `async void` can't be awaited and its exceptions crash the process instead of propagating. Return `Task` — or, where the delegate contract requires void (timer/event/callback registrations), make this a thin void shim that awaits a Task-returning inner method inside try/catch so exceptions are contained.
async void method: GenRank VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winCharacterPanel.xaml.cs:479— `async void` can't be awaited and its exceptions crash the process instead of propagating. Return `Task` — or, where the delegate contract requires void (timer/event/callback registrations), make this a thin void shim that awaits a Task-returning inner method inside try/catch so exceptions are contained.
async void method: MainTab_SelectionChanged VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winCharacterPanel.xaml.cs:966— `async void` can't be awaited and its exceptions crash the process instead of propagating. Return `Task` — or, where the delegate contract requires void (timer/event/callback registrations), make this a thin void shim that awaits a Task-returning inner method inside try/catch so exceptions are contained.
async void method: Output_WorkShopSession VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winConsole.xaml.cs:247— `async void` can't be awaited and its exceptions crash the process instead of propagating. Return `Task` — or, where the delegate contract requires void (timer/event/callback registrations), make this a thin void shim that awaits a Task-returning inner method inside try/catch so exceptions are contained.
async void method: ShowModList VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winGameSetting.xaml.cs:665— `async void` can't be awaited and its exceptions crash the process instead of propagating. Return `Task` — or, where the delegate contract requires void (timer/event/callback registrations), make this a thin void shim that awaits a Task-returning inner method inside try/catch so exceptions are contained.
async void method: ShowWorkshopVerification VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winGameSetting.xaml.cs:876— `async void` can't be awaited and its exceptions crash the process instead of propagating. Return `Task` — or, where the delegate contract requires void (timer/event/callback registrations), make this a thin void shim that awaits a Task-returning inner method inside try/catch so exceptions are contained.
async void method: ButtonEnable_MouseDown VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winGameSetting.xaml.cs:1024— `async void` can't be awaited and its exceptions crash the process instead of propagating. Return `Task` — or, where the delegate contract requires void (timer/event/callback registrations), make this a thin void shim that awaits a Task-returning inner method inside try/catch so exceptions are contained.
async void method: ButtonPublish_MouseDown VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winGameSetting.xaml.cs:1115— `async void` can't be awaited and its exceptions crash the process instead of propagating. Return `Task` — or, where the delegate contract requires void (timer/event/callback registrations), make this a thin void shim that awaits a Task-returning inner method inside try/catch so exceptions are contained.
async void method: ButtonAllow_Click VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winGameSetting.xaml.cs:1286— `async void` can't be awaited and its exceptions crash the process instead of propagating. Return `Task` — or, where the delegate contract requires void (timer/event/callback registrations), make this a thin void shim that awaits a Task-returning inner method inside try/catch so exceptions are contained.
async void method: BC_Click VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winGameSetting.xaml.cs:2277— `async void` can't be awaited and its exceptions crash the process instead of propagating. Return `Task` — or, where the delegate contract requires void (timer/event/callback registrations), make this a thin void shim that awaits a Task-returning inner method inside try/catch so exceptions are contained.
async void method: VV_Click VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winGameSetting.xaml.cs:2283— `async void` can't be awaited and its exceptions crash the process instead of propagating. Return `Task` — or, where the delegate contract requires void (timer/event/callback registrations), make this a thin void shim that awaits a Task-returning inner method inside try/catch so exceptions are contained.
MethodTooLong: MainWindow.GameLoad VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs:1624— MethodTooLong — GameLoad runs 576 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 476 over it, 5.76× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
MethodTooLong: MainWindow.MainWindow_Event_TakeItem VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow_Function.cs:83— MethodTooLong — MainWindow_Event_TakeItem runs 540 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 440 over it, 5.40× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
MethodTooLong: winCharacterPanel.GenRank VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winCharacterPanel.xaml.cs:479— MethodTooLong — GenRank runs 328 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 228 over it, 3.28× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
MethodTooLong: CoreMOD.CoreMOD(…) VPet-Simulator.Windows/Function/CoreMOD.cs:99— MethodTooLong — CoreMOD(…) runs 220 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 120 over it, 2.20× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
MethodTooLong: winGameSetting.winGameSetting(…) VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winGameSetting.xaml.cs:41— MethodTooLong — winGameSetting(…) runs 158 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 58 over it, 1.58× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
MethodTooLong: Main.FunctionSpend VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/MainLogic.cs:255— MethodTooLong — FunctionSpend runs 133 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 33 over it, 1.33× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
MethodTooLong: EvaluationSummary.EvaluationSummary(…) VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winCharacterPanel.xaml.cs:36— MethodTooLong — EvaluationSummary(…) runs 119 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 19 over it, 1.19× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
MethodTooLong: MainWindow.lowStrength VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs:559— MethodTooLong — lowStrength runs 117 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 17 over it, 1.17× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
MethodTooLong: DIYViewer.TextBox_PreviewKeyDown VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/DIYViewer.xaml.cs:30— MethodTooLong — TextBox_PreviewKeyDown runs 116 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 16 over it, 1.16× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
MethodTooLong: winGameSetting.ButtonPublish_MouseDown VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winGameSetting.xaml.cs:1115— MethodTooLong — ButtonPublish_MouseDown runs 115 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 15 over it, 1.15× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
MethodTooLong: winGameSetting.ShowMod VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winGameSetting.xaml.cs:698— MethodTooLong — ShowMod runs 104 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 4 over it, 1.04× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
Hotspot: VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs:1624— VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs changed 26 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 121 in MainWindow.GameLoad at line 1624. Frequent change and high complexity in one file compound: schedule the next change to it to include carving out the part being edited, with the area under test before it moves. Counted over 2026-07-24..2026-10-22, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-07-24 21:25:22 +08:00' --until='2026-10-22 21:25:22 +08:00' --full-history --no-merges -- VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Hotspot: VPet-Simulator.Windows/Function/CoreMOD.cs VPet-Simulator.Windows/Function/CoreMOD.cs:99— VPet-Simulator.Windows/Function/CoreMOD.cs changed 7 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 80 in CoreMOD.CoreMOD.ctor at line 99. Frequent change and high complexity in one file compound: schedule the next change to it to include carving out the part being edited, with the area under test before it moves. Counted over 2026-07-24..2026-10-22, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-07-24 21:25:22 +08:00' --until='2026-10-22 21:25:22 +08:00' --full-history --no-merges -- VPet-Simulator.Windows/Function/CoreMOD.cs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Hotspot: VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winGameSetting.xaml.cs VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winGameSetting.xaml.cs:698— VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winGameSetting.xaml.cs changed 13 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 29 in winGameSetting.ShowMod at line 698. Frequent change and high complexity in one file compound: schedule the next change to it to include carving out the part being edited, with the area under test before it moves. Counted over 2026-07-24..2026-10-22, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-07-24 21:25:22 +08:00' --until='2026-10-22 21:25:22 +08:00' --full-history --no-merges -- VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winGameSetting.xaml.cs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Hotspot: VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/MainLogic.cs VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/MainLogic.cs:255— VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/MainLogic.cs changed 5 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 38 in Main.FunctionSpend at line 255. Frequent change and high complexity in one file compound: schedule the next change to it to include carving out the part being edited, with the area under test before it moves. Counted over 2026-07-24..2026-10-22, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-07-24 21:25:22 +08:00' --until='2026-10-22 21:25:22 +08:00' --full-history --no-merges -- VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/MainLogic.cs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Hotspot: VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/BuffViewer.xaml.cs VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/BuffViewer.xaml.cs:245— VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/BuffViewer.xaml.cs changed 3 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 39 in BuffViewer.Refresh at line 245. Frequent change and high complexity in one file compound: schedule the next change to it to include carving out the part being edited, with the area under test before it moves. Counted over 2026-07-24..2026-10-22, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-07-24 21:25:22 +08:00' --until='2026-10-22 21:25:22 +08:00' --full-history --no-merges -- VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/BuffViewer.xaml.cs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Hotspot: VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winBetterBuy.xaml.cs VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winBetterBuy.xaml.cs:91— VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winBetterBuy.xaml.cs changed 4 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 23 in winBetterBuy.OrderItemSource at line 91. Frequent change and high complexity in one file compound: schedule the next change to it to include carving out the part being edited, with the area under test before it moves. Counted over 2026-07-24..2026-10-22, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-07-24 21:25:22 +08:00' --until='2026-10-22 21:25:22 +08:00' --full-history --no-merges -- VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winBetterBuy.xaml.cs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Hotspot: VPet.Solution/Models/ModLoader.cs VPet.Solution/Models/ModLoader.cs:87— VPet.Solution/Models/ModLoader.cs changed 4 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 23 in ModLoader.ModLoader.ctor at line 87. Frequent change and high complexity in one file compound: schedule the next change to it to include carving out the part being edited, with the area under test before it moves. Counted over 2026-07-24..2026-10-22, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-07-24 21:25:22 +08:00' --until='2026-10-22 21:25:22 +08:00' --full-history --no-merges -- VPet.Solution/Models/ModLoader.cs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Hotspot: VPet-Simulator.Windows.Interface/Mod/Photo.cs VPet-Simulator.Windows.Interface/Mod/Photo.cs:218— VPet-Simulator.Windows.Interface/Mod/Photo.cs changed 5 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 16 in UnlockCondition.Check at line 218. Frequent change and high complexity in one file compound: schedule the next change to it to include carving out the part being edited, with the area under test before it moves. Counted over 2026-07-24..2026-10-22, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-07-24 21:25:22 +08:00' --until='2026-10-22 21:25:22 +08:00' --full-history --no-merges -- VPet-Simulator.Windows.Interface/Mod/Photo.cs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Hotspot: VPet-Simulator.Core/Graph/APNGAnimation.cs VPet-Simulator.Core/Graph/APNGAnimation.cs:243— VPet-Simulator.Core/Graph/APNGAnimation.cs changed 2 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 15 in APNGAnimation.ParseApng at line 243. Frequent change and high complexity in one file compound: schedule the next change to it to include carving out the part being edited, with the area under test before it moves. Counted over 2026-07-24..2026-10-22, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-07-24 21:25:22 +08:00' --until='2026-10-22 21:25:22 +08:00' --full-history --no-merges -- VPet-Simulator.Core/Graph/APNGAnimation.cs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Sync-over-async blocking — 8 blocking call(s) on async work (.Wait()/.GetAwaiter().GetResult()) — these waste a thread and can deadlock wherever a synchronization context is in play (a UI thread, or a caller that has one).
Sync-over-async blocking VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/Main.xaml.cs:192— `.Wait()` blocks this thread until the async work completes — it wastes a thread-pool thread for as long as the work runs and can deadlock wherever a synchronization context is in play (a UI thread, or a caller that has one).
Sync-over-async blocking VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/Main.xaml.cs:202— `.Wait()` blocks this thread until the async work completes — it wastes a thread-pool thread for as long as the work runs and can deadlock wherever a synchronization context is in play (a UI thread, or a caller that has one).
Sync-over-async blocking VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/Main.xaml.cs:238— `.Wait()` blocks this thread until the async work completes — it wastes a thread-pool thread for as long as the work runs and can deadlock wherever a synchronization context is in play (a UI thread, or a caller that has one).
Sync-over-async blocking VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/Main.xaml.cs:417— `.Wait()` blocks this thread until the async work completes — it wastes a thread-pool thread for as long as the work runs and can deadlock wherever a synchronization context is in play (a UI thread, or a caller that has one).
Sync-over-async blocking VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs:1733— `.Wait()` blocks this thread until the async work completes — it wastes a thread-pool thread for as long as the work runs and can deadlock wherever a synchronization context is in play (a UI thread, or a caller that has one).
Sync-over-async blocking VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.xaml.cs:210— `.Wait()` blocks this thread until the async work completes — it wastes a thread-pool thread for as long as the work runs and can deadlock wherever a synchronization context is in play (a UI thread, or a caller that has one).
Sync-over-async blocking VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/MPFriends.xaml.cs:301— `avatarTask.Wait()` blocks this thread until the async work completes — it wastes a thread-pool thread for as long as the work runs and can deadlock wherever a synchronization context is in play (a UI thread, or a caller that has one).
Sync-over-async blocking VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/winMutiPlayer.xaml.cs:645— `avatarTask.Wait()` blocks this thread until the async work completes — it wastes a thread-pool thread for as long as the work runs and can deadlock wherever a synchronization context is in play (a UI thread, or a caller that has one).
TodoComment VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/Main.xaml.cs:309— //, TimeSpan timediff = TimeSpan.Zero) TODO — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment VPet-Simulator.Windows.Interface/MainPlugin.cs:28— ///// <summary>//TODO — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs:899— //TODO: 使用 — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow_Function.cs:180— //TODO: 无对应购买记录时的展示文案 — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment VPet.Solution/Views/SettingEditor/SystemSettingView.xaml:71— <!-- TODO: SystemSettingModel数据不全--> — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment VPet.Solution/Views/SettingEditor/InteractiveSettingView.xaml:93— <!--TODO: 这怎么不更新--> — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment VPet.Solution/Views/SettingEditor/InteractiveSettingView.xaml:216— <!-- TODO: 移动范围设置 --> — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment VPet.Solution/Views/SettingEditor/GraphicsSettingView.xaml:307— <!-- TODO: 翻译暂未实现 --> — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs:1760— VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs:1760-1764 | VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs:1771-1775 — 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 `VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs:1760` 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 (5 lines × 2) VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/winMPBetterBuy.xaml.cs:147— VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/winMPBetterBuy.xaml.cs:147-151 | VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winGallery.xaml.cs:163-167 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/winMPBetterBuy.xaml.cs:145` calls `Invoke` and `VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winGallery.xaml.cs:161` does not — after which the two agree again for 2 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) VPet-Simulator.Windows/Function/Setting.cs:372— VPet-Simulator.Windows/Function/Setting.cs:372-376 | VPet.Solution/Models/SettingEditor/Setting.cs:392-396 — before extracting anything, compare `VPet-Simulator.Windows/Function/Setting.cs` and `VPet.Solution/Models/SettingEditor/Setting.cs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 7 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 54 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Each matched range is the entire body of the declaration above it, so the region is already a complete unit: move that whole declaration to the shared location and have each site call it, rather than lifting the lines out of their bodies. Any `return` inside it is the body's own exit and keeps its meaning in the moved unit.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) VPet-Simulator.Windows/Function/Setting.cs:391— VPet-Simulator.Windows/Function/Setting.cs:391-395 | VPet.Solution/Models/SettingEditor/Setting.cs:412-416 — before extracting anything, compare `VPet-Simulator.Windows/Function/Setting.cs` and `VPet.Solution/Models/SettingEditor/Setting.cs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 7 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 54 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Each matched range is the entire body of the declaration above it, so the region is already a complete unit: move that whole declaration to the shared location and have each site call it, rather than lifting the lines out of their bodies. Any `return` inside it is the body's own exit and keeps its meaning in the moved unit.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) VPet-Simulator.Windows/Function/Setting.cs:378— VPet-Simulator.Windows/Function/Setting.cs:378-382 | VPet.Solution/Models/SettingEditor/Setting.cs:398-402 — before extracting anything, compare `VPet-Simulator.Windows/Function/Setting.cs` and `VPet.Solution/Models/SettingEditor/Setting.cs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 7 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 54 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) VPet-Simulator.Windows/Function/Setting.cs:397— VPet-Simulator.Windows/Function/Setting.cs:397-401 | VPet.Solution/Models/SettingEditor/Setting.cs:418-422 — before extracting anything, compare `VPet-Simulator.Windows/Function/Setting.cs` and `VPet.Solution/Models/SettingEditor/Setting.cs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 7 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 54 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs:645— VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs:645-649 | VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs:702-706 — 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 `VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs:645` 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.
Blocking `Thread.Sleep` inside an `async` method VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs:2204— `Thread.Sleep` parks the thread for the whole delay: no other work runs on it, and under load the pool must grow to make up for it. `await Task.Delay(…)` suspends only this method.
Blocking `Thread.Sleep` inside an `async` method VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.xaml.cs:197— `Thread.Sleep` parks the thread for the whole delay: no other work runs on it, and under load the pool must grow to make up for it. `await Task.Delay(…)` suspends only this method.
Blocking `Thread.Sleep` inside an `async` method VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/MPFriends.xaml.cs:143— `Thread.Sleep` parks the thread for the whole delay: no other work runs on it, and under load the pool must grow to make up for it. `await Task.Delay(…)` suspends only this method.
Blocking `Thread.Sleep` inside an `async` method VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/MPFriends.xaml.cs:150— `Thread.Sleep` parks the thread for the whole delay: no other work runs on it, and under load the pool must grow to make up for it. `await Task.Delay(…)` suspends only this method.
Blocking `Thread.Sleep` inside an `async` method VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/MPFriends.xaml.cs:158— `Thread.Sleep` parks the thread for the whole delay: no other work runs on it, and under load the pool must grow to make up for it. `await Task.Delay(…)` suspends only this method.
Blocking `Thread.Sleep` inside an `async` method VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/MPFriends.xaml.cs:169— `Thread.Sleep` parks the thread for the whole delay: no other work runs on it, and under load the pool must grow to make up for it. `await Task.Delay(…)` suspends only this method.
Blocking `Thread.Sleep` inside an `async` method VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/winMutiPlayer.xaml.cs:771— `Thread.Sleep` parks the thread for the whole delay: no other work runs on it, and under load the pool must grow to make up for it. `await Task.Delay(…)` suspends only this method.
DeadPreprocessorBranch VPet-Simulator.Windows.Interface/Resources.cs:141— #if DEBUGs — no definition of that symbol was found anywhere this analysis looks: not in a <DefineConstants> in any project file, props or targets under any condition, not on a build script's command line, not in a #define, and not in a project-template manifest; nor is it one the compiler or SDK defines itself. On that evidence the condition is decided the same way in every configuration this repository can build, and the code on the dead side of it never compiles — including the part a reader will assume is what ships. Either define the symbol in the configuration that is supposed to have it, or delete the branch and keep the behaviour you are actually shipping. If some other mechanism binds it, that mechanism is outside the list above and this row is a gap in what we read, not a fact about your code.
DeadPreprocessorBranch VPet-Simulator.Windows/Function/Win32.cs:335— #else — no definition of that symbol was found anywhere this analysis looks: not in a <DefineConstants> in any project file, props or targets under any condition, not on a build script's command line, not in a #define, and not in a project-template manifest; nor is it one the compiler or SDK defines itself. On that evidence the condition is decided the same way in every configuration this repository can build, and the code on the dead side of it never compiles — including the part a reader will assume is what ships. Either define the symbol in the configuration that is supposed to have it, or delete the branch and keep the behaviour you are actually shipping. If some other mechanism binds it, that mechanism is outside the list above and this row is a gap in what we read, not a fact about your code.
DeadPreprocessorBranch VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs:2646— #if NewYear — no definition of that symbol was found anywhere this analysis looks: not in a <DefineConstants> in any project file, props or targets under any condition, not on a build script's command line, not in a #define, and not in a project-template manifest; nor is it one the compiler or SDK defines itself. On that evidence the condition is decided the same way in every configuration this repository can build, and the code on the dead side of it never compiles — including the part a reader will assume is what ships. Either define the symbol in the configuration that is supposed to have it, or delete the branch and keep the behaviour you are actually shipping. If some other mechanism binds it, that mechanism is outside the list above and this row is a gap in what we read, not a fact about your code.
DeadPreprocessorBranch VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs:2897— #if NewYear — no definition of that symbol was found anywhere this analysis looks: not in a <DefineConstants> in any project file, props or targets under any condition, not on a build script's command line, not in a #define, and not in a project-template manifest; nor is it one the compiler or SDK defines itself. On that evidence the condition is decided the same way in every configuration this repository can build, and the code on the dead side of it never compiles — including the part a reader will assume is what ships. Either define the symbol in the configuration that is supposed to have it, or delete the branch and keep the behaviour you are actually shipping. If some other mechanism binds it, that mechanism is outside the list above and this row is a gap in what we read, not a fact about your code.
DeadPreprocessorBranch VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.xaml.cs:93— #if DEMO — no definition of that symbol was found anywhere this analysis looks: not in a <DefineConstants> in any project file, props or targets under any condition, not on a build script's command line, not in a #define, and not in a project-template manifest; nor is it one the compiler or SDK defines itself. On that evidence the condition is decided the same way in every configuration this repository can build, and the code on the dead side of it never compiles — including the part a reader will assume is what ships. Either define the symbol in the configuration that is supposed to have it, or delete the branch and keep the behaviour you are actually shipping. If some other mechanism binds it, that mechanism is outside the list above and this row is a gap in what we read, not a fact about your code.
DeadPreprocessorBranch VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winGameSetting.xaml.cs:1141— #if DEMO — no definition of that symbol was found anywhere this analysis looks: not in a <DefineConstants> in any project file, props or targets under any condition, not on a build script's command line, not in a #define, and not in a project-template manifest; nor is it one the compiler or SDK defines itself. On that evidence the condition is decided the same way in every configuration this repository can build, and the code on the dead side of it never compiles — including the part a reader will assume is what ships. Either define the symbol in the configuration that is supposed to have it, or delete the branch and keep the behaviour you are actually shipping. If some other mechanism binds it, that mechanism is outside the list above and this row is a gap in what we read, not a fact about your code.
Sync-over-async (deadlock risk) VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/Main.xaml.cs:192— Blocking on a Task with `.Wait()`/`.GetAwaiter().GetResult()` can deadlock (and wastes a thread). Prefer awaiting it: make the caller `async` and `await` instead. Where a synchronous entry point must stay — a public sync API you cannot break, or a process entry point that must not return until the work finishes — the block belongs in ONE documented bridge and never inside code that is already async; and where it already is that bridge, give the wait a TIMEOUT so a hung task fails the call instead of hanging the process.
Sync-over-async (deadlock risk) VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/Main.xaml.cs:202— Blocking on a Task with `.Wait()`/`.GetAwaiter().GetResult()` can deadlock (and wastes a thread). Prefer awaiting it: make the caller `async` and `await` instead. Where a synchronous entry point must stay — a public sync API you cannot break, or a process entry point that must not return until the work finishes — the block belongs in ONE documented bridge and never inside code that is already async; and where it already is that bridge, give the wait a TIMEOUT so a hung task fails the call instead of hanging the process.
Sync-over-async (deadlock risk) VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/Main.xaml.cs:238— Blocking on a Task with `.Wait()`/`.GetAwaiter().GetResult()` can deadlock (and wastes a thread). Prefer awaiting it: make the caller `async` and `await` instead. Where a synchronous entry point must stay — a public sync API you cannot break, or a process entry point that must not return until the work finishes — the block belongs in ONE documented bridge and never inside code that is already async; and where it already is that bridge, give the wait a TIMEOUT so a hung task fails the call instead of hanging the process.
Sync-over-async (deadlock risk) VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs:1731— Blocking on a Task with `.Wait()`/`.GetAwaiter().GetResult()` can deadlock (and wastes a thread). Prefer awaiting it: make the caller `async` and `await` instead. Where a synchronous entry point must stay — a public sync API you cannot break, or a process entry point that must not return until the work finishes — the block belongs in ONE documented bridge and never inside code that is already async; and where it already is that bridge, give the wait a TIMEOUT so a hung task fails the call instead of hanging the process.
Sync-over-async (deadlock risk) VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/MPFriends.xaml.cs:301— Blocking on a Task with `.Wait()`/`.GetAwaiter().GetResult()` can deadlock (and wastes a thread). Prefer awaiting it: make the caller `async` and `await` instead. Where a synchronous entry point must stay — a public sync API you cannot break, or a process entry point that must not return until the work finishes — the block belongs in ONE documented bridge and never inside code that is already async; and where it already is that bridge, give the wait a TIMEOUT so a hung task fails the call instead of hanging the process.
Sync-over-async (deadlock risk) VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/winMutiPlayer.xaml.cs:645— Blocking on a Task with `.Wait()`/`.GetAwaiter().GetResult()` can deadlock (and wastes a thread). Prefer awaiting it: make the caller `async` and `await` instead. Where a synchronous entry point must stay — a public sync API you cannot break, or a process entry point that must not return until the work finishes — the block belongs in ONE documented bridge and never inside code that is already async; and where it already is that bridge, give the wait a TIMEOUT so a hung task fails the call instead of hanging the process.
FileTooLong: VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs— FileTooLong — 1692 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 1192 over it, 3.38× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.
FileTooLong: WinDesign/winGameSetting.xaml.cs VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winGameSetting.xaml.cs— FileTooLong — 1424 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 924 over it, 2.85× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.
FileTooLong: WinDesign/winCharacterPanel.xaml.cs VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winCharacterPanel.xaml.cs— FileTooLong — 764 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 264 over it, 1.53× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.
FileTooLong: VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow_Function.cs VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow_Function.cs— FileTooLong — 756 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 256 over it, 1.51× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.
FileTooLong: MutiPlayer/MPFriends.xaml.cs VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/MPFriends.xaml.cs— FileTooLong — 524 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 24 over it, 1.05× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.
Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winWorkMenu.xaml.cs:584— VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winWorkMenu.xaml.cs:584-593 | VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winWorkMenu.xaml.cs:606-615 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) VPet-Simulator.Windows/Function/Setting.cs:482— VPet-Simulator.Windows/Function/Setting.cs:482-491 | VPet.Solution/Models/SettingEditor/Setting.cs:509-518 — before extracting anything, compare `VPet-Simulator.Windows/Function/Setting.cs` and `VPet.Solution/Models/SettingEditor/Setting.cs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 7 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 54 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Each matched range is the entire body of the declaration above it, so the region is already a complete unit: move that whole declaration to the shared location and have each site call it, rather than lifting the lines out of their bodies. Any `return` inside it is the body's own exit and keeps its meaning in the moved unit.
Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winGameSetting.xaml.cs:1026— VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winGameSetting.xaml.cs:1026-1035 | VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winGameSetting.xaml.cs:1288-1297 — 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 `VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winGameSetting.xaml.cs:1026` 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. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it.
Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/Main.xaml.cs:286— VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/Main.xaml.cs:286-295 | VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/MPFriends.xaml.cs:373-382 — 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. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/Main.xaml.cs:286` 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 (10 lines × 2) VPet-Simulator.Core/Handle/GameSave.cs:174— VPet-Simulator.Core/Handle/GameSave.cs:174-183 | VPet-Simulator.Windows.Interface/GameSave_VPet.cs:267-276 — before extracting anything, compare `VPet-Simulator.Core/Handle/GameSave.cs` and `VPet-Simulator.Windows.Interface/GameSave_VPet.cs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 7 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 112 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Each matched range is the entire body of the declaration above it, so the region is already a complete unit: move that whole declaration to the shared location and have each site call it, rather than lifting the lines out of their bodies. Any `return` inside it is the body's own exit and keeps its meaning in the moved unit.
Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/MainDisplay.cs:142— VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/MainDisplay.cs:142-149 | VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/MainDisplay.cs:180-187 — 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 (8 lines × 2) VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/MainLogic.cs:92— VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/MainLogic.cs:92-99 | VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/MainLogic.cs:122-129 — 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 `VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/MainLogic.cs:92` 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 (8 lines × 2) VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs:320— VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs:320-327 | VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs:365-372 — 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 `VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs:320` 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 × 2) VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs:2371— VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs:2371-2378 | VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/MPFriends.xaml.cs:454-463 — 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. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs:2371` 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 × 2) VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/winMPBetterBuy.xaml.cs:282— VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/winMPBetterBuy.xaml.cs:282-289 | VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winBetterBuy.xaml.cs:328-335 — before extracting anything, compare `VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/winMPBetterBuy.xaml.cs` and `VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winBetterBuy.xaml.cs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 6 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 102 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Each matched range is the entire body of the declaration above it, so the region is already a complete unit: move that whole declaration to the shared location and have each site call it, rather than lifting the lines out of their bodies. Any `return` inside it is the body's own exit and keeps its meaning in the moved unit.
Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winCharacterPanel.xaml.cs:586— VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winCharacterPanel.xaml.cs:586-592 | VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winCharacterPanel.xaml.cs:794-800 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/winMPBetterBuy.xaml.cs:149— VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/winMPBetterBuy.xaml.cs:149-155 | VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winBetterBuy.xaml.cs:187-193 — before extracting anything, compare `VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/winMPBetterBuy.xaml.cs` and `VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winBetterBuy.xaml.cs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 6 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 102 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/winMPBetterBuy.xaml.cs:149` it runs out through the closing brace of the declaration holding it — the window is that declaration's tail, not a fragment that begins part-way through something, 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 × 2) VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/Main.xaml.cs:488— VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/Main.xaml.cs:488-494 | VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/MainDisplay.cs:364-370 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from both call sites, so a change lands once.
Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs:2947— VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs:2947-2953 | VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs:2980-2986 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winGameSetting.xaml.cs:840— VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winGameSetting.xaml.cs:840-847 | VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winGameSetting.xaml.cs:1772-1778 — 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 `VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winGameSetting.xaml.cs:840` 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.
ClassTooLong: winCharacterPanel VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winCharacterPanel.xaml.cs— ClassTooLong — 516 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), 19 methods. The bar is 400 significant lines; this is 116 over it, 1.29× the bar. To reduce it, group the members that share the same data into a smaller type of their own and delegate to it, so no single type carries every responsibility.
ClassTooLong: MPFriends VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/MPFriends.xaml.cs— ClassTooLong — 498 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), 29 methods. The bar is 400 significant lines; this is 98 over it, 1.25× the bar. To reduce it, group the members that share the same data into a smaller type of their own and delegate to it, so no single type carries every responsibility.
ClassTooLong: winWorkMenu VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winWorkMenu.xaml.cs— ClassTooLong — 477 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), 30 methods. The bar is 400 significant lines; this is 77 over it, 1.19× the bar. To reduce it, group the members that share the same data into a smaller type of their own and delegate to it, so no single type carries every responsibility.
ClassTooLong: APNGAnimation VPet-Simulator.Core/Graph/APNGAnimation.cs— ClassTooLong — 413 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), 25 methods. The bar is 400 significant lines; this is 13 over it, 1.03× the bar. To reduce it, group the members that share the same data into a smaller type of their own and delegate to it, so no single type carries every responsibility.
Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) VPet-Simulator.Core/Graph/APNGAnimation.cs:365— VPet-Simulator.Core/Graph/APNGAnimation.cs:365-373 | VPet-Simulator.Core/Graph/PNGAnimation.cs:428-436 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from both call sites, so a change lands once. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `VPet-Simulator.Core/Graph/APNGAnimation.cs:365` 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 (9 lines × 2) VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winGallery.xaml.cs:123— VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winGallery.xaml.cs:123-131 | VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winGallery.xaml.cs:142-150 — 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 `VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winGallery.xaml.cs:123` it runs out through the closing brace of the declaration holding it — the window is that declaration's tail, not a fragment that begins part-way through something, 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 (9 lines × 2) VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/winMPBetterBuy.xaml.cs:239— VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/winMPBetterBuy.xaml.cs:239-247 | VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winBetterBuy.xaml.cs:277-285 — before extracting anything, compare `VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/winMPBetterBuy.xaml.cs` and `VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winBetterBuy.xaml.cs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 6 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 102 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Each matched range is the entire body of the declaration above it, so the region is already a complete unit: move that whole declaration to the shared location and have each site call it, rather than lifting the lines out of their bodies. Any `return` inside it is the body's own exit and keeps its meaning in the moved unit.
Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/winMPBetterBuy.xaml.cs:293— VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/winMPBetterBuy.xaml.cs:293-301 | VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winBetterBuy.xaml.cs:339-347 — before extracting anything, compare `VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/winMPBetterBuy.xaml.cs` and `VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winBetterBuy.xaml.cs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 6 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 102 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Each matched range is the entire body of the declaration above it, so the region is already a complete unit: move that whole declaration to the shared location and have each site call it, rather than lifting the lines out of their bodies. Any `return` inside it is the body's own exit and keeps its meaning in the moved unit.
Unfinished stub — throws NotImplementedException VPet-Simulator.Windows/Design/Converters/BoolToIntConverter.cs:15— A shipped member still throws NotImplementedException — generated scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface.
Unfinished stub — throws NotImplementedException VPet-Simulator.Windows/Design/Converters/DiscountPriceConverter.cs:18— A shipped member still throws NotImplementedException — generated scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface.
Unfinished stub — throws NotImplementedException VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winReport.xaml.cs:47— A shipped member still throws NotImplementedException — generated scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface.
Unfinished stub — throws NotImplementedException VPet.Solution/ViewModelInitialize.cs:418— A shipped member still throws NotImplementedException — generated scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface.
Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) VPet-Simulator.Windows/Function/CoreMOD.cs:376— `catch` does nothing with the exception it caught — the body neither logs it, rethrows it, nor even names it, so the failure is discarded as completely as by an empty catch. Log it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, or let it propagate; if one specific failure genuinely cannot matter, catch exactly that exception type and say why in a comment on the catch.
Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.xaml.cs:104— `catch` does nothing with the exception it caught — the body neither logs it, rethrows it, nor even names it, so the failure is discarded as completely as by an empty catch. Log it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, or let it propagate; if one specific failure genuinely cannot matter, catch exactly that exception type and say why in a comment on the catch.
Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winSaveManager.xaml.cs:207— `catch` does nothing with the exception it caught — the body neither logs it, rethrows it, nor even names it, so the failure is discarded as completely as by an empty catch. Log it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, or let it propagate; if one specific failure genuinely cannot matter, catch exactly that exception type and say why in a comment on the catch.
Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) VPet-Simulator.Windows.Interface/GameSave_v2.cs:61— `catch` does nothing with the exception it caught — the body neither logs it, rethrows it, nor even names it, so the failure is discarded as completely as by an empty catch. Log it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, or let it propagate; if one specific failure genuinely cannot matter, catch exactly that exception type and say why in a comment on the catch.
TooManyMethods: winGameSetting VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winGameSetting.xaml.cs— TooManyMethods — 1284 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), 107 methods. The bar is 30 methods; this is 77 over it, 3.57× the bar. To reduce it, group the members that share the same data into a smaller type of their own and delegate to it, so no single type carries every responsibility.
TooManyMethods: MainWindow VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs— TooManyMethods — 2888 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), 82 methods, declared across 3 files: VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs (45), VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.xaml.cs (24), VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow_Function.cs (13). The bar is 30 methods; this is 52 over it, 2.73× the bar. To reduce it, group the members that share the same data into a smaller type of their own and delegate to it, so no single type carries every responsibility.
TooManyMethods: Main VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/MainDisplay.cs— TooManyMethods — 1040 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), 73 methods, declared across 3 files: Display/MainDisplay.cs (29), Display/Main.xaml.cs (25), Display/MainLogic.cs (19). The bar is 30 methods; this is 43 over it, 2.43× the bar. To reduce it, group the members that share the same data into a smaller type of their own and delegate to it, so no single type carries every responsibility.
Duplicated block (18 lines × 2) VPet-Simulator.Windows/Function/MWController.cs:124— VPet-Simulator.Windows/Function/MWController.cs:124-141 | VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/MPController.cs:129-146 — 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. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `VPet-Simulator.Windows/Function/MWController.cs:124` it runs out through the closing brace of the declaration holding it — the window is that declaration's tail, not a fragment that begins part-way through something, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
Duplicated block (18 lines × 2) VPet-Simulator.Windows/Function/Setting.cs:23— VPet-Simulator.Windows/Function/Setting.cs:23-40 | VPet.Solution/Models/SettingEditor/Setting.cs:22-39 — before extracting anything, compare `VPet-Simulator.Windows/Function/Setting.cs` and `VPet.Solution/Models/SettingEditor/Setting.cs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 7 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 54 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (18 lines × 2) VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winCharacterPanel.xaml.cs:443— VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winCharacterPanel.xaml.cs:443-460 | VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winCharacterPanel.xaml.cs:1063-1080 — 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 `VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winCharacterPanel.xaml.cs:443` it runs out through the closing brace of the declaration holding it — the window is that declaration's tail, not a fragment that begins part-way through something, 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 (17 lines × 2) VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.xaml.cs:576— VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.xaml.cs:576-592 | VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.xaml.cs:633-649 — 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 (17 lines × 2) VPet-Simulator.Core/Graph/APNGAnimation.cs:674— VPet-Simulator.Core/Graph/APNGAnimation.cs:674-690 | VPet-Simulator.Core/Graph/PNGAnimation.cs:495-511 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from both call sites, so a change lands once. Each matched range is the entire body of the declaration above it, so the region is already a complete unit: move that whole declaration to the shared location and have each site call it, rather than lifting the lines out of their bodies. Any `return` inside it is the body's own exit and keeps its meaning in the moved unit. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `VPet-Simulator.Core/Graph/PNGAnimation.cs:515` calls `Clear` and `VPet-Simulator.Core/Graph/APNGAnimation.cs:694` does not — after which the two agree again for 2 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
Duplicated block (17 lines × 2) VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/MPFriends.xaml.cs:601— VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/MPFriends.xaml.cs:601-617 | VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/MPFriends.xaml.cs:627-643 — 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 `VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/MPFriends.xaml.cs:601` 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 (15 lines × 2) VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.xaml.cs:557— VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.xaml.cs:557-571 | VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.xaml.cs:616-630 — 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 `VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.xaml.cs:557` 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 (15 lines × 2) VPet-Simulator.Core/Handle/GameSave.cs:11— VPet-Simulator.Core/Handle/GameSave.cs:11-25 | VPet-Simulator.Windows.Interface/GameSave_VPet.cs:15-31 — before extracting anything, compare `VPet-Simulator.Core/Handle/GameSave.cs` and `VPet-Simulator.Windows.Interface/GameSave_VPet.cs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 7 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 112 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `VPet-Simulator.Core/Handle/GameSave.cs:11` 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 (15 lines × 2) VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/MPFriends.xaml.cs:755— VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/MPFriends.xaml.cs:755-769 | VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/winMutiPlayer.xaml.cs:705-719 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from both call sites, so a change lands once. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/MPFriends.xaml.cs:755` it runs out through the closing brace of the declaration holding it — the window is that declaration's tail, not a fragment that begins part-way through something, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
Duplicated block (14 lines × 2) VPet-Simulator.Core/Handle/GameSave.cs:233— VPet-Simulator.Core/Handle/GameSave.cs:233-246 | VPet-Simulator.Windows.Interface/GameSave_VPet.cs:326-339 — before extracting anything, compare `VPet-Simulator.Core/Handle/GameSave.cs` and `VPet-Simulator.Windows.Interface/GameSave_VPet.cs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 7 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 112 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Each matched range is the entire body of the declaration above it, so the region is already a complete unit: move that whole declaration to the shared location and have each site call it, rather than lifting the lines out of their bodies. Any `return` inside it is the body's own exit and keeps its meaning in the moved unit.
Duplicated block (14 lines × 2) VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/winMutiPlayer.xaml.cs:512— VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/winMutiPlayer.xaml.cs:512-525 | VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/winMutiPlayer.xaml.cs:564-577 — 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. Each matched range is the entire body of the declaration above it, so the region is already a complete unit: move that whole declaration to the shared location and have each site call it, rather than lifting the lines out of their bodies. Any `return` inside it is the body's own exit and keeps its meaning in the moved unit.
Duplicated block (14 lines × 2) VPet-Simulator.Windows/Function/CoreMOD.cs:233— VPet-Simulator.Windows/Function/CoreMOD.cs:233-246 | VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/MPMOD.cs:93-106 — before extracting anything, compare `VPet-Simulator.Windows/Function/CoreMOD.cs` and `VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/MPMOD.cs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 4 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 72 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (11 lines × 2) VPet-Simulator.Core/Handle/GameSave.cs:46— VPet-Simulator.Core/Handle/GameSave.cs:46-56 | VPet-Simulator.Windows.Interface/GameSave_VPet.cs:139-149 — before extracting anything, compare `VPet-Simulator.Core/Handle/GameSave.cs` and `VPet-Simulator.Windows.Interface/GameSave_VPet.cs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 7 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 112 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (11 lines × 2) VPet-Simulator.Windows/Function/CoreMOD.cs:304— VPet-Simulator.Windows/Function/CoreMOD.cs:304-314 | VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/MPMOD.cs:110-120 — before extracting anything, compare `VPet-Simulator.Windows/Function/CoreMOD.cs` and `VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/MPMOD.cs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 4 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 72 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `VPet-Simulator.Windows/Function/CoreMOD.cs:303` calls `Add` and `VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/MPMOD.cs:109` 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 (11 lines × 2) VPet-Simulator.Core/Handle/GameSave.cs:296— VPet-Simulator.Core/Handle/GameSave.cs:296-306 | VPet-Simulator.Windows.Interface/GameSave_VPet.cs:392-402 — before extracting anything, compare `VPet-Simulator.Core/Handle/GameSave.cs` and `VPet-Simulator.Windows.Interface/GameSave_VPet.cs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 7 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 112 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Each matched range is the entire body of the declaration above it, so the region is already a complete unit: move that whole declaration to the shared location and have each site call it, rather than lifting the lines out of their bodies. Any `return` inside it is the body's own exit and keeps its meaning in the moved unit.
Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/MessageBar.xaml.cs:118— VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/MessageBar.xaml.cs:118-124 | VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/MessageBar.xaml.cs:289-294 — 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 `VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/MessageBar.xaml.cs:118` 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 (6 lines × 2) VPet-Simulator.Windows/Function/Setting.cs:494— VPet-Simulator.Windows/Function/Setting.cs:494-499 | VPet.Solution/Models/SettingEditor/Setting.cs:521-526 — before extracting anything, compare `VPet-Simulator.Windows/Function/Setting.cs` and `VPet.Solution/Models/SettingEditor/Setting.cs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 7 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 54 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Each matched range is the entire body of the declaration above it, so the region is already a complete unit: move that whole declaration to the shared location and have each site call it, rather than lifting the lines out of their bodies. Any `return` inside it is the body's own exit and keeps its meaning in the moved unit.
Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/winMPBetterBuy.xaml.cs:323— VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/winMPBetterBuy.xaml.cs:323-328 | VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winBetterBuy.xaml.cs:414-419 — before extracting anything, compare `VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/winMPBetterBuy.xaml.cs` and `VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winBetterBuy.xaml.cs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 6 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 102 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Each matched range is the entire body of the declaration above it, so the region is already a complete unit: move that whole declaration to the shared location and have each site call it, rather than lifting the lines out of their bodies. Any `return` inside it is the body's own exit and keeps its meaning in the moved unit.
Duplicated block (21 lines × 2) VPet-Simulator.Windows/Function/CoreMOD.cs:65— VPet-Simulator.Windows/Function/CoreMOD.cs:65-85 | VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/MPMOD.cs:16-36 — before extracting anything, compare `VPet-Simulator.Windows/Function/CoreMOD.cs` and `VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/MPMOD.cs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 4 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 72 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Each matched range is the entire body of the declaration above it, so the region is already a complete unit: move that whole declaration to the shared location and have each site call it, rather than lifting the lines out of their bodies. Any `return` inside it is the body's own exit and keeps its meaning in the moved unit. Note first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: the declarations holding them bind `mw` to `MainWindow` in one and `MPFriends` in another, and the duplicated lines use it. The extracted unit therefore needs a parameter type that fits BOTH — their common supertype where they have one, or a new abstraction over them where they do not — and settling that is the step that comes BEFORE the extraction above. Where the two types are deliberately unrelated, the duplication is the price of that separation and the honest resolution is to record the decision rather than to extract.
Duplicated block (21 lines × 2) VPet-Simulator.Windows/Function/MWController.cs:206— VPet-Simulator.Windows/Function/MWController.cs:206-226 | VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/MPController.cs:75-95 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice.
Duplicated block (16 lines × 2) VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winGallery.xaml.cs:243— VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winGallery.xaml.cs:243-258 | VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winGallery.xaml.cs:312-327 — 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 `VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winGallery.xaml.cs:243` it runs out through the closing brace of the declaration holding it — the window is that declaration's tail, not a fragment that begins part-way through something, 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 (16 lines × 2) VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs:2954— VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs:2954-2969 | VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/MPFriends.xaml.cs:535-550 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs:2970` calls `Main_Event_TouchHead`, `Main_Event_TouchBody` and `VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/MPFriends.xaml.cs:551` 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 (12 lines × 2) VPet-Simulator.Core/Graph/GraphCore.cs:328— VPet-Simulator.Core/Graph/GraphCore.cs:328-339 | VPet-Simulator.Core/Graph/GraphCore.cs:389-400 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (12 lines × 2) VPet-Simulator.Windows.Interface/ExtensionFunction.cs:50— VPet-Simulator.Windows.Interface/ExtensionFunction.cs:50-61 | VPet-Simulator.Windows.Interface/ExtensionFunction.cs:79-90 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (6 lines × 3) VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/MainDisplay.cs:142— VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/MainDisplay.cs:142-147 | VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/MainDisplay.cs:180-185 | VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs:2945-2951 — there are 3 copies across 2 file(s) — more copies than files, so at least one file holds the block twice. Extract it once into a single shared function every call site can reach and call it from all 3 sites; resolving a subset leaves the remainder to drift apart. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/MainDisplay.cs:142` 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 (6 lines × 3) VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/winMutiPlayer.xaml.cs:510— VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/winMutiPlayer.xaml.cs:510-515 | VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/winMutiPlayer.xaml.cs:536-541 | VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/winMutiPlayer.xaml.cs:562-567 — all 3 copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from every one of those sites — resolving only two of them leaves the rest to drift apart the first time one is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/winMutiPlayer.xaml.cs:510` 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.
IC1 · Incompleteness & stubs· Both branches are identical · ×2
Both branches are identical — the condition decides nothing VPet-Simulator.Core/Graph/GraphInfo.cs:122— The `if` and its `else` contain the same 1 statement, so no input can make the condition matter. Implement the distinction that was intended, or drop the branch and keep the body.
Both branches are identical — the condition decides nothing VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.xaml.cs:241— The `if` and its `else` contain the same 1 statement, so no input can make the condition matter. Implement the distinction that was intended, or drop the branch and keep the body.
IC1 · Incompleteness & stubs· Both branches open with the same statements · ×2
Both branches open with the same statements — the condition does not decide them VPet-Simulator.Windows.Interface/Mod/Food.cs:178— The first 1 statement of the `if` and of the `else` are identical, so it runs on both paths regardless of the condition. Lift it above the `if` — leaving it duplicated inside makes the branches read as though they handled this differently.
Both branches open with the same statements — the condition does not decide them VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winGameSetting.xaml.cs:1514— The first 1 statement of the `if` and of the `else` are identical, so it runs on both paths regardless of the condition. Lift it above the `if` — leaving it duplicated inside makes the branches read as though they handled this differently.
IC1 · Incompleteness & stubs· Markup wires an event to an empty handler · ×2
Markup wires an event to an empty handler VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/winMPBetterBuy.xaml.cs:170— `winMPBetterBuy.xaml` wires an event to `ScrollViewer_PreviewMouseWheel`, whose body is empty — the markup attaches a listener that does nothing. Implement the handler, or remove the attribute that wires it.
Markup wires an event to an empty handler VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winBetterBuy.xaml.cs:208— `winBetterBuy.xaml` wires an event to `ScrollViewer_PreviewMouseWheel`, whose body is empty — the markup attaches a listener that does nothing. Implement the handler, or remove the attribute that wires it.
Weak hash algorithm VPet-Simulator.Windows.Interface/GameSave_v2.cs:48— MD5/SHA1 is constructed here, and both are collision-broken. If this digest protects anything — a signature, an integrity or tamper check, a credential, or any value an attacker can influence — that is a real weakness: use SHA-256+ for content integrity, or a KDF (PBKDF2/Argon2/BCrypt) for password storage. If it only derives a non-security identifier (a cache key, a file or mutex name), collision resistance carries no security consequence here; make that intent explicit instead — a non-cryptographic hash such as `System.IO.Hashing.XxHash64`/`Crc32` says it in code — since the algorithm alone cannot distinguish the two uses.
Weak hash algorithm VPet-Simulator.Windows.Interface/GameSave_v2.cs:84— MD5/SHA1 is constructed here, and both are collision-broken. If this digest protects anything — a signature, an integrity or tamper check, a credential, or any value an attacker can influence — that is a real weakness: use SHA-256+ for content integrity, or a KDF (PBKDF2/Argon2/BCrypt) for password storage. If it only derives a non-security identifier (a cache key, a file or mutex name), collision resistance carries no security consequence here; make that intent explicit instead — a non-cryptographic hash such as `System.IO.Hashing.XxHash64`/`Crc32` says it in code — since the algorithm alone cannot distinguish the two uses.
MainWindow.MainWindow_Event_TakeItem (cyclomatic 144) VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow_Function.cs:83— MainWindow.MainWindow_Event_TakeItem has cyclomatic complexity 144 (threshold 15). Of this number, 120 points are the body's own statements and 24 belong to 5 function literals inside it that branch. 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.
MainWindow.GameLoad (cyclomatic 121) VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs:1624— MainWindow.GameLoad has cyclomatic complexity 121 (threshold 15). Of this number, 38 points are the body's own statements and 83 belong to 13 function literals inside it that branch. To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
CoreMOD.CoreMOD.ctor (cyclomatic 80) VPet-Simulator.Windows/Function/CoreMOD.cs:99— CoreMOD.CoreMOD.ctor has cyclomatic complexity 80 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
DIYViewer.TextBox_PreviewKeyDown (cyclomatic 73) VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/DIYViewer.xaml.cs:30— DIYViewer.TextBox_PreviewKeyDown has cyclomatic complexity 73 (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.
MainWindow.lowStrength (cyclomatic 68) VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs:559— MainWindow.lowStrength has cyclomatic complexity 68 (threshold 15). Of this number, 55 points are the body's own statements and 13 belong to 9 function literals inside it that branch. To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
winCharacterPanel.GenRank (cyclomatic 62) VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winCharacterPanel.xaml.cs:479— winCharacterPanel.GenRank has cyclomatic complexity 62 (threshold 15). Of this number, 61 points are the body's own statements and 1 belongs to one function literal inside it that branches. To reduce it, split the body: these branches sit side by side rather than nested inside one another, so extracting each one on its own would leave a function per branch. Group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function, so the body reads as a short sequence of named stages.
MainWindow.MainWindow.ctor (cyclomatic 61) VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.xaml.cs:39— MainWindow.MainWindow.ctor has cyclomatic complexity 61 (threshold 15). Most of this is not in the body itself: 11 of the 61 points are its own statements and the rest belongs to 14 function literals inside it that branch (lines 130, 139, 301, …). The decisions are inside those literals, which nothing outside this body can call, review or test on its own, so splitting the enclosing body is not the move available here. To reduce it, lift the literals' work into a named function or method at the enclosing scope and have each literal call it, then reduce whichever part then reads as the largest.
winGallery.RefreshList (cyclomatic 40) VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winGallery.xaml.cs:83— winGallery.RefreshList has cyclomatic complexity 40 (threshold 15). Most of this is not in the body itself: 14 of the 40 points are its own statements and the rest belongs to 2 function literals inside it that branch (lines 116, 135). The decisions are inside those literals, which nothing outside this body can call, review or test on its own, so splitting the enclosing body is not the move available here. To reduce it, lift the literals' work into a named function or method at the enclosing scope and have each literal call it, then reduce whichever part then reads as the largest.
BuffViewer.Refresh (cyclomatic 39) VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/BuffViewer.xaml.cs:245— BuffViewer.Refresh has cyclomatic complexity 39 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
Main.FunctionSpend (cyclomatic 38) VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/MainLogic.cs:255— Main.FunctionSpend has cyclomatic complexity 38 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
winMutiPlayer.LoopP2PPacket (cyclomatic 29) VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/winMutiPlayer.xaml.cs:361— winMutiPlayer.LoopP2PPacket has cyclomatic complexity 29 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
winGameSetting.ShowMod (cyclomatic 29) VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winGameSetting.xaml.cs:698— winGameSetting.ShowMod has cyclomatic complexity 29 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
GraphInfo.GraphInfo.ctor (cyclomatic 28) VPet-Simulator.Core/Graph/GraphInfo.cs:47— GraphInfo.GraphInfo.ctor has cyclomatic complexity 28 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
MainWindow.Save (cyclomatic 27) VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs:259— MainWindow.Save has cyclomatic complexity 27 (threshold 15). Of this number, 25 points are the body's own statements and 2 belong to 2 function literals inside it that branch. To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
MainWindow.Handle_Steam (cyclomatic 27) VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs:1041— MainWindow.Handle_Steam has cyclomatic complexity 27 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
winGameSetting.ButtonPublish_MouseDown (cyclomatic 26) VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winGameSetting.xaml.cs:1115— winGameSetting.ButtonPublish_MouseDown has cyclomatic complexity 26 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
MainWindow.SavesLoad (cyclomatic 25) VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs:948— MainWindow.SavesLoad has cyclomatic complexity 25 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
App.UnhandledException (cyclomatic 24) VPet-Simulator.Windows/App.xaml.cs:70— App.UnhandledException has cyclomatic complexity 24 (threshold 15). To reduce it, name the conditions: bind each compound test to a well-named local or a small predicate function, so the body reads as a sequence of named decisions rather than a chain of operators.
winGameSetting.winGameSetting.ctor (cyclomatic 24) VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winGameSetting.xaml.cs:41— winGameSetting.winGameSetting.ctor has cyclomatic complexity 24 (threshold 15). To reduce it, split the body: these branches sit side by side rather than nested inside one another, so extracting each one on its own would leave a function per branch. Group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function, so the body reads as a short sequence of named stages.
Main.MainGrid_MouseWave (cyclomatic 23) VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/Main.xaml.cs:536— Main.MainGrid_MouseWave has cyclomatic complexity 23 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
winBetterBuy.OrderItemSource (cyclomatic 23) VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winBetterBuy.xaml.cs:91— winBetterBuy.OrderItemSource has cyclomatic complexity 23 (threshold 15). Most of this is not in the body itself: 1 of the 23 points is its own statement and the rest belongs to 2 function literals inside it that branch (lines 93, 181). The decisions are inside those literals, which nothing outside this body can call, review or test on its own, so splitting the enclosing body is not the move available here. To reduce it, lift the literals' work into a named function or method at the enclosing scope and have each literal call it, then reduce whichever part then reads as the largest.
ModLoader.ModLoader.ctor (cyclomatic 23) VPet.Solution/Models/ModLoader.cs:87— ModLoader.ModLoader.ctor has cyclomatic complexity 23 (threshold 15). To reduce it, break up the iteration: give each loop body a named function, and split a multi-phase loop into one function per phase so no single body carries the whole pipeline.
MainWindow.StatisticsCalHandle (cyclomatic 22) VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs:889— MainWindow.StatisticsCalHandle has cyclomatic complexity 22 (threshold 15). To reduce it, split the body: these branches sit side by side rather than nested inside one another, so extracting each one on its own would leave a function per branch. Group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function, so the body reads as a short sequence of named stages.
winMPBetterBuy.OrderItemSource (cyclomatic 22) VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/winMPBetterBuy.xaml.cs:56— winMPBetterBuy.OrderItemSource has cyclomatic complexity 22 (threshold 15). Most of this is not in the body itself: 1 of the 22 points is its own statement and the rest belongs to one function literal inside it that branches (line 58). The decisions are inside the literal, which nothing outside this body can call, review or test on its own, so splitting the enclosing body is not the move available here. To reduce it, lift the literal's work into a named function or method at the enclosing scope and have the literal call it, then reduce whichever part then reads as the largest.
MainWindow.HashCheck.set (cyclomatic 20) VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs:172— MainWindow.HashCheck.set has cyclomatic complexity 20 (threshold 15). Most of this is not in the body itself: 2 of the 20 points are its own statements and the rest belongs to one function literal inside it that branches (line 178). The decisions are inside the literal, which nothing outside this body can call, review or test on its own, so splitting the enclosing body is not the move available here. To reduce it, lift the literal's work into a named function or method at the enclosing scope and have the literal call it, then reduce whichever part then reads as the largest.
MainWindow.Exit (cyclomatic 20) VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.xaml.cs:546— MainWindow.Exit has cyclomatic complexity 20 (threshold 15). To reduce it, break up the iteration: give each loop body a named function, and split a multi-phase loop into one function per phase so no single body carries the whole pipeline.
Move.Triggered (cyclomatic 19) VPet-Simulator.Core/Graph/GraphHelper.cs:378— Move.Triggered has cyclomatic complexity 19 (threshold 15). To reduce it, split the body: these branches sit side by side rather than nested inside one another, so extracting each one on its own would leave a function per branch. Group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function, so the body reads as a short sequence of named stages.
MWController.IfInActivateScreen (cyclomatic 19) VPet-Simulator.Windows/Function/MWController.cs:103— MWController.IfInActivateScreen has cyclomatic complexity 19 (threshold 15). Of this number, 15 points are the body's own statements and 4 belong to one function literal inside it that branches. To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
MainWindow.GameInitialization (cyclomatic 19) VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs:1453— MainWindow.GameInitialization has cyclomatic complexity 19 (threshold 15). Of this number, 15 points are the body's own statements and 4 belong to one function literal inside it that branches. To reduce it, split the body: these branches sit side by side rather than nested inside one another, so extracting each one on its own would leave a function per branch. Group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function, so the body reads as a short sequence of named stages.
MPFriends.MPFriends.ctor (cyclomatic 19) VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/MPFriends.xaml.cs:53— MPFriends.MPFriends.ctor has cyclomatic complexity 19 (threshold 15). Most of this is not in the body itself: 6 of the 19 points are its own statements and the rest belongs to 3 function literals inside it that branch (lines 124, 87, 172). The decisions are inside those literals, which nothing outside this body can call, review or test on its own, so splitting the enclosing body is not the move available here. To reduce it, lift the literals' work into a named function or method at the enclosing scope and have each literal call it, then reduce whichever part then reads as the largest.
MPMOD.MPMOD.ctor (cyclomatic 19) VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/MPMOD.cs:38— MPMOD.MPMOD.ctor has cyclomatic complexity 19 (threshold 15). To reduce it, break up the iteration: give each loop body a named function, and split a multi-phase loop into one function per phase so no single body carries the whole pipeline.
Move.Checked (cyclomatic 18) VPet-Simulator.Core/Graph/GraphHelper.cs:405— Move.Checked has cyclomatic complexity 18 (threshold 15). To reduce it, split the body: these branches sit side by side rather than nested inside one another, so extracting each one on its own would leave a function per branch. Group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function, so the body reads as a short sequence of named stages.
TalkSelect.btn_Send_Click (cyclomatic 18) VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/TalkSelect.xaml.cs:95— TalkSelect.btn_Send_Click has cyclomatic complexity 18 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
UnlockCondition.UnlockCondition.ctor (cyclomatic 18) VPet-Simulator.Windows.Interface/Mod/Photo.cs:123— UnlockCondition.UnlockCondition.ctor has cyclomatic complexity 18 (threshold 15). To reduce it, split the body: these branches sit side by side rather than nested inside one another, so extracting each one on its own would leave a function per branch. Group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function, so the body reads as a short sequence of named stages.
Main.EventTimer_Elapsed (cyclomatic 17) VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/MainLogic.cs:496— Main.EventTimer_Elapsed has cyclomatic complexity 17 (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.
ICheckText.CheckState (cyclomatic 17) VPet-Simulator.Windows.Interface/Mod/ICheckText.cs:118— ICheckText.CheckState has cyclomatic complexity 17 (threshold 15). To reduce it, name the conditions: bind each compound test to a well-named local or a small predicate function, so the body reads as a sequence of named decisions rather than a chain of operators.
UnlockCondition.GetHolidayCheck (cyclomatic 17) VPet-Simulator.Windows.Interface/Mod/Photo.cs:268— UnlockCondition.GetHolidayCheck has cyclomatic complexity 17 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
Config.Set (cyclomatic 16) VPet-Simulator.Core/Graph/GraphCore.cs:347— Config.Set has cyclomatic complexity 16 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
UnlockCondition.Check (cyclomatic 16) VPet-Simulator.Windows.Interface/Mod/Photo.cs:218— UnlockCondition.Check has cyclomatic complexity 16 (threshold 15). To reduce it, split the body: these branches sit side by side rather than nested inside one another, so extracting each one on its own would leave a function per branch. Group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function, so the body reads as a short sequence of named stages.
CoreMOD.CoreMOD.ctor (cognitive 247) VPet-Simulator.Windows/Function/CoreMOD.cs:99— CoreMOD.CoreMOD.ctor has cognitive complexity 247 (threshold 15). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
MainWindow.GameLoad (cognitive 182) VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs:1624— MainWindow.GameLoad has cognitive complexity 182 (threshold 15). Of this number, 48 points are the body's own statements and 134 belong to 13 function literals inside it that branch. To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
MainWindow.lowStrength (cognitive 178) VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs:559— MainWindow.lowStrength has cognitive complexity 178 (threshold 15). Of this number, 169 points are the body's own statements and 9 belong to 9 function literals inside it that branch. To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
MainWindow.MainWindow.ctor (cognitive 114) VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.xaml.cs:39— MainWindow.MainWindow.ctor has cognitive complexity 114 (threshold 15). Of this number, 18 points are the body's own statements and 96 belong to 14 function literals inside it that branch. To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
BuffViewer.Refresh (cognitive 106) VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/BuffViewer.xaml.cs:245— BuffViewer.Refresh has cognitive complexity 106 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
winCharacterPanel.GenRank (cognitive 86) VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winCharacterPanel.xaml.cs:479— winCharacterPanel.GenRank has cognitive complexity 86 (threshold 15). Of this number, 84 points are the body's own statements and 2 belong to one function literal inside it that branches. To reduce it, split the body: most of this score is breadth rather than depth — checks laid out side by side rather than stacked — so group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function. Some of it IS depth: where a check sits inside another whose only job is to reach it, merge the two into one condition, and where an else follows a branch that already returns, drop the trailing else and let the rest of the body continue at one level.
winMutiPlayer.LoopP2PPacket (cognitive 72) VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/winMutiPlayer.xaml.cs:361— winMutiPlayer.LoopP2PPacket has cognitive complexity 72 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
MainWindow.Save (cognitive 68) VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs:259— MainWindow.Save has cognitive complexity 68 (threshold 15). Of this number, 60 points are the body's own statements and 8 belong to 2 function literals inside it that branch. To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
Main.FunctionSpend (cognitive 64) VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/MainLogic.cs:255— Main.FunctionSpend has cognitive complexity 64 (threshold 15). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
MainWindow.MainWindow_Event_TakeItem (cognitive 57) VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow_Function.cs:83— MainWindow.MainWindow_Event_TakeItem has cognitive complexity 57 (threshold 15). Of this number, 34 points are the body's own statements and 23 belong to 5 function literals inside it that branch. The drivers above price the dispatch low by construction — a dispatch is charged once however many cases it lists, while each branch inside an arm is charged in full — so most of this count is what the case bodies hold, and the arms are where it can be reduced. 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.
MainWindow.Handle_Steam (cognitive 56) VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs:1041— MainWindow.Handle_Steam has cognitive complexity 56 (threshold 15). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
winGameSetting.ShowMod (cognitive 49) VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winGameSetting.xaml.cs:698— winGameSetting.ShowMod has cognitive complexity 49 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
MainWindow.Exit (cognitive 48) VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.xaml.cs:546— MainWindow.Exit has cognitive complexity 48 (threshold 15). To reduce it, break up the iteration: give each loop body a named function, and split a multi-phase loop into one function per phase so no single body carries the whole pipeline.
GraphInfo.GraphInfo.ctor (cognitive 47) VPet-Simulator.Core/Graph/GraphInfo.cs:47— GraphInfo.GraphInfo.ctor has cognitive complexity 47 (threshold 15). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
MPMOD.MPMOD.ctor (cognitive 47) VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/MPMOD.cs:38— MPMOD.MPMOD.ctor has cognitive complexity 47 (threshold 15). To reduce it, break up the iteration: give each loop body a named function, and split a multi-phase loop into one function per phase so no single body carries the whole pipeline.
ModLoader.ModLoader.ctor (cognitive 40) VPet.Solution/Models/ModLoader.cs:87— ModLoader.ModLoader.ctor has cognitive complexity 40 (threshold 15). To reduce it, break up the iteration: give each loop body a named function, and split a multi-phase loop into one function per phase so no single body carries the whole pipeline.
Main.MainGrid_MouseWave (cognitive 39) VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/Main.xaml.cs:536— Main.MainGrid_MouseWave has cognitive complexity 39 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
winGameSetting.ButtonPublish_MouseDown (cognitive 35) VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winGameSetting.xaml.cs:1115— winGameSetting.ButtonPublish_MouseDown has cognitive complexity 35 (threshold 15). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
PetLoader.LoadGraph (cognitive 33) VPet-Simulator.Core/Handle/PetLoader.cs:76— PetLoader.LoadGraph has cognitive complexity 33 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
winBetterBuy.OrderItemSource (cognitive 31) VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winBetterBuy.xaml.cs:91— winBetterBuy.OrderItemSource has cognitive complexity 31 (threshold 15). None of this is in the body itself: all 31 points belong to 2 function literals inside it that branch (lines 93, 181). The decisions are inside those literals, which nothing outside this body can call, review or test on its own, so splitting the enclosing body is not the move available here. To reduce it, lift the literals' work into a named function or method at the enclosing scope and have each literal call it, then reduce whichever part then reads as the largest.
MainWindow.HashCheck.set (cognitive 30) VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs:172— MainWindow.HashCheck.set has cognitive complexity 30 (threshold 15). Most of this is not in the body itself: 1 of the 30 points is its own statement and the rest belongs to one function literal inside it that branches (line 178). The decisions are inside the literal, which nothing outside this body can call, review or test on its own, so splitting the enclosing body is not the move available here. To reduce it, lift the literal's work into a named function or method at the enclosing scope and have the literal call it, then reduce whichever part then reads as the largest.
MainWindow.SavesLoad (cognitive 30) VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs:948— MainWindow.SavesLoad has cognitive complexity 30 (threshold 15). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
winMPBetterBuy.OrderItemSource (cognitive 30) VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/winMPBetterBuy.xaml.cs:56— winMPBetterBuy.OrderItemSource has cognitive complexity 30 (threshold 15). None of this is in the body itself: all 30 points belong to one function literal inside it that branches (line 58). The decisions are inside the literal, which nothing outside this body can call, review or test on its own, so splitting the enclosing body is not the move available here. To reduce it, lift the literal's work into a named function or method at the enclosing scope and have the literal call it, then reduce whichever part then reads as the largest.
winGameSetting.winGameSetting.ctor (cognitive 30) VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winGameSetting.xaml.cs:41— winGameSetting.winGameSetting.ctor has cognitive complexity 30 (threshold 15). To reduce it, split the body: most of this score is breadth rather than depth — checks laid out side by side rather than stacked — so group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function. Some of it IS depth: where a check sits inside another whose only job is to reach it, merge the two into one condition, and where an else follows a branch that already returns, drop the trailing else and let the rest of the body continue at one level.
GameSave_v2.load (cognitive 28) VPet-Simulator.Windows.Interface/GameSave_v2.cs:26— GameSave_v2.load has cognitive complexity 28 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
MessageBar.ShowTimer_Elapsed (cognitive 27) VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/MessageBar.xaml.cs:98— MessageBar.ShowTimer_Elapsed has cognitive complexity 27 (threshold 15). Of this number, 19 points are the body's own statements and 8 belong to 2 function literals inside it that branch. To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
winGallery.RefreshList (cognitive 26) VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winGallery.xaml.cs:83— winGallery.RefreshList has cognitive complexity 26 (threshold 15). Of this number, 14 points are the body's own statements and 12 belong to 2 function literals inside it that branch. To reduce it, name the conditions: bind each compound test to a well-named local or a small predicate function, so the body reads as a sequence of named decisions rather than a chain of operators.
BuffViewer.UpdateRemainingTime (cognitive 25) VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/BuffViewer.xaml.cs:348— BuffViewer.UpdateRemainingTime has cognitive complexity 25 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
ScheduleTask.StartWork (cognitive 25) VPet-Simulator.Windows.Interface/ScheduleTask.cs:252— ScheduleTask.StartWork has cognitive complexity 25 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
ScheduleTask.ScheduleTask.ctor (cognitive 24) VPet-Simulator.Windows.Interface/ScheduleTask.cs:81— ScheduleTask.ScheduleTask.ctor has cognitive complexity 24 (threshold 15). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
ToolBar.M_TimeUIHandle (cognitive 23) VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/ToolBar.xaml.cs:179— ToolBar.M_TimeUIHandle has cognitive complexity 23 (threshold 15). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
MPFriends.MPFriends.ctor (cognitive 23) VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/MPFriends.xaml.cs:53— MPFriends.MPFriends.ctor has cognitive complexity 23 (threshold 15). Most of this is not in the body itself: 7 of the 23 points are its own statements and the rest belongs to 3 function literals inside it that branch (lines 124, 172, 87). The decisions are inside those literals, which nothing outside this body can call, review or test on its own, so splitting the enclosing body is not the move available here. To reduce it, lift the literals' work into a named function or method at the enclosing scope and have each literal call it, then reduce whichever part then reads as the largest.
TalkSelect.btn_Send_Click (cognitive 23) VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/TalkSelect.xaml.cs:95— TalkSelect.btn_Send_Click has cognitive complexity 23 (threshold 15). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
winGameSetting.PetBox_SelectionChanged (cognitive 23) VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winGameSetting.xaml.cs:1594— winGameSetting.PetBox_SelectionChanged has cognitive complexity 23 (threshold 15). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
GraphCore.FindGraph (cognitive 22) VPet-Simulator.Core/Graph/GraphCore.cs:131— GraphCore.FindGraph has cognitive complexity 22 (threshold 15). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
MWController.IfInActivateScreen (cognitive 22) VPet-Simulator.Windows/Function/MWController.cs:103— MWController.IfInActivateScreen has cognitive complexity 22 (threshold 15). Of this number, 15 points are the body's own statements and 7 belong to one function literal inside it that branches. To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
Main.Load_2_WaitGraph (cognitive 21) VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/Main.xaml.cs:109— Main.Load_2_WaitGraph has cognitive complexity 21 (threshold 15). Most of this is not in the body itself: 7 of the 21 points are its own statements and the rest belongs to one function literal inside it that branches (line 128). The decisions are inside the literal, which nothing outside this body can call, review or test on its own, so splitting the enclosing body is not the move available here. To reduce it, lift the literal's work into a named function or method at the enclosing scope and have the literal call it, then reduce whichever part then reads as the largest.
Main.MainGrid_MouseLeftButtonDown (cognitive 21) VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/Main.xaml.cs:407— Main.MainGrid_MouseLeftButtonDown has cognitive complexity 21 (threshold 15). None of this is in the body itself: all 21 points belong to one function literal inside it that branches (line 411). The decisions are inside the literal, which nothing outside this body can call, review or test on its own, so splitting the enclosing body is not the move available here. To reduce it, lift the literal's work into a named function or method at the enclosing scope and have the literal call it, then reduce whichever part then reads as the largest.
MessageBar.DealWithStreamFinish (cognitive 21) VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/MessageBar.xaml.cs:286— MessageBar.DealWithStreamFinish has cognitive complexity 21 (threshold 15). None of this is in the body itself: all 21 points belong to 4 function literals inside it that branch (lines 288, 294, 297, …). The decisions are inside those literals, which nothing outside this body can call, review or test on its own, so splitting the enclosing body is not the move available here. To reduce it, lift the literals' work into a named function or method at the enclosing scope and have each literal call it, then reduce whichever part then reads as the largest.
MainWindow.StatisticsCalHandle (cognitive 21) VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs:889— MainWindow.StatisticsCalHandle has cognitive complexity 21 (threshold 15). To reduce it, split the body: most of this score is breadth rather than depth — checks laid out side by side rather than stacked — so group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function. Some of it IS depth: where a check sits inside another whose only job is to reach it, merge the two into one condition, and where an else follows a branch that already returns, drop the trailing else and let the rest of the body continue at one level.
MainWindow.AddEffect (cognitive 21) VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow_Function.cs:884— MainWindow.AddEffect has cognitive complexity 21 (threshold 15). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
BuffViewer.RefreshEntry (cognitive 21) VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/BuffViewer.xaml.cs:186— BuffViewer.RefreshEntry has cognitive complexity 21 (threshold 15). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
APNGAnimation.ParseApng (cognitive 20) VPet-Simulator.Core/Graph/APNGAnimation.cs:243— APNGAnimation.ParseApng has cognitive complexity 20 (threshold 15). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
Config.Set (cognitive 20) VPet-Simulator.Core/Graph/GraphCore.cs:347— Config.Set has cognitive complexity 20 (threshold 15). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
App.UnhandledException (cognitive 20) VPet-Simulator.Windows/App.xaml.cs:70— App.UnhandledException has cognitive complexity 20 (threshold 15). To reduce it, split the body: this score is breadth rather than depth — many checks laid out side by side rather than nested inside one another, so inverting conditions into early returns has nothing left to flatten. Group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function, so the body reads as a short sequence of named stages.
Move.GetCompatibilityMove (cognitive 19) VPet-Simulator.Core/Graph/GraphHelper.cs:431— Move.GetCompatibilityMove has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
Picture.Run (cognitive 19) VPet-Simulator.Core/Graph/Picture.cs:103— Picture.Run has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15). Most of this is not in the body itself: 1 of the 19 points is its own statement and the rest belongs to one function literal inside it that branches (line 114). The decisions are inside the literal, which nothing outside this body can call, review or test on its own, so splitting the enclosing body is not the move available here. To reduce it, lift the literal's work into a named function or method at the enclosing scope and have the literal call it, then reduce whichever part then reads as the largest.
UnlockCondition.Check (cognitive 19) VPet-Simulator.Windows.Interface/Mod/Photo.cs:218— UnlockCondition.Check has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15). To reduce it, split the body: most of this score is breadth rather than depth — checks laid out side by side rather than stacked — so group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function. Some of it IS depth: where a check sits inside another whose only job is to reach it, merge the two into one condition.
UnlockCondition.CheckReason (cognitive 19) VPet-Simulator.Windows.Interface/Mod/Photo.cs:308— UnlockCondition.CheckReason has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15). To reduce it, split the body: most of this score is breadth rather than depth — checks laid out side by side rather than stacked — so group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function. Some of it IS depth: where a check sits inside another whose only job is to reach it, merge the two into one condition, and where an else follows a branch that already returns, drop the trailing else and let the rest of the body continue at one level.
ModSettingModel.GetLocalMods (cognitive 19) VPet.Solution/Models/SettingEditor/ModSettingModel.cs:34— ModSettingModel.GetLocalMods has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
Main.MoveSideHideCheck (cognitive 18) VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/MainLogic.cs:564— Main.MoveSideHideCheck has cognitive complexity 18 (threshold 15). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
Main.StartWork (cognitive 18) VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/MainLogic.cs:725— Main.StartWork has cognitive complexity 18 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
Move.Triggered (cognitive 18) VPet-Simulator.Core/Graph/GraphHelper.cs:378— Move.Triggered has cognitive complexity 18 (threshold 15). To reduce it, split the body: this score is breadth rather than depth — many checks laid out side by side rather than nested inside one another, so inverting conditions into early returns has nothing left to flatten. Group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function, so the body reads as a short sequence of named stages.
PNGAnimation.Run (cognitive 18) VPet-Simulator.Core/Graph/PNGAnimation.cs:324— PNGAnimation.Run has cognitive complexity 18 (threshold 15). Most of this is not in the body itself: 2 of the 18 points are its own statements and the rest belongs to one function literal inside it that branches (line 340). The decisions are inside the literal, which nothing outside this body can call, review or test on its own, so splitting the enclosing body is not the move available here. To reduce it, lift the literal's work into a named function or method at the enclosing scope and have the literal call it, then reduce whichever part then reads as the largest.
MainWindow.GameInitialization (cognitive 18) VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs:1453— MainWindow.GameInitialization has cognitive complexity 18 (threshold 15). Of this number, 14 points are the body's own statements and 4 belong to one function literal inside it that branches. To reduce it, split the body: this score is breadth rather than depth — many checks laid out side by side rather than nested inside one another, so inverting conditions into early returns has nothing left to flatten. Group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function, so the body reads as a short sequence of named stages.
winBetterBuy.BtnBuy_Click (cognitive 18) VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winBetterBuy.xaml.cs:220— winBetterBuy.BtnBuy_Click has cognitive complexity 18 (threshold 15). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
winGameSetting.RenderModList (cognitive 18) VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winGameSetting.xaml.cs:583— winGameSetting.RenderModList has cognitive complexity 18 (threshold 15). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
UnlockCondition.UnlockCondition.ctor (cognitive 18) VPet-Simulator.Windows.Interface/Mod/Photo.cs:123— UnlockCondition.UnlockCondition.ctor has cognitive complexity 18 (threshold 15). To reduce it, split the body: this score is breadth rather than depth — many checks laid out side by side rather than nested inside one another, so inverting conditions into early returns has nothing left to flatten. Group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function, so the body reads as a short sequence of named stages.
Main.Display (cognitive 17) VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/MainDisplay.cs:526— Main.Display has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
GraphCore.FindGraphs (cognitive 17) VPet-Simulator.Core/Graph/GraphCore.cs:177— GraphCore.FindGraphs has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
Move.Checked (cognitive 17) VPet-Simulator.Core/Graph/GraphHelper.cs:405— Move.Checked has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). To reduce it, split the body: this score is breadth rather than depth — many checks laid out side by side rather than nested inside one another, so inverting conditions into early returns has nothing left to flatten. Group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function, so the body reads as a short sequence of named stages.
PNGAnimation.startup (cognitive 17) VPet-Simulator.Core/Graph/PNGAnimation.cs:118— PNGAnimation.startup has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
MainWindow.RunDIY (cognitive 17) VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs:455— MainWindow.RunDIY has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
MainWindow.LoadLatestSave (cognitive 17) VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.xaml.cs:663— MainWindow.LoadLatestSave has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Of this number, 15 points are the body's own statements and 2 belong to one function literal inside it that branches. To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
DIYViewer.TextBox_PreviewKeyDown (cognitive 17) VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/DIYViewer.xaml.cs:30— DIYViewer.TextBox_PreviewKeyDown has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
winWorkMenu.winWorkMenu.ctor (cognitive 17) VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winWorkMenu.xaml.cs:45— winWorkMenu.winWorkMenu.ctor has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). To reduce it, split the body: this score is breadth rather than depth — many checks laid out side by side rather than nested inside one another, so inverting conditions into early returns has nothing left to flatten. Group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function, so the body reads as a short sequence of named stages.
Effect.RealPrice.get (cognitive 17) VPet-Simulator.Windows.Interface/Buff.cs:158— Effect.RealPrice.get has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
Main.Load_2_WaitGraph (cognitive 16) VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/Main.xaml.cs:80— Main.Load_2_WaitGraph has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). To reduce it, break up the iteration: give each loop body a named function, and split a multi-phase loop into one function per phase so no single body carries the whole pipeline.
Main.DisplayRaising (cognitive 16) VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/MainDisplay.cs:378— Main.DisplayRaising has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). The drivers above price the dispatch low by construction — a dispatch is charged once however many cases it lists, while each branch inside an arm is charged in full — so most of this count is what the case bodies hold, and the arms are where it can be reduced. 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.
APNGAnimation.Play (cognitive 16) VPet-Simulator.Core/Graph/APNGAnimation.cs:516— APNGAnimation.Play has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Of this number, 14 points are the body's own statements and 2 belong to one function literal inside it that branches. To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
APNGAnimation.Run (cognitive 16) VPet-Simulator.Core/Graph/APNGAnimation.cs:610— APNGAnimation.Run has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Most of this is not in the body itself: 2 of the 16 points are its own statements and the rest belongs to one function literal inside it that branches (line 627). The decisions are inside the literal, which nothing outside this body can call, review or test on its own, so splitting the enclosing body is not the move available here. To reduce it, lift the literal's work into a named function or method at the enclosing scope and have the literal call it, then reduce whichever part then reads as the largest.
MainWindow.LoadDIY (cognitive 16) VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs:387— MainWindow.LoadDIY has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Of this number, 12 points are the body's own statements and 4 belong to one function literal inside it that branches. To reduce it, flatten the nesting: invert conditions into early returns or guard clauses so the happy path stays at one level, and lift the deepest nested block into its own named function.
TalkSelect.RelsSelect (cognitive 16) VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/TalkSelect.xaml.cs:46— TalkSelect.RelsSelect has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
winCharacterPanel.MainTab_SelectionChanged (cognitive 16) VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winCharacterPanel.xaml.cs:966— winCharacterPanel.MainTab_SelectionChanged has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
ICheckText.CheckState (cognitive 16) VPet-Simulator.Windows.Interface/Mod/ICheckText.cs:118— ICheckText.CheckState has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). To reduce it, name the conditions: bind each compound test to a well-named local or a small predicate function, so the body reads as a sequence of named decisions rather than a chain of operators.
UnlockCondition.GetHolidayCheck (cognitive 16) VPet-Simulator.Windows.Interface/Mod/Photo.cs:268— UnlockCondition.GetHolidayCheck has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). The drivers above price the dispatch low by construction — a dispatch is charged once however many cases it lists, while each branch inside an arm is charged in full — so most of this count is what the case bodies hold, and the arms are where it can be reduced. 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.
ScheduleTask.AutoRenew (cognitive 16) VPet-Simulator.Windows.Interface/ScheduleTask.cs:175— ScheduleTask.AutoRenew has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Of this number, 14 points are the body's own statements and 2 belong to 2 function literals inside it that branch. To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
Change coupling: MainLogic.cs ↔ IController.cs VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/MainLogic.cs:1— `VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/MainLogic.cs` and `VPet-Simulator.Core/Handle/IController.cs` change together 50% of the time (6 of the 12 commits that touched whichever of the two files changed less often, counting a file under its earlier names as well — a repo-wide or module-wide sweep is evidence about the sweep rather than about any pair inside it and is left out of BOTH sides of this ratio, while a dependency bump, a formatter/rename sweep, or a commit whose edit to one of the two files was a tool directive such as //go:generate or whitespace only is left out of the shared count ONLY, so the two sides are not taken over identical commit sets). They sit in different directories, but in this ecosystem the namespace is declared in the FILE, not by the folder — so the two may well share one namespace and reference each other with no import for this pass to see. Read the pair before acting: if one derives from or overrides the other, the dependency is explicit in the type declaration and the co-change is definitional; if one registers itself into the other through a hook or an initialiser, the missing dependency is DELIBERATE and the thing to add is a comment saying so; if they simply belong together, co-locate them; if none of these holds, the coupling is hidden and worth breaking. You can check this without leaving the row: of the 6 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `c1a40fb1` 添加自动切换屏幕功能（自动开启）; `543a8d86` 引入自动切换屏幕功能，添加设置项（未添加设置UI）; `378881e3` 修复拼写错误，添加切换主屏幕相关代码 — run `git show` on any of them.
D4 · Code Duplication· Members sharing a duplicated core (4 members, 50+ identical tokens) · ×1
Members sharing a duplicated core (4 members, 50+ identical tokens) VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/MainDisplay.cs:141— VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/MainDisplay.cs:141-170 | VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/MainDisplay.cs:179-208 | VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs:2940-2975 | VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs:2977-2993 — 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 (63 lines × 2) VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/winMPBetterBuy.xaml.cs:86— VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/winMPBetterBuy.xaml.cs:86-148 | VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winBetterBuy.xaml.cs:122-184 — before extracting anything, compare `VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/winMPBetterBuy.xaml.cs` and `VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winBetterBuy.xaml.cs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 6 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 102 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/winMPBetterBuy.xaml.cs:86` 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 (37–48 lines × 2) VPet-Simulator.Core/Graph/FoodAnimation.cs:167— VPet-Simulator.Core/Graph/FoodAnimation.cs:167-214 | VPet-Simulator.Core/Graph/PNGAnimation.cs:283-319 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from both call sites, so a change lands once. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `VPet-Simulator.Core/Graph/FoodAnimation.cs:167` 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 (9–33 lines × 2) VPet-Simulator.Windows.Interface/Mod/IModInfo.cs:25— VPet-Simulator.Windows.Interface/Mod/IModInfo.cs:25-57 | VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winGameSetting.xaml.cs:358-366 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice.
Duplicated block (31 lines × 2) VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/MPFriends.xaml.cs:715— VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/MPFriends.xaml.cs:715-745 | VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/winMutiPlayer.xaml.cs:669-699 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from both call sites, so a change lands once. Each matched range is the entire body of the declaration above it, so the region is already a complete unit: move that whole declaration to the shared location and have each site call it, rather than lifting the lines out of their bodies. Any `return` inside it is the body's own exit and keeps its meaning in the moved unit.
Duplicated block (27 lines × 2) VPet-Simulator.Windows/Function/WorkshopVerificationClient.cs:340— VPet-Simulator.Windows/Function/WorkshopVerificationClient.cs:340-366 | VPet-Simulator.Windows/Function/WorkshopVerificationClient.cs:456-482 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (26 lines × 2) VPet-Simulator.Core/Handle/GameSave.cs:265— VPet-Simulator.Core/Handle/GameSave.cs:265-290 | VPet-Simulator.Windows.Interface/GameSave_VPet.cs:361-386 — before extracting anything, compare `VPet-Simulator.Core/Handle/GameSave.cs` and `VPet-Simulator.Windows.Interface/GameSave_VPet.cs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 7 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 112 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `VPet-Simulator.Core/Handle/GameSave.cs:265` it runs out through the closing brace of the declaration holding it — the window is that declaration's tail, not a fragment that begins part-way through something, 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. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it.
Duplicated block (12–26 lines × 2) VPet-Simulator.Windows/Function/CoreMOD.cs:196— VPet-Simulator.Windows/Function/CoreMOD.cs:196-207 | VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/MPMOD.cs:67-92 — before extracting anything, compare `VPet-Simulator.Windows/Function/CoreMOD.cs` and `VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/MPMOD.cs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 4 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 72 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `VPet-Simulator.Windows/Function/CoreMOD.cs:196` 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. Note first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: the declarations holding them bind `mw` to `MainWindow` in one and `MPFriends` in another, and the duplicated lines use it. The extracted unit therefore needs a parameter type that fits BOTH — their common supertype where they have one, or a new abstraction over them where they do not — and settling that is the step that comes BEFORE the extraction above. Where the two types are deliberately unrelated, the duplication is the price of that separation and the honest resolution is to record the decision rather than to extract.
Duplicated block (24 lines × 2) VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs:1516— VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs:1516-1539 | VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/MPFriends.xaml.cs:87-110 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice.
Duplicated block (23 lines × 2) VPet-Simulator.Core/Handle/GameSave.cs:204— VPet-Simulator.Core/Handle/GameSave.cs:204-226 | VPet-Simulator.Windows.Interface/GameSave_VPet.cs:297-319 — before extracting anything, compare `VPet-Simulator.Core/Handle/GameSave.cs` and `VPet-Simulator.Windows.Interface/GameSave_VPet.cs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 7 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 112 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Each matched range is the entire body of the declaration above it, so the region is already a complete unit: move that whole declaration to the shared location and have each site call it, rather than lifting the lines out of their bodies. Any `return` inside it is the body's own exit and keeps its meaning in the moved unit.
Duplicated block (9–21 lines × 4) VPet-Simulator.Core/Graph/GraphHelper.cs:117— VPet-Simulator.Core/Graph/GraphHelper.cs:117-137 | VPet-Simulator.Windows.Interface/Mod/ClickText.cs:88-96 | VPet-Simulator.Windows.Interface/Mod/Food.cs:64-72 | VPet-Simulator.Windows.Interface/Mod/SelectText.cs:73-81 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere all 4 call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made 4 times.
Duplicated block (20–21 lines × 2) VPet-Simulator.Core/Graph/APNGAnimation.cs:611— VPet-Simulator.Core/Graph/APNGAnimation.cs:611-631 | VPet-Simulator.Core/Graph/PNGAnimation.cs:325-344 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from both call sites, so a change lands once. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `VPet-Simulator.Core/Graph/APNGAnimation.cs:611` 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 (19–20 lines × 2) VPet-Simulator.Core/Graph/APNGAnimation.cs:582— VPet-Simulator.Core/Graph/APNGAnimation.cs:582-601 | VPet-Simulator.Core/Graph/PNGAnimation.cs:388-406 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from both call sites, so a change lands once. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `VPet-Simulator.Core/Graph/APNGAnimation.cs:582` 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 (19 lines × 2) VPet-Simulator.Windows.Interface/Mod/Photo.cs:705— VPet-Simulator.Windows.Interface/Mod/Photo.cs:705-723 | VPet-Simulator.Windows.Interface/Mod/Photo.cs:751-769 — 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 `VPet-Simulator.Windows.Interface/Mod/Photo.cs:705` 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 (6 lines × 4) VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs:636— VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs:636-641 | VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs:663-668 | VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs:693-698 | VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs:719-724 — all 4 copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from every one of those sites — resolving only two of them leaves the rest to drift apart the first time one is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs:636` 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 (14–15 lines × 2) VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winCharacterPanel.xaml.cs:661— VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winCharacterPanel.xaml.cs:661-674 | VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winCharacterPanel.xaml.cs:752-766 — 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 `VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winCharacterPanel.xaml.cs:661` 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 (10 lines × 3) VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winWorkMenu.xaml.cs:563— VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winWorkMenu.xaml.cs:563-572 | VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winWorkMenu.xaml.cs:584-593 | VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winWorkMenu.xaml.cs:606-615 — all 3 copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from every one of those sites — resolving only two of them leaves the rest to drift apart the first time one is edited.
Duplicated block (6–7 lines × 2) VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs:617— VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs:617-622 | VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs:674-680 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs:617` 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 (5 lines × 4) VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/MainDisplay.cs:143— VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/MainDisplay.cs:143-147 | VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/MainDisplay.cs:181-185 | VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs:2947-2951 | VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs:2980-2984 — there are 4 copies across 2 file(s) — more copies than files, so at least one file holds the block twice. Extract it once into a single shared function every call site can reach and call it from all 4 sites; resolving a subset leaves the remainder to drift apart. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/MainDisplay.cs:143` 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.
Low cohesion: Main (LCOM4 5) VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/Main.xaml.cs:18— Main's methods fall into 5 groups that share no field and call none of each other, against a bar of more than 3 for this run (LCOM4, configurable — your repository's bar is the one quoted here). Each group is a set of methods reachable from one another through shared fields or direct calls, so 5 groups means the type has that many internally-connected clusters with nothing tying them together. Types whose shape makes a high count expected — and which would otherwise dominate this list — are excluded before this row is raised, so this is a genuine split candidate rather than a metric reading. It is still a shape, not a defect: confirm the groups match responsibilities you can name before splitting.
Unfinished stub — throws NotImplementedException VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winReport.xaml.cs:47— `Timer_Elapsed` is a shipped member whose whole body throws NotImplementedException — scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface.
M1 · Documentation (README)· README may be stale · ×1
README may be stale — 173 code files changed in the last 6 months but the README was not touched — it may no longer reflect the system.
No CI pipeline — No CI workflow found (.github/workflows, azure-pipelines.yml, .gitlab-ci.yml, …) — changes aren't gated by an automated build/test.
SC1 · Supply-chain hygiene· NuGet dependencies are not locked · ×1
NuGet dependencies are not locked — No packages.lock.json and no central package management — restores aren't reproducible or pinned (SSDF PW.4.4). Enable <RestorePackagesWithLockFile>true</RestorePackagesWithLockFile> (commit the lockfile) or adopt Directory.Packages.props. Advisory — never scored.
Sync-over-async (deadlock risk) through `.Result` VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/MainLogic.cs:62— Reading `.Result` of a task that has not completed blocks this thread until it does — the same block as `.Wait()`: under a synchronization context (Blazor, a UI thread, classic ASP.NET) it deadlocks, and on the thread pool it parks a thread for as long as the work runs. `await` the task instead (make the caller `async`); where a synchronous entry point must stay, keep the block in ONE documented bridge with a timeout.
Blocking `File.ReadAllText` inside an `async` method VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs:1740— `File.ReadAllText` blocks the thread on I/O while `File.ReadAllTextAsync` exists to wait without one — inside a method that is already `async`, await the twin.
Blocking `winMutiPlayer.LoopP2PPacket` inside an `async` method VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/winMutiPlayer.xaml.cs:227— `winMutiPlayer.LoopP2PPacket` is a synchronous helper that blocks (`Thread.Sleep`): called from an `async` method it parks the thread exactly as the inline call would. Make the helper `async` and `await` it (`await Task.Delay`, `SemaphoreSlim.WaitAsync`, a `TaskCompletionSource` instead of the poll).
X18 · Disposal-pattern correctness· Owned disposable field is never released · ×1
Owned disposable field is never released VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/Main.xaml.cs:52— `Main` implements `IDisposable` — so it has told every caller it holds something worth releasing — and it constructs `soundPlayer` itself (line 52), which makes that instance its own. But `soundPlayer` is named in none of the methods the disposal search covered: `Dispose` (line 510) — that is `Dispose` plus every method `Dispose` calls BY NAME, so a release reached through an interface, a delegate or a base class is not followed and is worth checking before acting. On what was read, the type's disposal releases everything except the one thing it owns. A disposable the owner never disposes is held until finalization if its type has a finalizer, and forever if it does not — which for a synchronisation primitive, a timer, a stream or a handle means the resource accumulates once per instance for the life of the process. Release it in `Dispose` (`soundPlayer?.Dispose();`), or, if it truly does not need releasing, drop `IDisposable` from the type so the claim and the behaviour agree.
Commented-out code VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/Main.xaml.cs:322— A line of code has been commented out rather than removed — dead weight that rots and confuses. Delete it (version control remembers).
Commented-out code VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/Main.xaml.cs:326— A line of code has been commented out rather than removed — dead weight that rots and confuses. Delete it (version control remembers).
Commented-out code VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/Main.xaml.cs:418— A line of code has been commented out rather than removed — dead weight that rots and confuses. Delete it (version control remembers).
Commented-out code VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/Main.xaml.cs:464— A line of code has been commented out rather than removed — dead weight that rots and confuses. Delete it (version control remembers).
Commented-out code VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/Main.xaml.cs:596— A line of code has been commented out rather than removed — dead weight that rots and confuses. Delete it (version control remembers).
Commented-out code VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/MainDisplay.cs:380— A line of code has been commented out rather than removed — dead weight that rots and confuses. Delete it (version control remembers).
Commented-out code VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/MainDisplay.cs:557— A line of code has been commented out rather than removed — dead weight that rots and confuses. Delete it (version control remembers).
Commented-out code VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/MainDisplay.cs:598— A line of code has been commented out rather than removed — dead weight that rots and confuses. Delete it (version control remembers).
Commented-out code VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/MainDisplay.cs:609— A line of code has been commented out rather than removed — dead weight that rots and confuses. Delete it (version control remembers).
Commented-out code VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/MainDisplay.cs:655— A line of code has been commented out rather than removed — dead weight that rots and confuses. Delete it (version control remembers).
Commented-out code VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/MainDisplay.cs:668— A line of code has been commented out rather than removed — dead weight that rots and confuses. Delete it (version control remembers).
Commented-out code VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/MainLogic.cs:412— A line of code has been commented out rather than removed — dead weight that rots and confuses. Delete it (version control remembers).
Commented-out code VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/MainLogic.cs:506— A line of code has been commented out rather than removed — dead weight that rots and confuses. Delete it (version control remembers).
Commented-out code VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/MainLogic.cs:507— A line of code has been commented out rather than removed — dead weight that rots and confuses. Delete it (version control remembers).
Commented-out code VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/MessageBar.xaml.cs:131— A line of code has been commented out rather than removed — dead weight that rots and confuses. Delete it (version control remembers).
Commented-out code VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/ToolBar.xaml.cs:41— A line of code has been commented out rather than removed — dead weight that rots and confuses. Delete it (version control remembers).
Commented-out code VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/ToolBar.xaml.cs:373— A line of code has been commented out rather than removed — dead weight that rots and confuses. Delete it (version control remembers).
Commented-out code VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/WorkTimer.xaml.cs:121— A line of code has been commented out rather than removed — dead weight that rots and confuses. Delete it (version control remembers).
Commented-out code VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/WorkTimer.xaml.cs:122— A line of code has been commented out rather than removed — dead weight that rots and confuses. Delete it (version control remembers).
Commented-out code VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/WorkTimer.xaml.cs:123— A line of code has been commented out rather than removed — dead weight that rots and confuses. Delete it (version control remembers).
Commented-out code VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/WorkTimer.xaml.cs:221— A line of code has been commented out rather than removed — dead weight that rots and confuses. Delete it (version control remembers).
Commented-out code VPet-Simulator.Core/Graph/APNGAnimation.cs:704— A line of code has been commented out rather than removed — dead weight that rots and confuses. Delete it (version control remembers).
Commented-out code VPet-Simulator.Core/Graph/FoodAnimation.cs:195— A line of code has been commented out rather than removed — dead weight that rots and confuses. Delete it (version control remembers).
Commented-out code VPet-Simulator.Core/Graph/FoodAnimation.cs:196— A line of code has been commented out rather than removed — dead weight that rots and confuses. Delete it (version control remembers).
Commented-out code VPet-Simulator.Core/Graph/FoodAnimation.cs:203— A line of code has been commented out rather than removed — dead weight that rots and confuses. Delete it (version control remembers).
+ 8 more in this group — see findings.md.
P2 · Observability· Console output used as the logging channel · ×12
Console output used as the logging channel VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/Main.xaml.cs:381— `VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/Main.xaml.cs` reports through `Console.Write…` at line 381 although other files in its project log through a logger. Console lines carry no level, category or structured properties and never reach the log pipeline or its exporters.
Console output used as the logging channel VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/Main.xaml.cs:385— `VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/Main.xaml.cs` reports through `Console.Write…` at line 385 although other files in its project log through a logger. Console lines carry no level, category or structured properties and never reach the log pipeline or its exporters.
Console output used as the logging channel VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/Main.xaml.cs:389— `VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/Main.xaml.cs` reports through `Console.Write…` at line 389 although other files in its project log through a logger. Console lines carry no level, category or structured properties and never reach the log pipeline or its exporters.
Console output used as the logging channel VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/Main.xaml.cs:393— `VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/Main.xaml.cs` reports through `Console.Write…` at line 393 although other files in its project log through a logger. Console lines carry no level, category or structured properties and never reach the log pipeline or its exporters.
Console output used as the logging channel VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/Main.xaml.cs:596— `VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/Main.xaml.cs` reports through `Console.Write…` at line 596 although other files in its project log through a logger. Console lines carry no level, category or structured properties and never reach the log pipeline or its exporters.
Console output used as the logging channel VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/MainDisplay.cs:380— `VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/MainDisplay.cs` reports through `Console.Write…` at line 380 although other files in its project log through a logger. Console lines carry no level, category or structured properties and never reach the log pipeline or its exporters.
Console output used as the logging channel VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs:379— `VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs` reports through `Console.Write…` at line 379 although other files in its project log through a logger. Console lines carry no level, category or structured properties and never reach the log pipeline or its exporters.
Console output used as the logging channel VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs:1457— `VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs` reports through `Console.Write…` at line 1457 although other files in its project log through a logger. Console lines carry no level, category or structured properties and never reach the log pipeline or its exporters.
Console output used as the logging channel VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winGameSetting.xaml.cs:44— `VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winGameSetting.xaml.cs` reports through `Console.Write…` at line 44 although other files in its project log through a logger. Console lines carry no level, category or structured properties and never reach the log pipeline or its exporters.
Console output used as the logging channel VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winGameSetting.xaml.cs:46— `VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winGameSetting.xaml.cs` reports through `Console.Write…` at line 46 although other files in its project log through a logger. Console lines carry no level, category or structured properties and never reach the log pipeline or its exporters.
Console output used as the logging channel VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winGameSetting.xaml.cs:48— `VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winGameSetting.xaml.cs` reports through `Console.Write…` at line 48 although other files in its project log through a logger. Console lines carry no level, category or structured properties and never reach the log pipeline or its exporters.
Console output used as the logging channel VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winGameSetting.xaml.cs:50— `VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winGameSetting.xaml.cs` reports through `Console.Write…` at line 50 although other files in its project log through a logger. Console lines carry no level, category or structured properties and never reach the log pipeline or its exporters.
Duplicated predicate VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/MainDisplay.cs:143— `Core.Controller!.EnableFunction && Core.Save!.Strength >= 10 && Core.Save!.Feeling < Core.Save!.FeelingMax` appears character-identically in 2 files — VPet-Simulator.Core/Display/MainDisplay.cs, VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.
Duplicated predicate VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs:2959— `Dispatcher.Invoke(() => Main.PetGrid.Tag) is IGraph ig && ig.GraphInfo.Name == "pinch" && ig.GraphInfo.Animat == AnimatType.B_Loop` appears character-identically in 2 files — VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs, VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/MPFriends.xaml.cs. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.
Duplicated predicate VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs:2964— `Dispatcher.Invoke(() => Main.PetGrid2.Tag) is IGraph ig2 && ig2.GraphInfo.Name == "pinch" && ig2.GraphInfo.Animat == AnimatType.B_Loop` appears character-identically in 2 files — VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs, VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/MPFriends.xaml.cs. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.
Duplicated predicate VPet-Simulator.Core/Graph/APNGAnimation.cs:358— `FrameRects == null || frameIndex < 0 || frameIndex >= FrameRects.Length || SpriteSheetSource == null` appears character-identically in 2 files — VPet-Simulator.Core/Graph/APNGAnimation.cs, VPet-Simulator.Core/Graph/PNGAnimation.cs. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.
Duplicated predicate VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs:2978— `Main.isPress && Main.DisplayType.Name == "pinch" && Main.DisplayType.Animat == AnimatType.B_Loop` appears character-identically in 2 files — VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs, VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/MPFriends.xaml.cs. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.
Duplicated predicate VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/MPFriends.xaml.cs:811— `e.Key == Key.Enter && e.KeyboardDevice.Modifiers.HasFlag(ModifierKeys.Control)` appears character-identically in 2 files — VPet-Simulator.Windows.Interface/TalkBox.xaml.cs, VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/MPFriends.xaml.cs. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.
Duplicated predicate VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/winMPBetterBuy.xaml.cs:323— `e.Key == Key.Enter && int.TryParse(TbPage.Text?.Trim(), out int page)` appears character-identically in 2 files — VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/winMPBetterBuy.xaml.cs, VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winBetterBuy.xaml.cs. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.
Duplicated predicate VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/MPFriends.xaml.cs:757— `gi.Type == Main.DisplayType.Type && gi.Animat == Main.DisplayType.Animat` appears character-identically in 2 files — VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/MPFriends.xaml.cs, VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/winMutiPlayer.xaml.cs. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.
Duplicated predicate VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs:2784— `infos.Length >= 2 && ulong.TryParse(infos[0], out ulong itemId) && ulong.TryParse(infos[1], out ulong authorId)` appears character-identically in 2 files — VPet-Simulator.Windows/MainWindow.cs, VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winGameSetting.xaml.cs. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.
Fat interface: IController (16 members) VPet-Simulator.Core/Handle/IController.cs:6— `IController` declares 16 members: `MoveWindows`, `GetWindowsDistanceLeft`, `GetWindowsDistanceRight`, `GetWindowsDistanceUp`, `GetWindowsDistanceDown`, `IfInActivateScreen`, `SetNowScreenActivate`, `ZoomRatio`, `PressLength`, `ShowPanel`, `ResetPosition`, `CheckPosition`, `EnableFunction`, `InteractionCycle`, `RePositionActive`, `AutoChangeWindow`. Counted as the author wrote them — a property is ONE member and its get/set accessors are not counted separately, and an event counts once. A wide interface forces every implementer and caller to depend on methods they don't use (the Interface-Segregation 'I' in SOLID). Split it into focused role-interfaces.
Fat interface: IGameSave (33 members) VPet-Simulator.Core/Handle/IGameSave.cs:8— `IGameSave` declares 33 members: `Name`, `HostName`, `Money`, `Exp`, `ExpBonus`, `Level`, `LevelUpNeed`, `Strength`, `StrengthMax`, `StoreStrength`, `ChangeStrength`, `StrengthChange`, `StrengthFood`, `StoreStrengthFood`, `StrengthChangeFood`, `ChangeStrengthFood`, `StrengthDrink`, `StoreStrengthDrink`, `ChangeStrengthDrink`, `StrengthChangeDrink`, `FeelingChange`, `ChangeFeeling`, `Feeling`, `FeelingMax`, `Health`, `Likability`, `LikabilityMax`, `CleanChange`, `StoreTake`, `EatFood`, `Mode`, `CalMode`, `ToLine`. Counted as the author wrote them — a property is ONE member and its get/set accessors are not counted separately, and an event counts once. A wide interface forces every implementer and caller to depend on methods they don't use (the Interface-Segregation 'I' in SOLID). Split it into focused role-interfaces.
Fat interface: IMainWindow (65 members) VPet-Simulator.Windows.Interface/IMainWindow.cs:20— `IMainWindow` declares 65 members: `PrefixSave`, `Args`, `IsSteamUser`, `SteamID`, `SteamAuthorID`, `Set`, `Pets`, `TalkAPI`, `TalkBoxCurr`, `Core`, `Main`, `Buff`, `version`, `Version`, `lastclicktime`, `Plugins`, `Foods`, `BuffEffects`, `LowFoodText`, `LowDrinkText`, `ClickTexts`, `SelectTexts`, `GetClickText`, `Photos`, `ImageSources`, `FileSources`, `SetZoomLevel`, `Save`, `LoadDIY`, `ShowSetting`, `ShowBetterBuy`, `ShowGallery`, `Close`, `Restart`, `MouseHitThrough`, `HashCheck`, `AudioPlayingVolume`, `CloseConfirm`, `HashCheckOff`, `Windows`, and 25 more. Counted as the author wrote them — a property is ONE member and its get/set accessors are not counted separately, and an event counts once. A wide interface forces every implementer and caller to depend on methods they don't use (the Interface-Segregation 'I' in SOLID). Split it into focused role-interfaces.
Fat interface: ISetting (38 members) VPet-Simulator.Windows.Interface/ISetting.cs:10— `ISetting` declares 38 members: `ZoomLevel`, `SetZoomLevel`, `VoiceVolume`, `SetVoiceVolume`, `AutoSaveInterval`, `SetAutoSaveInterval`, `BackupSaveMaxNum`, `TopMost`, `SetTopMost`, `LastCacheDate`, `Language`, `SetLanguage`, `PressLength`, `InteractionCycle`, `LogicInterval`, `SetLogicInterval`, `AllowMove`, `SetAllowMove`, `SmartMove`, `SetSmartMove`, `EnableFunction`, `SetEnableFunction`, `SmartMoveInterval`, `SetSmartMoveInterval`, `MessageBarOutside`, `StartRecordLast`, `StartRecordLastPoint`, `StartRecordPoint`, `MusicCatch`, `MusicMax`, `Resolution`, `AutoBuy`, `AutoGift`, `HideFromTaskControl`, `this[]`, `MPNOTouch`, `PetGraph`, `DeBug`. Counted as the author wrote them — a property is ONE member and its get/set accessors are not counted separately, and an event counts once. A wide interface forces every implementer and caller to depend on methods they don't use (the Interface-Segregation 'I' in SOLID). Split it into focused role-interfaces.
Fat interface: IMPFriend (24 members) VPet-Simulator.Windows.Interface/MutiPlayer/IMPFriend.cs:12— `IMPFriend` declares 24 members: `LobbyID`, `FriendID`, `IsMe`, `IsFriend`, `IsBlocked`, `IsPlayingThisGame`, `IsOnline`, `IsAway`, `IsBusy`, `IsSnoozing`, `Name`, `SteamLevel`, `Avatar`, `Core`, `ImageSources`, `SetPetGraph`, `Main`, `DisplayAuto`, `DisplayGraph`, `DisplayMessage`, `InConvenience`, `InConvenience`, `DisplayFoodAnimation`, `NOTouch`. Counted as the author wrote them — a property is ONE member and its get/set accessors are not counted separately, and an event counts once. Those 24 declarations carry 23 distinct name(s), so part of the width is overloading rather than separate responsibilities — but 23 operations clears the >15 bar on its own, so the row is about responsibilities, not signatures. A wide interface forces every implementer and caller to depend on methods they don't use (the Interface-Segregation 'I' in SOLID). Split it into focused role-interfaces.
Silent fallback default in catch VPet-Simulator.Windows/Function/MWController.cs:136— `IfInActivateScreen` swallows every exception into `return true;` — a data error becomes a silent behavior change with no trail. Log the failure or let validation throw.
Silent fallback default in catch VPet-Simulator.Windows/MutiPlayer/MPController.cs:141— `IfInActivateScreen` swallows every exception into `return true;` — a data error becomes a silent behavior change with no trail. Log the failure or let validation throw.
Silent fallback default in catch VPet-Simulator.Windows/WinDesign/winGameSetting.xaml.cs:421— `HasValidPluginSignatures` swallows every exception into `return false;` — a data error becomes a silent behavior change with no trail. Log the failure or let validation throw.
No ADRs found — No ADRs found. No recognised ADR directory (`docs/adr/`, `docs/decisions/`, `adr/`, `docs/rfcs/`, an `ADR0001/` folder, or their siblings) exists anywhere in this tree. What was searched, so you can tell an empty log from a search that missed one: every directory under the tree (build output, dependencies and VCS metadata excepted), for a document that is either any non-index page inside a recognised ADR directory, whatever its name and however deeply nested (`docs/adr/use-postgres.md`, `docs/adr/2024/0001-x.md`); or a file anywhere whose name is ADR-shaped (`0001-use-postgres.md`, `adr-012-caching.md`); or, when neither turned anything up, a document carrying the decision-record signature (an "Architecture Decision Record" heading, or Status / Context / Decision / Consequences as section headings). A decision log that clears none of these — unnumbered files outside any recognised directory, without those headings — is not seen by this check and this row is then wrong. If that is your case, say so rather than renaming anything; otherwise, consider recording architectural decisions in `docs/adr/`.
D34 · Knowledge Freshness· Orphaned files with no living knowledge · ×1
Orphaned files with no living knowledge — 1 of 83 analysed file(s) have no living knowledge left — their last meaningful change has decayed away, so if one breaks, no one currently understands it (counted over production source files of roughly 2,400 bytes or more, excluding vendored, generated and example/demo trees and test files identified by path convention, largest first; 83 of the 124 production source files in this repository met that bar). None is large enough to earn a read-through of its own, so this row stands in for the per-file rows rather than raising one each — most significant first: VPet-Simulator.Windows/Design/AutoUniformGrid.cs. Attach the read to the next change that touches one of them: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for, so the knowledge comes back at the cost of a change you were making anyway.
Orphaned file VPet-Simulator.Windows/Design/AutoUniformGrid.cs: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.
No tests found — No test suite could be collected — no discoverable tests to count. If this repository does test, wiring the suite to a framework a runner can collect (xUnit, NUnit or MSTest) is what makes it countable here; a pipeline step that invokes a runner is not evidence on its own, because a runner over an empty suite passes. Tests written as plain executables or shell/PowerShell harnesses are not collectible this way and are not scored here.
No ADRs — No Architecture Decision Records found — no conventional ADR directory, no numbered `NNNN-title` documents in any markup this check reads, and nothing ADR-shaped by content. Design rationale recorded elsewhere (a design-notes tree, a mailing list, pull-request discussion) is not visible to this check and is not re-findable per decision, so a future maintainer cannot ask why one choice was made and get an answer.
M2 · Architecture documentation· No architecture diagram/doc · ×1
No architecture diagram/doc — No C4/Structurizr/PlantUML/Mermaid/Graphviz/D2 diagram, no drawn diagram named for the architecture, no file named `architecture` or `design` in any markup this check reads, and nothing in the README, docs or contributor guides that announces the shape — no `## Architecture` heading, no "architecture overview"/"high-level design" phrasing, no "the architecture is …" introduction, no guided code tour. A shape laid out in prose that never names itself as the architecture is not visible to this check, and neither is one kept outside the repository, so this row reports the absence of a re-findable shape document — not evidence that nobody wrote the shape down.
No src/ separation — Production code isn't grouped under a src/ folder — it's spread across several top-level directories, so there's no one place that says 'this is the product'.
No SAST — No static application security testing detected. For this repository's stack, add CodeQL's csharp pack, or a .NET security analyzer package (or `semgrep --config=auto`, which runs on any language) — this repository has no CI pipeline yet, so run it locally to clear the existing findings, then make it a step of the first workflow you add so a regression fails the build. What was searched, so you can tell an absence from a miss: the 0 CI workflow file(s) in this repository, and the scanner and linter configuration checked in beside them. A scan that runs outside CI, one configured in your forge's web UI rather than in a committed file, or a tool whose name is none of those this check carries, is not seen — if that is your case the row is wrong, and saying so is more useful than adding a second scanner.
No changelog — No CHANGELOG/HISTORY/RELEASES file — what shipped when isn't easy to reconstruct for support or audit. (Versioning/tagging makes releases traceable, but a changelog records the what.)
X2 · Cancellation propagation· Not all async methods take a CancellationToken · ×1
Not all async methods take a CancellationToken — Only 2/28 async methods accept a CancellationToken, so in-flight work can't be stopped early when the caller gives up — whatever ends it in your host (shutdown signal, timeout, abandoned request, user cancel). Thread a token through the call chain and honour it at each await and loop; where a method genuinely cannot be interrupted, omitting it is a deliberate choice — judge against your hosting model.
Null-forgiving operator (`!`) suppressions reduce the NRT score — ~5.2 `!` suppressions per 1k syntax nodes — 822 suppression(s) across the 159172 syntax node(s) in code where nullable warnings are ENABLED, which is the only code a `!` can suppress anything in (a `!` under `#nullable disable` is inert and is not counted, and its file's nodes are not in the denominator). Each one tells the compiler to trust you about null, suppressing the very safety NRTs provide.
Every external tool invocation behind a deep-scan dimension — the tool, its captured version, the exact command, how many findings it yielded, and a link to the retained raw output. To reproduce any finding: check out the same commit and run the command shown (repo-relative — never an absolute scratch path). The complete raw scanner output is retained verbatim under artifacts/raw/ (indexed in artifacts/raw/index.json); per-invocation exit codes and wall-clock durations are in sidecar.json — kept out of this table so the rendered report stays byte-identical across runs of the same commit.
nuget: not applicable — nuget: the solution did not restore on the analyzer's .NET SDK (an SDK/target-framework/restore mismatch, common for an older codebase), so there was no restored dependency graph to scan
trivy: not applicable — No Infrastructure-as-Code or container manifests found (Dockerfile, Docker Compose, Terraform, Kubernetes/Helm, CloudFormation, ARM, Bicep, Ansible); nothing to scan.
semgrep: not applicable — No personal data was found crossing a boundary the PII/GDPR ruleset checks — nothing written to a log or console sink, placed in a URL or query string, or persisted to browser storage. That is a clean result for the LEAK surface only: this ruleset detects personal data escaping, it does not inventory the personal data a repository holds, so it is not evidence that this repository has no personal-data surface. The personal-data map (Appendix C) and the C1-C5 compliance cards are what speak to that. semgrep could not parse 1 file(s) — `VPet.Solution/ViewModelInitialize.cs` — so the PII/GDPR sweep did not cover the unparsed regions of them; rows reported elsewhere in those files are real.
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 01a168b2-c1fb-719e-9a8b-f1ca0c9299d2 · every finding is also locatable in findings.md, and the complete scoring record (with exit codes + durations) in sidecar.json.
Issues: 37 · Warnings: 401 · Recommendations: 73 · Info: 13 — Appendix A · all findings · full markdown report.
Generated by Watchdog — deterministic code-health analysis. 23-10-2026 @ 12:18 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.