Public report of akfamily/akshare, published 20 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, 20 October 2026, 19:03 UTC · Survey ID cd_24edfbbc8a0e4761b9b0458ceee0b69e
akfamily/akshare
Measured 20 October 2026, 19:01 UTC, at code version fe10d1d
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: 97,283 lines of product code in 2 projects, tests not counted · Estimated rebuild effort: about 0.6 person-years · Weakest lens: Code Health, 37
Findings by how serious they are
101 critical2986 serious229 minor
12 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
20 October 2026, 19:01 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 ▸
58of 62 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.
3299of 3316 findings point to an exact file and line, so you can open each one in the code. The other 17 concern the repository as a whole, such as missing documentation.
62dimensions across 5 lenses, read from 97,283 lines of product code in 2 projects.
akfamily/akshare scores 47 out of 100 and is rated Weak, while four of its five lenses score higher still: Architecture at 88, Production Readiness at 61 and Security and Compliance at 54, all rated Adequate, and Maturity at 49, rated Weak.
The score is lower than those four because the weakest lens counts most, and here that is Code Health, which scores 37 and is rated Weak. Its Type Safety dimension scores 0 out of 10, and until that reaches 4, Code Health can't be rated higher than Adequate. The first actions are to adopt TypeScript for the frontend: add a typecheck step to the build, then either type-check the existing JavaScript in place (`checkJs`/JSDoc types) or convert the highest-traffic modules first — no file is typed today, so this is an adoption, not a clean-up and to split each oversized file along the responsibilities already in it, into smaller focused modules in the same package, and if Code Health rose to 70, the score would rise from 47 to about 55.
101 findings are critical: 46 in Static Analysis (SAST), 34 in Secrets (history), 18 in REDACTED Scanning, two in IaC & Container Security and one in Dependency Vulnerabilities.
Watchdog couldn't measure 11 dimensions in this code, among them Code Coverage, Internal API Consistency and Navigability, so they are left out of the score. The product code is 97,283 lines, which would take an estimated 0.6 person-years, around €88,000, 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: 50 findings
These 50 critical or serious findings were in the previous survey, on 4 October 2026, and are gone from this one.
Exception handling · Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) REDACTED
Exception handling · Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_sina.py
Exception handling · Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_sina.py
Exception handling · Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) REDACTED
Exception handling · Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) REDACTED
Exception handling · Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_notice.py
Rebuild cost: about €88,000 · Estimate
Cost to rebuild
€29,000 to €150,000, for 489 to 1,550 hours of work, about 0.6 person-years for 1 to 2 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 47. 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: 97,283 lines of product code
How the estimate is made: Watchdog prices the hours a team would need to write this code again, at €60 to €95 an hour. Declarations and boilerplate are priced at a fast rate and logic at a slower one, and the logic is then multiplied by the difficulty of the problem and by the quality factor. The estimate can be about 30% off either way, and it moves most with the hourly rate and the difficulty. For this code, every line is priced as straight logic, which keeps the estimate on the low side.
Top priorities
The three actions that raise the score most for the work they take. The full ranked list is in the Roadmap.
1
Adopt TypeScript for the frontend: add a typecheck step to the build, then either type-check the existing JavaScript in place (`checkJs`/JSDoc types) or convert the highest-traffic modules first — no file is typed today, so this is an adoption, not a clean-up.
Raises the score by about 7 points · Medium effort · Type Safety
2
Split each oversized file along the responsibilities already in it, into smaller focused modules in the same package.
Raises the score by about 7 points · Medium effort · Large Files
3
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.
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 €88,000 to build again, about 0.6 person-years of work. Its weakest lens is Code Health, at 37 (Weak). Code Health is about how easy the code is to read and change safely, and code that is hard to read is slow and risky to change, so every future change costs more than it should. Because the weakest lens counts most in the score, work on Code Health also moves the score most.
Based on: the rebuild estimate · the Code Health grade · how much each lens counts
What to do: Start with the Code Health actions in Top priorities.
If you do one thing first · First action
Adopt TypeScript for the frontend: add a typecheck step to the build, then either type-check the existing JavaScript in place (`checkJs`/JSDoc types) or convert the highest-traffic modules first — no file is typed today, so this is an adoption, not a clean-up. Of all the actions in this report, it raises the score most for the work it takes: about 7 points for medium effort. 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 6.4 out of 10. Code at that level is slower to change than clean code, and Watchdog estimates the extra work at 4% to 9% on every change. The history of the code shows how much it changes: about 34,568 lines over the last 90 days, which is about 140,192 lines a year. At that pace, the extra work comes to an estimated 13.9 to 83.2 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.
At a glance — Code Health · 37% · Weak · gated by D2, R1, R3 ·
Findings mapped to OWASP categories; the specific CVEs/secrets are in the Security dimension cards below and findings.md (redacted only on the public version of this report).
OWASP category
Findings
Severity
A05:2025 — Injection
278
High / Critical
A07:2025 — Authentication Failures
53
High / Critical
A03:2025 — Software Supply Chain Failures
9
High / Critical
A02:2025 — Security Misconfiguration
9
High / Critical
Roadmap
Begin by introducing type safety to the frontend through a build-time check or incremental conversion of high-traffic modules, while simultaneously splitting the five largest files into smaller, focused modules to improve maintainability. Next, document significant design decisions in a dedicated folder to establish architectural context, and immediately resolve the 18 leaked secrets found in scanning, prioritizing the identified Python files. Finally, address the 60 instances of swallowed exceptions to ensure robust error handling across the application.
Ranked by impact ÷ effort. "Helps" is the estimated gain on the 0–100 health score.
Do this
Helps
Effort
Dimension
Adopt TypeScript for the frontend: add a typecheck step to the build, then either type-check the existing JavaScript in place (`checkJs`/JSDoc types) or convert the highest-traffic modules first — no file is typed today, so this is an adoption, not a clean-up.
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.
Reconcile the README with reality: docs/uv.md runs `powershell -ExecutionPolicy ByPass -c "irm https://astral.sh/uv/install.ps1`, but `https:/astral.sh/uv/install.ps1` does not exist; docs/uv.md documents the environment variable `UV_DEFAULT_INDEX`, but no code, script or configuration file names it.
Per-file score 0–10 — a quality signature. Of 250 files carrying findings, judged against the Production bar: 8% slop · 64% mixed · 28% near-clean.
File
Score
Band
Worst signal
REDACTED
0.0
Slop
REDACTED Scanning: Leaked secret: REDACTED
REDACTED
1.4
Slop
REDACTED Scanning: Leaked secret: REDACTED
REDACTED
1.4
Slop
REDACTED Scanning: Leaked secret: REDACTED
REDACTED
1.6
Slop
REDACTED Scanning: Leaked secret: REDACTED
REDACTED
1.7
Slop
IaC & Container Security: High IaC: REDACTED
REDACTED
1.8
Slop
Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED
1.8
Slop
Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED
1.8
Slop
Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED
1.8
Slop
REDACTED Scanning: Leaked secret: REDACTED
REDACTED
1.8
Slop
Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED
1.9
Slop
Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED
1.9
Slop
Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED
2.1
Slop
Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED
2.4
Slop
Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED
2.5
Slop
Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED
2.8
Slop
REDACTED Scanning: Leaked secret: REDACTED
REDACTED
2.9
Slop
Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED
3.5
Slop
REDACTED Scanning: Leaked secret: REDACTED
REDACTED
3.6
Slop
REDACTED Scanning: Leaked secret: REDACTED
REDACTED
4.0
Mixed
Static Analysis (SAST): Medium: REDACTED
How the grades work
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 — 101
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 — 2986
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 — 229
Recorded, with no effect on how the codebase functions.
Present so the survey is complete, not because it needs doing.
Could not be resolved — 12
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. 58 of 62 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 — 62 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, 3299 of 3316 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.
D8 Code Coverage — 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. Coverage NOT MEASURED: test source is present (.py) but the built-in coverage collector has no runner for this repository's ecosystem — so this suite was never executed by it. Not scored — this is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a defect in the repo. To have real coverage read, produce a coverage report in a standard format (`coverage run -m pytest` then `coverage xml`) 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. You can widen what we reach: optional: produce a coverage report in a standard format (`coverage run -m pytest` then `coverage xml`) 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 — then the real number is read on the next scan.
D12 Dependency Hygiene — not measured this run — This is a true statement about the repository that carries nothing for its owner to act on, so it is reported here rather than as a defect in their code. This repository's 16 shipped Python distribution(s) across 2 manifest(s) WERE read; what went unanswered is the currency half, because it grades an EXACT pin against the newest release and every declaration here is a floor or a range — which installs the newest release it admits and so cannot be behind one. So pypi.org was never asked. This is a true statement about the repository, and the healthy one, NOT a gap on our side: no reader we could write would find a currency question here.
D22 Internal API Consistency — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. D22 identifies the intentionally-exposed surface from `IsPackable` and `.Contracts` project names, MSBuild conventions read off the loaded project set. This target exposed no such projects, so the probe never ran; this says nothing about whether the repository has a public API. This repository commits no C#/VB source at all, so there was never an MSBuild project set to read these conventions off. That is OUR side and it is an ADMISSION gap, not an environment fault: it declares a published package (setup.py), but no published-package marker D22 reads admitted any project here. D22 DOES collect the public API of every language in this tree, and admits a project only when its manifest makes that ecosystem's publication act in a form the marker recognises — so what is missing is not a collector but an admission rule for the publication act this repository makes, if it makes one. The remedy is a better discriminator for that marker — not a collector, and no change to the scan image can close it. The marker's rules are measured to refuse applications, so one refused repository is the rule working as calibrated; several are the evidence that it is too strict. For npm the surface is what a published package.json's entry points (exports, main, module, types) export, followed through the source; an entry that names build output the tree does not commit (dist/, build/) is not followed back to source, because only a tsconfig outDir/rootDir pair states that mapping and a bundler's input lives in executable configuration this engine does not evaluate.
D27 Navigability — 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. Navigability is taken over call sites whose callee resolved. For C# that population includes calls into referenced assemblies; for this language only calls declared inside the repository count, so the abstention threshold reads the repository's use of its standard library as a resolution failure. That is a limit of this analyzer, not a build problem in this repository.
AX6 Interface segregation — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is computed over the public interfaces this run's compilations declare, and none was loaded, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
AXR1 Runtime accessibility — 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. Render strategy: boot via REDACTED (REDACTED). docker build failed (exit 1) — DEPRECATED: The legacy builder is deprecated and will be removed in a future release.
Install the buildx component to build images with BuildKit:
https://docs.docker.com/go/bui…; runtime evidence skipped.
C1 Data Protection — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. These personal data controls are read from declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names and guard methods in a C# source model, and none was loaded on this run, so there was nothing to gather. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository lacks personal data controls.
GD1 Unfinished & placeholder code — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check reads C# syntax, F#, JavaScript/TypeScript, Dart, Ruby and Scala source only, and this repository's Python is most of its product and is not read yet, so it had nothing of this repository's product to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
IC1 Incompleteness & stubs — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check reads C# syntax, JavaScript/TypeScript, Java, Dart, Ruby and Scala source only, and this repository's Python is most of its product and is not read yet, so it had nothing of this repository's product to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
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.
R10 Code Duplication — 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. 32 further occurrence(s) are not listed individually; the score already reflects all 72.
S1 Web-Security Posture — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. These web-security controls are read from declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names and guard methods in a C# source model, and none was loaded on this run, so there was nothing to gather. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository lacks web-security controls.
X3 Exception handling — 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. 20 further occurrence(s) are not listed individually; the score already reflects all 60.
X4 Structured logging — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check reads C# syntax, and JavaScript/TypeScript, Java, Kotlin, Python, PHP, Dart, Ruby, Scala and Rust source only, and no C# was loaded, and this repository's JavaScript/TypeScript, Python and PHP make no call through a named logger, so it had nothing of this repository's product to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X5 Nullable reference types — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check reads C# syntax and MSBuild project configuration, TypeScript source and its tsconfig files, Java source and its package and module declarations, PHP source and its PHPStan and Psalm configuration, Dart source and its pubspec language version, Ruby source and its Sorbet and Steep configuration, Scala source and its build's explicit-nulls, WartRemover and Scalafix settings, and Kotlin source only, and no C# was loaded, no TypeScript was found, and this repository's Python is not read yet, so it had nothing of this repository's product to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
Repo exclusion declarations (.gitattributes linguist-generated/vendored, .editorconfig generated_code): none declared — every source file was scored.
Limitations & what we did not check
Watchdog assesses the repository exactly as committed, and only the repository. By design it does not reach outside the source tree: the live cloud account, the running CI/CD pipeline, the host's branch-protection and approval rules, the production configuration, or a restore actually exercised against a backup are all out of scope. That boundary is a feature, not a gap — a repo-relative, deterministic scan re-runs identically on any commit and every finding opens at a real file and line, where a live audit can neither be reproduced nor traced. The visible consequence is that controls which leave no in-repo evidence are reported as "not evidenced" and excluded from the score rather than awarded a number a static scan cannot justify.
Per-dimension blind spots
For each dimension that was measured, what a static, repo-only scan structurally cannot see — the honest edge of the measurement, not a failure of it.
D1 Cyclomatic Complexity: Cyclomatic complexity counts branches statically — it cannot tell an essential decision tree from accidental tangle, nor see complexity that lives in data or configuration (large switch-case token tables, DSL lexers/parsers, data-as-code rule tables) rather than control flow: a tokenizer's many single-character cases read as high complexity though each branch is trivial.
D2 Cognitive Complexity: Cognitive-complexity heuristics approximate how hard code is to follow; genuine domain difficulty and well-named intent that eases reading are not captured.
D3 God Classes: "God class" is sized by members and responsibilities visible in the type — a deliberately broad facade over a coherent subsystem can read the same as an accidental grab-bag. For front-end JS the file-length check is cohesion-aware (a single-responsibility module — one class/IIFE — earns a 3× threshold), but cohesion is approximated from top-level declarations, not true dependency structure.
D4 Code Duplication: Duplication is token-similarity — an in-process token-stream comparison over sliding windows, with type-aware normalization — so it finds copy-paste, not semantic duplication expressed differently. Committed machine-written code (scaffolded migrations, designer/codegen output, protobuf/OpenAPI stubs, model snapshots) is EXCLUDED — its repetition is the tool's, not the team's — so the score reflects hand-written duplication only.
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.
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.
D11 Test Reliability: Flakiness is inferred from history/markers — Watchdog runs the suite once (for coverage), not the repeated runs under varied conditions that reveal nondeterminism, so a flaky test never recorded as failing is invisible here.
D13 REDACTED Scanning: REDACTED detection is signature- and entropy-based on the current tree — a secret that does not match a known pattern, or one already rotated, will not be flagged (a clean scan is "nothing matched", not "no secrets exist").
D14 License Compliance: License compatibility is checked against declared package metadata and a policy — mislabelled or missing license metadata, and obligations that depend on how you distribute, are not resolved here.
D15 Churn × Complexity Hotspots: Churn hotspots come from git history — a freshly imported or squashed repository has no churn signal, and recent rewrites can mask a historically risky file.
D16 Bus Factor: Bus-factor is a time-decayed model of commit attribution (who has recently, repeatedly worked a file), not comprehension — pairing, review and reading-without-committing spread knowledge it can't see; bot commits and shared accounts still distort it.
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.
D19 Documentation Quality: Documentation quality is judged by an LLM over a bounded sample of docs — it reads what is written, not whether the docs match the running system, and it is advisory, not a measurement. Its critique rows are drawn from a closed category vocabulary and each row means the same thing in every run, so two scans can be compared row by row; the SET that fires is still a sample, and does not repeat exactly. Measured on one frozen input, six scans at one engine SHA: 2-5 critique rows per scan, 8 distinct rows across the six, 3 of those 8 seen in only one scan. So a D19 row is evidence about the documentation, but a COUNT of D19 rows is not a quantity — never read a change in it as an improvement or a regression.
D21 Naming Consistency: Naming quality is an LLM judgement over a bounded sample — it assesses clarity/consistency of the names it sees, not domain-correctness, and is advisory.
D26 Project Cohesion: Project focus is sized from members/namespaces per project — a project that is broad by deliberate design reads the same as one that has sprawled.
D28 Secrets (history): Secret-history scanning sweeps the git log for known patterns — a secret that predates the available history, or never matched a signature, is not found (clean means "nothing matched in the history we can see").
D29 Static Analysis (SAST): SAST findings are pattern-based (semgrep) — it finds classes of bug it has rules for; logic flaws, auth/authorization gaps and issues needing runtime context are out of reach (and clean means "no rule matched").
D30 Dependency Vulnerabilities: CVE matching depends on accurate package/version metadata and on the advisory databases — a vulnerability with no published advisory, or in code not declared as a dependency, is not seen. Coverage needs a RESOLVED graph: an unpinned requirements.txt, or a pom without a resolved build, yields partial coverage rather than a clean verdict. An ecosystem the analyzer cannot scan is reported as unmeasured, never as clean.
D31 IaC & Container Security: IaC scanning checks Dockerfiles/Terraform/Kubernetes against best-practice rules — it cannot see the live cloud account, runtime configuration, or drift between the committed config and what is actually deployed.
D34 Knowledge Freshness: Freshness is decayed commit RECENCY, not comprehension — code read often but rarely committed reads as orphaned, and stable code that genuinely needs no changes is penalised the same as forgotten code; bot/squash commits distort it like the bus factor.
D35 Change Coupling: Change coupling is co-change in COMMITS — files split across separate commits, or coupled only through a shared config/build step, read as uncoupled, and a sweeping commit (rename/format) is excluded so it doesn't couple everything. It shows that files change together, not WHY: a high coupling can be a healthy cohesive pair as readily as a hidden leak.
D43 Malicious Dependencies: Only packages some vulnerability database has already NAMED as malicious are seen — a compromise published in the last hours, or never reported at all, is invisible here, and this dimension reading 10 is not evidence that a dependency is trustworthy. There is no typosquat or dependency-confusion analysis: a package nobody has reported is simply absent from the feeds. Coverage is the dependency scan's: an ecosystem that could not be scanned is disclosed as unmeasured, never as clean.
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 REDACTED (D31's subject), in a CI workflow (D29's), or in a file this pass does not parse (go.mod, a Gemfile ruby directive) is invisible here, which is why a repository declaring none of them abstains rather than scoring. Only frameworks with a PUBLISHED support policy are tracked: React, Flask and Express publish none, so their age cannot be judged and their absence from a report is not a statement that they are supported.
AX10 Code composition: Role is inferred from namespace/folder convention, not semantics — a domain concept living in a folder named "Services" reads as application, and the split is lines-of-code, not business value. The business-logic-share score is a SOFT, FLOORED signal: it contributes to the Architecture lens but is floored at the Critical gate, so an infrastructure-heavy design (a gateway, an ETL, a driver) is legitimately low without being nuked to zero.
M4 Documentation accuracy: Onboarding quality is an LLM read of the docs/setup present — it cannot run the onboarding or measure how long a real new joiner takes; the verdict is sampled and advisory.
P4 Deployment & Rollback: Approval/branch-protection rules live in repository settings the scan cannot see — only their in-repo evidence (config files, workflows) is checked, so a control enforced purely in the host's settings reads as "not evidenced".
P6 Release Hygiene: Rollback/observability controls are inferred from repo artefacts (pipelines, dashboards-as-code) — controls configured in external tooling, with no in-repo trace, cannot be credited.
The LLM boundary
LLM-set scores this run (4): D19, D21, D26, 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.
58 method(s) exceeded the cyclomatic complexity threshold of 15; the worst was v_cookie at 118. A further 1 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 jm.webDES at 18 — they are counted neither in the figure above nor in this dimension's score.
+ 46 more group(s) — more in Appendix A; the complete list is findings.md.
What to do
Bring the 16 bodies over 30 down to 30 or less in Cyclomatic Complexity — start with v_cookie (cyclomatic 118), v_cookie (cyclomatic 118), ths.v_cookie (cyclomatic 117). — 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 16 together lifts Cyclomatic Complexity from 5.5 to about 7.1/10, projected with the scoring formula itself and assuming each lands exactly at 30; a cleaner split scores higher.
Enforce Cyclomatic Complexity in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — 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.
+ 90 more group(s) — more in Appendix A; the complete list is findings.md.
What to do
Bring the 14 bodies over 60 down to 60 or less in Cognitive Complexity — start with JSON.decode_composite (cognitive 134), v_cookie (cognitive 134), v_cookie (cognitive 134). — 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 14 together lifts Cognitive Complexity from 3.1 to about 4.9/10, projected with the scoring formula itself and assuming each lands exactly at 60; a cleaner split scores higher.
Enforce Cognitive Complexity in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — 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 Classes8.7 / 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 25 FileTooLong finding(s) in God Classes — start with ths.js (2), demjson.py, REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (25 warning-level).
Resolve the 3 FunctionTooLong finding(s) in God Classes — start with ths.js (2), REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (3 warning-level).
Resolve the 1 TooManyMethods finding(s) in God Classes — start with demjson.py. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
Enforce God Classes in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — 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.
572 duplicated block group(s) detected. A further 2090 rows report members as variants of one another; they aggregate block groups already counted above and are not themselves counted.
Edited copy of a member (27 corresponding lines) · ×108REDACTED:2257
Edited copy of a member (26 corresponding lines) · ×107akshare/index/index_stock_zh_csindex.py:18
Edited copy of a member (48 corresponding lines) · ×83REDACTED:2426
Edited copy of a member (30 corresponding lines) · ×73akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46
Edited copy of a member (42 corresponding lines) · ×69REDACTED:659
+ 490 more group(s) — more in Appendix A; the complete list is findings.md.
What to do
Resolve the 108 Edited copy of a member (27 corresponding lines) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with index_stock_hk.py (18), REDACTED (16), index_stock_zh.py (12). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (108 warning-level).
Resolve the 107 Edited copy of a member (26 corresponding lines) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with index_stock_hk.py (21), reits_basic.py (14), index_stock_zh.py (10). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (107 warning-level).
Resolve the 83 Edited copy of a member (48 corresponding lines) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with REDACTED (20), bond_zh_sina.py (19), REDACTED (18). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (83 warning-level).
Enforce Code Duplication in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — 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.
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.
D9 · Test Distribution10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ 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.
79 test methods: 76 unit, 3 integration, 0 BDD, 0 e2e. The Python suite contributes 79 test function(s) across 6 file(s) declaring at least one — every `def test…` in a file pytest or unittest would collect, which is those frameworks' own definition of a case; a parametrize table counts once, so this is a floor. Its tier split is read from file names and paths only.
✓ On the Gold path — maintain.
Detailed fixes: d9_recommendation.md.
Do you agree with this assessment?
D11 · Test Reliability10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified
What it measures: Whether the tests pass reliably, with no flakiness.
Method: Suite re-run N times within tiered wall-clock budgets (unit to e2e); tests failing non-deterministically across runs flagged; guarded tests retried when #if guards detected.
What it measures: Whether any secrets (keys, tokens, passwords) have leaked into the code.
Method: In-process native secret scanner (entropy plus signature patterns) across all tracked files; no external tool. A clean result is a measured 10, not no-data zero. Deterministic.
Resolve the 18 Leaked secret finding(s) in REDACTED Scanning — start with REDACTED (5), REDACTED (2), REDACTED (2). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (18 issue-level).
Enforce REDACTED Scanning in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.
Detailed fixes: d13_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.
What it measures: 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 30 shipped Python distribution(s) use a banned license. Licences were resolved from PyPI over the distributions a consumer installs — this repository's 16 declared runtime requirement(s) closed transitively over each distribution's published `requires_dist` (14 reached that way). Requirements it states ONLY under an extra, a PEP 735 dependency group, a Poetry dev group or a dev-named requirements file are excluded: pip does not install any of them for a consumer. ★ This repository commits no dependency lockfile that this pass reads, so each licence is the one PyPI publishes for the distribution's CURRENT release rather than for a pinned version. 3 of them publish no licence on PyPI this pass can read; that is missing data, not a violation, and none of them is charged. This repository publishes itself under MIT, which is its own choice and is not judged here.
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 4 Hotspot finding(s) in Churn × Complexity Hotspots — start with macro_china_nbs.py, other_taptap.py, check_punctuation.py. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (4 warning-level).
Detailed fixes: d15_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.
Do you agree with this assessment?
D16 · Bus Factor8.5 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified
What it measures: Whether knowledge is concentrated in too few people (the "bus factor").
Method: Living knowledge per author via time-decayed commit attribution (6-month half-life, focus weighting) across largest source files. Deterministic, avoids blame's mechanical-refactor false positives.
43 source file(s) have their living knowledge concentrated in one author (≥90% of recent, decayed contribution). The largest is REDACTED. Counted over 293 of the 405 production source files in this repository: the rest are under the ~2,400-byte size floor this dimension measures over.
Off-boarding risk: anonymized user #1 · ×2
What to do
Resolve the 2 Off-boarding risk finding(s) in Bus Factor. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 recommendation-level).
Detailed fixes: d16_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.
2 deducted task-comment markers across 97283 LoC (0.0/KLoC) → score 10.0. Task comments only: this repository's language is read without a compiler, so D17's suppression, dead-code and commented-out-code arms did not run and this score counts fewer marker kinds than a .NET repository's would.
TodoComment · ×2REDACTED:11
What to do
Resolve the 2 TodoComment finding(s) in Explicit Debt — start with REDACTED, REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 warning-level).
Enforce Explicit Debt in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — 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 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.
AKShare 的文档质量非常高，包含 README、installation.md、platform.md、registry.md、requirements.txt 和 akdocker.md 等文件。项目概览文档清晰地介绍了 AKTools HTTP API 版本的定位和风险提示；安装指导全面覆盖了通用 pip 安装、国内镜像加速、uv/Anaconda/容器部署，并附带升级说明；接口检索文档详细描述了 ak.search、ak.interface_info 和 ak.list_categories 的使用方式，且完整列出了所有类目。特色部分详述了代码规范、Python 3.13 支持、文档支持和 HTTP API 工具 AKTools。 This is a data repository for the AKShare project (a volatility and risk analytics tool), with two README files and 51 architecture/Docs markdown files. The single visible document is an Oxford-Man volatility data article whose body is clipped mid-table; it contains no overview of what AKShare does or what it stores, no installation/build instructions, no usage examples, no contribution guidance, and no licence statement. The architecture/Docs set (51 documents) would cover the project's scope, design, and API, but the visible README alone cannot be judged from its own text. (12 of 25 sampled documents could not be assessed: 1 of 3 evaluation groups failed.)
What to do
Improve Documentation Quality — currently 8.6/10. — AKShare 的文档质量非常高，包含 README、installation.md、platform.md、registry.md、requirements.txt 和 akdocker.md 等文件。项目概览文档清晰地介绍了 AKTools HTTP API 版本的定位和风险提示；安装指导全面覆盖了通用 pip 安装、国内镜像加速、uv/Anaconda/容器部署，并附带升级说明；接口检索文档详细描述了 ak.search、ak.interface_info 和 ak.list_categories 的使用方式，且完整列出了所有类目。特色部分详述了代码规范、Python 3.13 支持、文档支持和 HTTP API 工具 AKTools。 This is a data repository for the AKShare project (a volatility and risk analytics tool), with two README files and 51 architecture/Docs markdown files. The single visible document is an Oxford-Man volatility data article whose body is clipped mid-table; it contains no overview of what AKShare does or what it stores, no installation/build instructions, no usage examples, no contribution guidance, and no licence statement. The architecture/Docs set (51 documents) would cover the project's scope, design, and API, but the visible README alone cannot be judged from its own text. (12 of 25 sampled documents could not be assessed: 1 of 3 evaluation groups failed.)
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.
1 of 2 build units (Python) flagged as possibly oversized/incoherent.
Projects may be oversized for their cohesion
What to do
Resolve the 1 Projects may be oversized for their cohesion finding(s) in Project Cohesion. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 recommendation-level).
Detailed fixes: d26_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.
What it measures: Whether any secrets were ever committed — scanned across the full git history, not just now.
Method: REDACTED scan via TWO gitleaks detect passes in an isolated checkout — the full git history, then a second --no-git pass over the working tree as it stands — merged and de-duplicated by (rule, file, line); each match flagged High. Both invocations are recorded in the audit trail. Exhaustive; when the tool is absent, or when its output cannot be parsed into the expected shape, the dimension is WITHHELD as an explicit measurement gap on our side — unscored and excluded from the lens, never a hedged middling score.
34 finding(s): 0 critical, 34 high, 0 medium, 0 low. Remediation for historically-committed secrets is credential rotation — they remain in history regardless of later deletion.
REDACTED
REDACTED
What to do
Resolve the 34 REDACTED finding(s) in Secrets (history) — start with REDACTED (30), REDACTED, REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (34 issue-level).
Resolve the 1 Rotate the exposed credentials finding(s) in Secrets (history). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 recommendation-level).
Detailed fixes: d28_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.
What it measures: Real static-analysis (SAST) findings — likely security bugs in the code, any language.
Method: Polyglot static analysis via semgrep across the repo using the pinned, image-baked p/security-audit + p/owasp-top-ten rulesets (no scan-time registry fetch); severity rules (ERROR/WARNING/INFO) map to a full-band severity-weighted score. Exhaustive, deterministic; degrades on parse failure.
Coverage: semgrep pattern rules over all files — exhaustive for the rule set, blind to classes of bug without a rule (clean = no rule matched).
278 finding(s): 0 critical, 46 high, 26 medium, 206 low. 9 unpinned-GitHub-Actions row(s) are reported here but scored by D36 (supply-chain provenance), which measures that posture as `pinned_actions` — one pinning decision is charged once, not once per lens. Separately, one or more rules could not re-parse an embedded snippet in 1 file(s) (e.g. a workflow `run:` block read as shell). Those files WERE scanned and their other rows are unaffected; only those rules' view of those snippets is missing.
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
+ 10 more group(s) — more in Appendix A; the complete list is findings.md.
What to do
Resolve the 34 REDACTED finding(s) in Static Analysis (SAST) — start with REDACTED (6), REDACTED (4), REDACTED (4). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (34 issue-level).
Resolve the 1 REDACTED finding(s) in Static Analysis (SAST) — start with REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 issue-level).
No action in Static Analysis (SAST) — all 9 REDACTED finding(s) are reported here at file:line but scored by D36 (supply-chain provenance), so none is charged to this dimension. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (9 issue-level, 0 of them charged here).
Detailed fixes: d29_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.
What it measures: Whether any dependency has a known published vulnerability (CVE), direct or transitive, in ANY ecosystem the repository declares — Dart pub, Elixir and Erlang via Hex, Go modules, Java and Kotlin via Maven/Gradle, JavaScript/npm, .NET/NuGet, PHP/Composer, Python/PyPI, RubyGems, Rust/Cargo and Swift.
Method: Dependency-CVE scan across every ecosystem the repository declares, scored ONCE. Three sources are unioned and deduplicated by advisory identity (rule id + alias closure, CVE<->GHSA) scoped to package+version, keeping the worst severity: `osv-scanner --recursive` over osv.dev for Dart pub, Elixir/Hex (and Erlang, whose `rebar.lock` syft first converts to a CycloneDX SBOM the scanner reads, with rows attributed back to the lock), Go, Java and Kotlin via Maven/Gradle (and Scala, whose sbt build's pinned direct declarations are written into a CycloneDX SBOM the scanner reads, with rows attributed back to the build file), npm, PHP/Composer, Python/PyPI, RubyGems, Rust/Cargo and Swift; `trivy fs --scanners vuln` for npm lockfiles; and `dotnet list package --vulnerable --include-transitive` for NuGet (with per-advisory collapse of the project x target-framework fan-out), plus a DECLARED-dependency arm that resolves a published gem's gemspec against rubygems.org where no Gemfile.lock is committed. `SeverityScore(c,h,m,l, normalizer 8.0)`. NotApplicable only when NO ecosystem is readable; if any applicable ecosystem could not be scanned the findings are REPORTED and the score is withheld. Supersedes the npm and OSV arms, retired 2026-09-05.
Resolve the 1 High CVE finding(s) in Dependency Vulnerabilities — start with REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 issue-level).
Detailed fixes: d30_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.
Resolve the 2 High IaC finding(s) in IaC & Container Security — start with REDACTED (2). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 issue-level).
Resolve the 7 Medium IaC finding(s) in IaC & Container Security — start with REDACTED (5), REDACTED (2). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (7 warning-level).
Detailed fixes: d31_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.
What it measures: Whether anyone still has living knowledge of each file, or it has been orphaned — last understood long ago by someone now gone quiet. The sibling of the bus factor: D16 asks who owns it, D34 asks whether anyone still knows it.
Method: File orphaning as total living-knowledge decay below one focused-commit's worth within a year, computed per-file from the D16 decay model. Exhaustive, deterministic over fixed history.
Every significant source file has living knowledge — recently and meaningfully worked. Counted over 293 of the 405 production source files in this repository: the rest are under the ~2,400-byte size floor this dimension measures over.
What it measures: Whether files that change together actually belong together — pairs that repeatedly co-change in git history despite having no explicit code dependency, surfacing the hidden/logical coupling (and boundaries in the wrong place) a static scan can't see.
Method: Pairwise co-occurrence over the per-commit file sets in git history (production source only — tests and generated dropped): Degree-of-Coupling = shared ÷ min individual revisions, reported above noise floors (each file ≥10 revisions, ≥5 shared commits, ≥50% strength); sweeping commits excluded. Deterministic over fixed history.
Coverage: Population: PRODUCTION source files only — test and generated files are dropped before pairing, so a class co-changing with its own test (trivially ~100%) can't drown the real production↔production coupling. Pairs ranked by Degree-of-Coupling. A non-source file is never a coupling PARTICIPANT either: documentation, schemas, config and data files are dropped with the rest, so a code↔docs pair — a command and the reference page that restates it — is not reported however strongly the two co-change; nor is coupling that runs THROUGH a build step or config file.
What it measures: Whether the build pipeline provides supply-chain integrity — generated provenance/attestation, signed artifacts (cosign/sigstore), an SBOM, and pinned build actions. Presence of the configuration, not a runtime guarantee.
Method: Supply-chain provenance/signing read deterministically from CI/build config (.github/workflows, .gitlab-ci.yml, azure-pipelines, Jenkinsfile, .circleci) + the release surface: four signals — generated provenance/attestation (SLSA/in-toto/actions-attest), artifact signing (cosign/sigstore/gitsign), an SBOM (syft/sbom-action/*.spdx.json/*.cdx.json), and SHA-pinned build actions — scored 10·present/denom. NotApplicable without a build pipeline. Detects configuration presence, not runtime enforcement.
+ 2 more group(s) — more in Appendix A; the complete list is findings.md.
What to do
Resolve the 2 REDACTED finding(s) in Supply-chain Provenance & Signing — start with REDACTED, REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 warning-level).
Resolve the 1 REDACTED finding(s) in Supply-chain Provenance & Signing. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
Resolve the 1 REDACTED finding(s) in Supply-chain Provenance & Signing. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 recommendation-level).
Detailed fixes: d36_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.
What it measures: Whether any dependency the repository declares is published as MALICIOUS rather than merely vulnerable — a package that is an attacker's work, in any ecosystem osv-scanner reads. Scored apart from D30 because the answer is binary: there is no safe version to upgrade to, and the fix is to remove the package and rotate every credential it could have read.
Method: The same dependency scan D30 reads, partitioned on the scanner's own classification rather than rescanned: a row is MALICIOUS when its id is in the `MAL-` space (the ossf/malicious-packages feed) OR its `database_specific.cwe_ids` carries `CWE-506` ("Embedded Malicious Code"). Both channels are structural; the summary text is deliberately NOT read, because a malicious-package record whose summary says only "Critical severity vulnerability" is a real shape ([GHSA redacted]) and a text matcher misses it. Scored BINARY: any surviving row is 0, whatever its severity and however many CVEs sit beside it — a hostile dependency is not a quantity. Applicability and degradation are D30's: NotApplicable only when no ecosystem is readable, and an unscannable ecosystem degrades rather than reading clean. SCORED, not informational.
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 1 platform declaration(s) and 16 dependency declaration(s). This dimension reads what the repository says about ITSELF — a pinned target framework, a version file, a capped requires-python, a Rust toolchain pin, a framework major a constraint cannot move off. A FLOOR is deliberately never charged: `requires-python = ">=3.8"` states what the package SUPPORTS, not what it runs on, and a well-maintained library declares exactly that while running its own CI on a current release. The end-of-life facts are FROZEN and dated, so this dimension needs no network and answers identically inside a closed scan fence; as the table ages it loses recall and never precision, because a statement about support that ended in the past cannot become false. The OS layer of a container image is D31's question and the toolchain a CI workflow installs is D29's; this row is neither.
Other · Architecture — How the codebase splits by code ROLE — domain, application, infrastructure, test, generated. The significance map behind the knowledge/coupling weighting, and a DDD signal in its own right: a thin domain core under fat infrastructure is the anemic-domain smell, quantified. How each file's role is decided, because the split is only as good as that: a generated name or a build-output tree makes it Generated, a test project makes it Test, and otherwise the file's NAMESPACE and PATH words are matched against fixed vocabularies in a fixed ORDER — domain, then infrastructure, then application — so a file whose words hit two layers is counted under the earlier one. A production file matching none of them counts as application, so that share reads 'application or unclassified' rather than a measured application layer. Roles come from naming convention, never from what the code does. On this repository the split was taken from the source tree on disk rather than from a loaded .NET workspace, so a file's role is decided by its PATH segments alone — no declared namespace was available to add to the evidence — and generated output is excluded from the census entirely rather than counted as a generated share.
Method: Roslyn line-count by code ROLE: every source file classified Domain/Application/Infrastructure/Test/Generated by namespace + path convention (the shared CodeRoleClassifier), then significant lines summed per role. Deterministic; the advisory score is the business-logic (domain+application) share of production code.
Coverage: Population: ALL source files, each bucketed into ONE of five roles (Domain/Application/Infrastructure/Test/Generated) by namespace + path convention — a file whose layer isn't named in the convention falls to Application (the neutral default), and the split is line-count, not semantic depth or business value.
What to do
The domain core is a small share of production code, but most of the rest matched no layer vocabulary at all — so this is not yet an anemic-domain finding. The namespace/path convention could not place that code, which makes the composition above a statement about the naming, not about the design. Name the layers (or check that the repository's conventions differ from the ones this check knows) before reading a thin domain into it.
Other · Architecture — Whether the project-reference graph is acyclic (cycles block independent build/deploy and signal eroding boundaries).
Method: Project reference cycles via elementary-DFS over real .csproj references, using the engine shared with D5/D7; cyclic versus acyclic. Exhaustive, deterministic.
Other · Architecture — Whether dependencies point inward (Domain ← Application ← Infrastructure/Web) — the clean-architecture dependency rule, checked across the project graph.
Method: Layer violations by name-segment inference (Domain/Core to Application to Infrastructure/Web) over the project-reference graph. Exhaustive over all projects, deterministic.
Maturity · Maturity — Whether the repo and its projects have a README, and whether it's substantive and current.
Method: Filesystem scan: README presence, word count, and headings for depth; git history for staleness. Exhaustive across root and project dirs, deterministic.
What to do
Add an 'Architecture' / 'How it works' section to the root README — the high-level shape.
Maturity · Maturity — Whether key decisions (ADRs) and the high-level shape (C4/diagrams) are written down.
Method: Filesystem scan: ADR folder/naming conventions or content, plus Mermaid/PlantUML/C4/architecture.md discovery. Exhaustive, deterministic.
No Architecture Decision Records found — no conventional ADR directory, no numbered `NNNN-title` documents in any markup this check reads, and nothing ADR-shaped by content. Design rationale recorded elsewhere (a design-notes tree, a mailing list, pull-request discussion) is not visible to this check and is not re-findable per decision, so a future maintainer cannot ask why one choice was made and get an answer.
No C4/Structurizr/PlantUML/Mermaid/Graphviz/D2 diagram, no drawn diagram named for the architecture, no file named `architecture` or `design` in any markup this check reads, and nothing in the README, docs or contributor guides that announces the shape — no `## Architecture` heading, no "architecture overview"/"high-level design" phrasing, no "the architecture is …" introduction, no guided code tour. A shape laid out in prose that never names itself as the architecture is not visible to this check, and neither is one kept outside the repository, so this row reports the absence of a re-findable shape document — not evidence that nobody wrote the shape down.
What to do
Record your significant design decisions. Write one short document per decision, giving its date, the situation, the decision and its consequences, and keep them together with your other design documents. A docs/adr folder with each file named by number and title is the easiest place to find them.
Add a C4 context/container diagram (Structurizr, PlantUML or Mermaid) or an architecture.md overview.
Maturity · Maturity — Whether the repo is organised deliberately — src/test separation and consistent project naming.
Method: Filesystem scan: src/test folder separation and namespace-prefix consistency (majority RootNamespace agreement). Exhaustive across projects, deterministic.
Production code isn't grouped under a src/ folder — it'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.
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.
docs/uv.md runs `powershell -ExecutionPolicy ByPass -c "irm https://astral.sh/uv/install.ps1`, but `https:/astral.sh/uv/install.ps1` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — docs/uv.md:16
docs/uv.md documents the environment variable `UV_DEFAULT_INDEX`, but no code, script or configuration file names it. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — docs/uv.md:141
What to do
Reconcile the README with reality: docs/uv.md runs `powershell -ExecutionPolicy ByPass -c "irm https://astral.sh/uv/install.ps1`, but `https:/astral.sh/uv/install.ps1` does not exist; docs/uv.md documents the environment variable `UV_DEFAULT_INDEX`, but no code, script or configuration file names it.
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.
Do you agree with this assessment?
P10 · Library API & versioning10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged
Readiness · Readiness — For a library: a deliberate (small) public API surface and explicit semantic versioning so consumers can depend on it safely.
Method: Roslyn scan: public API surface area and semantic-versioning markers (SemVer attributes, changelog entries) for libraries; off .NET, a library is the ecosystem's publication act (an npm package that is not private and names an entry point, a PyPI distribution with a build system, a Rust library crate, a Maven/Gradle module that publishes, a Go module with no package main, a gemspec, a Composer library, a SwiftPM library product, a pub.dev or Hex package), its surface is the share of types the language model records as public (Rust, Swift, Java, Kotlin, Go, Dart; not measured where the model records no type visibility or, as in TypeScript, only module-level export), and its version is read from the manifest, a semver CHANGELOG, release tooling or semver git tags. Exhaustive, deterministic.
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 bandit, `semgrep --config=p/python`, or CodeQL's python pack as a CI step. What was searched, so you can tell an absence from a miss: the 4227 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
Add a SAST step to CI running what this repository's stack ships: bandit, `semgrep --config=p/python`, or CodeQL's python pack — so a security regression fails the build instead of landing.
Dependabot is configured but does not watch `pip` — add that `package-ecosystem` entry to REDACTED so those dependencies get the same automatic update and advisory pressure as the ones it already covers.
Add gitleaks/trufflehog in CI to block PRs that introduce committed secrets.
Readiness · Readiness — Whether releases are automated and safely reversible (probes, rolling updates, approval gates) — from manifests/pipeline files, not the live environment.
Method: Filesystem scan: deployment manifests/IaC (K8s YAML, Helm, Terraform) for rolling updates, probes, approval gates, migration hooks. Exhaustive, deterministic.
The release is automated and no gate that pauses it for a human is DECLARED IN THIS REPOSITORY'S PIPELINE FILES. What was read: every file under `.github/workflows/`, `.forgejo/workflows/`, `.gitea/workflows/`, `.azuredevops/` and `.azure-pipelines/`, plus `.gitlab-ci*` and `azure-pipelines*` — with comment text stripped, so documenting a gate is not declaring one. What would have counted: GitLab's `when: manual`, CircleCI's `type: approval`, an Azure `ManualValidation@` task or an `approvals:` block, a Jenkins `input` step, a `uses:` step naming an approval action, an `environment:` paired with `reviewers` / `required_reviewers` / `protection` / `wait-timer` / `deployment_branch_policy`, a draft-release step, a `workflow_dispatch` promotion, or a release-event gate. ★ What this cannot see, because none of it is a file: a GitHub environment whose required reviewers are configured in repo SETTINGS, a branch protection rule, or an organisation deployment policy — all of them real, enforced gates that live outside the repository. If yours is one of those, this row is wrong and nothing in the tree could have told us. Otherwise: whatever the release trigger points at is published to users unreviewed, so a mistagged or unverified commit ships and the only remedy is a follow-up release.
What to do
Nothing pauses a release for a human: publish as a draft release (or gate the release job on a protected tag/manual dispatch) so a bad build can be stopped before users can download it.
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.
Do you agree with this assessment?
R1 · Type Safety0.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified
React / JS · Code Health — How much of the frontend is typed TypeScript vs untyped JavaScript.
Method: Frontend file inventory: the share of typed TypeScript vs untyped JavaScript across the source tree. Deterministic, exhaustive over frontend files.
0 typed · 6 plain JS — the untyped files are akshare/air/crypto.js, REDACTED, REDACTED, akshare/data/ths.js, akshare/movie/jm.js, akshare/stock_feature/ths.js.
What to do
Adopt TypeScript for the frontend: add a typecheck step to the build, then either type-check the existing JavaScript in place (`checkJs`/JSDoc types) or convert the highest-traffic modules first — no file is typed today, so this is an adoption, not a clean-up.
React / JS · Code Health — Near-exact copy-pasted blocks of substantial extent across the frontend (the D4 clone algorithm over JS/TS tokens, D-386): a block is reported only where its copies still agree on most of their own identifiers and literals, or were renamed as they were pasted but kept most of their constants, and where the copies carry enough code to stand on their own or the copied extent reaches 30 lines — so a re-implementation sharing neither names nor values, and a small pasted declaration, are both found and deliberately not reported, and a clean R10 is not a claim that nothing was copied.
Method: Near-exact copy-pasted blocks of substantial extent across the frontend (the D4 clone algorithm run over JS/TS tokens). Masking finds the candidates; a block is reported when its copies still agree on most of their own identifiers and literals, or when a renamed copy still agrees on most of its constants, AND the copies carry enough code to stand on their own — or when the copied extent reaches 30 lines. So a re-implementation sharing neither names nor values, and a small pasted declaration, are deliberately not counted. Deterministic.
17 duplicated blocks under akshare/ have copies in at least two of the sibling directories air, data, stock_feature — 9 of them are reported below, and 8 are counted here but not reported individually: those copies match on shape but no longer clear R10's bar for an individually reported row — either they kept neither their own names nor their values, or what was copied is too small to stand on its own (it reports near-exact duplication only, and only of substantial extent). What this row states is the concentration, which the detector measured over all 17 and which does not depend on how exactly each block's copies still match. That concentration is one structural fact, not 17 local ones: the siblings replicate behaviour none of them owns, which is the shape of a missing shared module — a common library every sibling imports — rather than 17 separate extractions. Check first whether the siblings are deliberately standalone deliverables (scaffold templates, demo apps that must stay copy-pasteable); where they are, the duplication is the design and the per-block rows are the ones to act on. — akshare/data/ths.js:1
akshare/data/ths.js:1 · akshare/stock_feature/ths.js:1 — these 2 files are line-for-line copies of one another — 757 lines are identical, in the same order, in every one of them — so this is one fact about the file set, not a block to extract. An edit made to one file and not the others changes behaviour silently, which is the failure a wholesale copy guarantees. Pick one file as the single source and derive the others from it (re-export it, spread it into the local overrides each variant genuinely needs, or generate the copies at build time) — the few lines that differ between the files are exactly the part each variant should still own. Check first whether the copies are deliberately standalone deliverables (a translation file seeded from its sibling and waiting to be translated); where they are, the duplication is the design, and the honest move is to mark the seeded file as untranslated rather than to let it pass as done. — akshare/data/ths.js:1
REDACTED:2506 · REDACTED:3825 — all 2 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — REDACTED:2506
REDACTED:2306 · REDACTED:3625 — all 2 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — REDACTED:2306
REDACTED:2682 · REDACTED:4001 — 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. — REDACTED:2682
REDACTED:130 · REDACTED:2188 — 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. — REDACTED:130
REDACTED:2867 · REDACTED:4186 — 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. — REDACTED:2867
REDACTED:2433 · REDACTED:3752 — 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. — REDACTED:2433
REDACTED:1765 · REDACTED:5224 — the two spans are one implementation copied and then locally edited — 483 tokens are still identical, in the same order in both files, with only local edits between them. The copies have already begun to drift, which is this row's finding: an edit made to one and not the other changes behaviour silently. Diff the two spans first to learn what genuinely differs, then extract the shared core into one module both sites use, passing the differences in as parameters — or, if one copy exists only because the other could not be imported from its context, make one of them the single source the other is generated or re-exported from. If one copy is no longer reachable, delete it rather than letting it shadow the live one. — REDACTED:1765
REDACTED:3539 · REDACTED:4858 — all 2 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — REDACTED:3539
REDACTED:5590 · REDACTED:5802 — all 2 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — REDACTED:5590
akshare/movie/jm.js:76 · akshare/movie/jm.js:1439 — the two spans are one implementation copied and then locally edited — 217 tokens are still identical, in the same order in both spans, with only local edits between them. The copies have already begun to drift, which is this row's finding: an edit made to one and not the other changes behaviour silently. Diff the two spans first to learn what genuinely differs, then extract the shared core into one module both sites use, passing the differences in as parameters — or, if one copy exists only because the other could not be imported from its context, make one of them the single source the other is generated or re-exported from. If one copy is no longer reachable, delete it rather than letting it shadow the live one. — akshare/movie/jm.js:76
REDACTED:20 · REDACTED:2080 — all 2 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — REDACTED:20
REDACTED:3499 · REDACTED:4818 — all 2 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — REDACTED:3499
REDACTED:2956 · REDACTED:4275 — 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. — REDACTED:2956
REDACTED:788 · REDACTED:2782 · REDACTED:4101 — all 3 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — REDACTED:788
REDACTED:668 · REDACTED:2674 · REDACTED:3993 — 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. — REDACTED:668
REDACTED:1033 · REDACTED:1780 — 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. — REDACTED:1033
REDACTED:1719 · REDACTED:1740 — 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. — REDACTED:1719
REDACTED:5548 · REDACTED:5762 — all 2 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — REDACTED:5548
REDACTED:565 · REDACTED:2586 · REDACTED:3905 — all 3 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — REDACTED:565
REDACTED:1723 · REDACTED:3494 · REDACTED:4813 — all 3 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — REDACTED:1723
REDACTED:713 · REDACTED:2717 · REDACTED:4036 — all 3 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — REDACTED:713
REDACTED:2008 · REDACTED:2134 — all 2 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — REDACTED:2008
REDACTED:2100 · REDACTED:2214 — all 2 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — REDACTED:2100
REDACTED:5661 · REDACTED:5873 — 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. — REDACTED:5661
REDACTED:1853 · REDACTED:2015 · REDACTED:2050 — 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. — REDACTED:1853
REDACTED:1888 · REDACTED:1980 — 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. — REDACTED:1888
REDACTED:1205 · REDACTED:1386 — 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. — REDACTED:1205
akshare/air/crypto.js:1 · REDACTED:1 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — akshare/air/crypto.js:1
REDACTED:394 · REDACTED:2424 · REDACTED:3743 — all 3 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — REDACTED:394
REDACTED:604 · REDACTED:2616 · REDACTED:3935 — all 3 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — REDACTED:604
REDACTED:451 · REDACTED:2481 · REDACTED:3800 — all 3 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — REDACTED:451
REDACTED:641 · REDACTED:2653 · REDACTED:3972 — all 3 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — REDACTED:641
REDACTED:696 · REDACTED:2702 · REDACTED:4021 — all 3 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — REDACTED:696
REDACTED:900 · REDACTED:1681 — all 2 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — REDACTED:900
REDACTED:901 · REDACTED:1213 · REDACTED:1394 — the 3 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — REDACTED:901
REDACTED:1841 · REDACTED:2037 — all 2 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — REDACTED:1841
REDACTED:1931 · REDACTED:1957 — 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. — REDACTED:1931
REDACTED:171 · REDACTED:2502 — all 2 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — REDACTED:171
What to do
Act on each finding's own remediation rather than one rule: the move depends on what recurs. Where the copies are executable blocks, give the shared part one home and call it from each site; where they are declarations, a listing, a specialisation already delegating to its base, or one shape repeated per entity, there is no call site and the move is a shared type, a generated set or a factory — sometimes there is nothing to extract.
React / JS · Code Health — Per-function cyclomatic/cognitive complexity from the token-level function scanner (D-386) — real branching, not a regex heuristic.
Method: Per-function cyclomatic/cognitive complexity from a token-level function scanner (real branching, not a regex heuristic), computed over every frontend function. Deterministic.
_doProcessBlock has cyclomatic complexity 21 and cognitive complexity 35; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — REDACTED:2978
clone has cyclomatic complexity 17 and cognitive complexity 17; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — akshare/movie/jm.js:224
(anonymous) has cyclomatic complexity 17 and cognitive complexity 17; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — akshare/movie/jm.js:2174
init has cyclomatic complexity 13 and cognitive complexity 14; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — REDACTED:1585
_doReset has cyclomatic complexity 12 and cognitive complexity 19; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — REDACTED:4466
_doProcessBlock has cyclomatic complexity 11 and cognitive complexity 23; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — REDACTED:2690
_process has cyclomatic complexity 11 and cognitive complexity 19; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — akshare/movie/jm.js:584
concat has cyclomatic complexity 11 and cognitive complexity 15; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — akshare/movie/jm.js:348
_doProcessBlock has cyclomatic complexity 11 and cognitive complexity 14; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — REDACTED:1684
nextState has cyclomatic complexity 11 and cognitive complexity 10; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive sits below cyclomatic here, so much of the count is breadth — arms side by side rather than stacked — and splitting per arm would leave a function per arm; group the work between the checks into named steps instead. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. (×2) — REDACTED:5674, REDACTED:5886
What to do
Break down the listed branch-heavy functions; aim P95 cyclomatic ≤ 5.
Do you agree with this assessment?
R3 · Large Files0.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified
React / JS · Code Health — How many source files exceed the large-file threshold.
Method: Components/modules exceeding the large-file threshold, counted exhaustively across the frontend source tree. Deterministic.
REDACTED has 5262 significant lines (blank lines excluded), over the 400-line bar, and contains logic — a file this long is usually several responsibilities in one module. — REDACTED:1
REDACTED has 4831 significant lines (blank lines excluded), over the 400-line bar, and contains logic — a file this long is usually several responsibilities in one module. — REDACTED:1
akshare/movie/jm.js has 2256 significant lines (blank lines excluded), over the 400-line bar, and contains logic — a file this long is usually several responsibilities in one module. — akshare/movie/jm.js:1
akshare/data/ths.js has 978 significant lines (blank lines excluded), over the 400-line bar, and contains logic — a file this long is usually several responsibilities in one module. — akshare/data/ths.js:1
akshare/stock_feature/ths.js has 978 significant lines (blank lines excluded), over the 400-line bar, and contains logic — a file this long is usually several responsibilities in one module. — akshare/stock_feature/ths.js:1
What to do
Split each oversized file along the responsibilities already in it, into smaller focused modules in the same package.
Do you agree with this assessment?
R7 · Dead Code7.3 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified
React / JS · Code Health — Files unreachable from every application/tooling/test entry point, and exports nothing imports (module-graph reachability, D-386).
Method: Dead code: files unreachable from every application/tooling/test entry point plus exports nothing imports, via module-graph reachability. Deterministic, exhaustive over the import graph.
Unreachable from the 5 application, 0 tooling and 0 test entry point(s) detected in this repo. This repository declares no build, type-check or test script, so nothing here would fail on a wrong deletion — confirm by hand that nothing loads each file (including by a path built at runtime) before removing it. An undetected custom entry would make these reachable.
no import path from any entry point (5 application, 0 tooling, 0 test roots considered), and no other file in the scanned tree imports it — nothing in-repo names this module at all, which is the strongest form of this claim the import graph can make — akshare/data/ths.js
This top-level declaration is not exported and its name occurs nowhere else in its module — not called, read, typed against, re-exported or named by a string. Nothing outside the module can reach a non-exported binding, so this is the whole search: remove it, or use it. (×3) — REDACTED:5977, REDACTED:5990, REDACTED:6003
What to do
Delete the dead files and unused exports — every line is maintenance cost and rebuild-estimate inflation with zero runtime value.
React / JS · Architecture — Import cycles in the module graph (D-386) — files that can only be understood and changed together.
Method: Import cycles in the module graph, detected exhaustively over JS/TS imports (the same cycle detection as the .NET coupling dimension). Deterministic.
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.
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.
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 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 `for` loop leaves the `dict`, `set` or `deque` it is walking alone — CPython's iterators over those check that the collection has not changed size since the loop began, so a body that removes from (or empties) the very collection the loop is walking makes the next step raise `RuntimeError: dictionary changed size during iteration` 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. (×7) — akshare/data/ths.js:235, akshare/data/ths.js:249, akshare/data/ths.js:275, …
`except` takes every exception and records none of it — the body neither logs it, rethrows it, nor even names it, so the failure is discarded as completely as by an empty catch and only the substituted value survives. Log it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, narrow the catch to the exception this call can actually raise, or say in a comment on the catch why the failure genuinely cannot matter. (×33) — akshare/economic/macro_constitute.py:211, REDACTED:453, akshare/futures/futures_zh_sina.py:448, …
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?
Reference — by lens
The score is the rank-weighted fold of these lenses (worst-heaviest), each including its meta-dimensions; a lens with a Critical contributor is capped at Fair (its band reads "gated by …") and is never the strongest area however high its average.
Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Unscored — 1 check(s) recorded observations but carry no score
These checks ran and found something, but they do not carry a score — either by design (an advisory check reports evidence rather than grading it) or because they could not be scored here. They are excluded from the score for that reason, not because there was nothing to see.
X10 Duplicated predicate — 3 observation(s) recorded · Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score.
Not evidenced — 1 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.
P5 DR & Backup — not evidenced — repo shows no backup/RTO/RPO controls; absence of evidence is not evidence of a working control
Not included — 67 check(s) not relevant to this codebase
These checks had nothing to measure here (no tests, no git history, the codebase is small, or the architecture style doesn't apply), so they're omitted above rather than scored low.
AC1 Text alternatives — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
AC2 Forms & labels — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
AC3 Page structure — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
AC4 Keyboard semantics — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
AC5 ARIA correctness — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
AC6 Visual & motion safety — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
AC7 A11y enforcement — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
AX1 Captive dependencies — Not applicable: this repository's JavaScript imports no dependency-injection container and defines no container of its own — nothing that both registers and resolves bindings, and nothing that names two lifetimes — so nothing holds one lifetime's instance while handing out another's; this repository's Python imports no dependency-injection container and defines no container of its own — nothing that both registers and resolves bindings, and nothing that names two lifetimes — so nothing holds one lifetime's instance while handing out another's.
AX2 Stateful singletons — No container singleton was found, so there is no shared instance for concurrent requests to race on. No function in this Python code is served by a threaded web framework (a Flask, Bottle or FastAPI route, a Django or Pyramid view), so no module is shared between request threads. TypeScript/JavaScript runs each process's requests on one event loop, so no two requests write a shared object at the same instant (interleaving across an await is a different defect).
AX5 Architecture & structure — not assessed — architecture style/structure is computed from a project graph (projects, types, module namespaces) that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
AX6 Interface segregation — not assessed — interface segregation is computed over a type surface that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
AX7 Slice cohesion — not applicable — not a vertical-slice architecture
AX8 Test isolation — no test/production split to check
AX9 CQS / query purity — no CQRS query handlers detected — query purity is not applicable to this codebase
AXB2 Runtime readiness — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
AXR1 Runtime accessibility — docker build failed (exit 1) — DEPRECATED: The legacy builder is deprecated and will be removed in a future release.
Install the buildx component to build images with BuildKit:
https://docs.docker.com/go/bui…; runtime evidence skipped This is a statement about this run, not a statement about your application: nothing here says the surface is inaccessible, only that it was never rendered.
C1 Data Protection — Not assessed: these personal data controls are read from a source model (declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names, guard methods) that was not loaded for this repository — because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. Absence of an idiom this check recognises is NOT evidence that this repository lacks personal data controls: it may implement them entirely in its own ecosystem. This is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
C2 Access Controls — No access-control surface detected in the analyzed source — this repository registers no route and starts no server another machine can reach (no Flask/FastAPI/Starlette route, Django urlpatterns or class-based view, Tornado handler). Access control is therefore N/A here — a library or command-line tool is authorized by the application that serves it, 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 a persisted data model — no PII-named field (email, first_name, date_of_birth, phone, …) or stored credential in a Django, SQLAlchemy, SQLModel, Peewee, Tortoise or MongoEngine model, a migration or a SQL schema — and no database or data-store client (Django ORM, SQLAlchemy, psycopg, PyMongo, …) in the source either, so this repository keeps no sensitive data whose changes an audit trail would record. If it does (through a store configured outside this repository, for instance), the trail belongs to wherever that data is stored.
C4 Data Retention — No personal data detected in a persisted data model — no PII-named field (email, first_name, date_of_birth, phone, …) or stored credential on a Django, SQLAlchemy, SQLModel, Peewee, Tortoise or mongoengine model, in a migration or in a SQL schema — and no database or data-store client (django.db, sqlalchemy, psycopg2, pymongo, sqlite3, …) imported either, so this repository keeps no personal data whose lifetime a retention limit would bound.
C5 Data-Subject Rights — No personal data detected in a persisted data model — no PII-named field (email, first_name, date_of_birth, phone, …) or stored credential on a Django, SQLAlchemy, SQLModel, Peewee, Tortoise or mongoengine model, in a migration or in a SQL schema — and no database or data-store client (django.db, sqlalchemy, psycopg2, pymongo, sqlite3, …) imported either, so this repository keeps no personal data for a data subject to erase, export or consent over.
D10 Test Quality — ~866 lines of test source are present (.py) but no test cases reached the test census for this repository — no test root we could resolve declared them, or the files we read declare no cases in a test framework we recognise — so skipped/assertion-free tests couldn't be counted. Not scored — this is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository.
D12 Dependency Hygiene — Dependency currency not established — no declaration carries an exact pin to grade
D18 Solution Shape — D18 scores the shape of a .NET solution; this repository has no .NET solution or project files, so the dimension does not apply.
D20 ADR Quality — N/A — ADRs are expected on deployable products with a user-facing host, not consumed libraries; no ADR log is required here.
D22 Internal API Consistency — The exposed public-API surface could not be collected — no C#/VB projects loaded.
D23 Boundary Type-Coupling — No bounded-context organisation was detected either — neither a context-shaped layout nor 2+ sibling source directories each declaring an aggregate root. Declaring this codebase's bounded contexts (≥2) would let cross-boundary type coupling be assessed. Declare them in `.codehealth/config.yaml` at the repository root (create it if absent), mapping each context name to the module-path or namespace prefixes that belong to it — e.g. `architecture:` → `contexts:` → `Billing: ["src/billing", "Acme.Billing"]`, `Catalog: ["src/catalog", "Acme.Catalog"]`.
D24 Comment Value — No inline comments to assess — comment value is not applicable here.
D25 ADR Conformance — no ADRs to check
D27 Navigability — D27 counts a call into the standard library or a dependency as unresolved for this repository's language (.py), so too few call sites counted as resolved to assess navigability. Not scored: this is a gap in the analyzer, not a verdict about this repository.
D32 Data Compliance (PII/GDPR) — No personal data was found crossing a boundary the PII/GDPR ruleset checks — nothing written to a log or console sink, placed in a URL or query string, or persisted to browser storage. That is a clean result for the LEAK surface only: this ruleset detects personal data escaping, it does not inventory the personal data a repository holds, so it is not evidence that this repository has no personal-data surface. The personal-data map (Appendix C) and the C1-C5 compliance cards are what speak to that.
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 — D39 measures the IL emitted by a .NET build; this repository has no .NET solution or project files, so the dimension does not apply.
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.
D5 Coupling — Not applicable — this Python build ships 1 production module(s), so there is no coupling BETWEEN modules to measure. (Its test and non-production modules are not part of the shipped graph.)
D7 Architectural Integrity — no checkable ADRs, and no project-reference graph for the cycle pass to read — so this dimension makes no claim about dependency cycles in either direction (where this repository's language has an import-cycle lens, cycles are reported there). Architectural integrity not assessed
D8 Code Coverage — Coverage not included — suite not readable by the collector
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
GD1 Unfinished & placeholder code — no source files were read — this check reads C#, F#, JavaScript/TypeScript, Dart, Ruby and Scala, and none was read for this repository's product. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
IC1 Incompleteness & stubs — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
P12 CI test-gate honesty — Reported, not scored — and nothing was matched here. The coverage check applies to any stack, and the automatic-re-run check to any GitHub-Actions workflow, but the checks for excluded tests, skipped tests and sleep-based synchronisation currently recognise only some ecosystems' test-runner idioms, so on a repository built with another stack the zeros below mean 'not checked', not 'clean'.
P2 Observability — This repository's Python, JavaScript/TypeScript source (3 module(s), 412 file(s) read) declares no entry point and bootstraps no server, and nothing here deploys a service — it is a library, run inside whatever hosts it, so production observability (structured logging, tracing/metrics, health checks) is N/A. If it grows a binary or a service, the dimension reactivates.
P7 Outbound HTTP resilience — not applicable — no HTTP server, API framework or worker entry point was found in the JavaScript/TypeScript, Python source, so there is no service whose uptime a failing dependency could take down
P8 Schema migrations — no ORM, schema-migration tool or schema auto-create was found in this repository's dependency manifests or source, so there is no database schema for this check to judge
P9 Domain vs controller coverage — no coverage report found on disk — produce a coverage report in a standard format (`coverage run -m pytest` then `coverage xml`) and commit it — a hosted scan measures a clone of the repository, so a report that exists only in a working tree, a CI runner's or your own, never reaches it; the artefact is commonly gitignored, so `git add -f` that one file (or un-ignore its path) and commit it alongside the code it measures, or wire coverage collection into CI, to enable this cross-layer check
PF1 Benchmark discipline — Not applicable: no benchmark suite was found. This check searched for a pytest-benchmark or pytest-codspeed dependency with tests taking the `benchmark` fixture, an asv.conf.json with its `time_`/`mem_`/`peakmem_` benchmarks, or a pyperf Runner, and for a `*benchmark*` script that this repository's CI runs. Benchmarks are credited as a bonus, so their absence is neither scored nor deducted.
PF2 Allocation hygiene — Not applicable: Python and TypeScript/JavaScript runs on a garbage-collected runtime that gives a program no allocation-control idiom to choose on a hot path — no pools, stack allocation or value types — so allocation awareness is not something this code can be rated on.
PF3 Async & latency hygiene — Not applicable: this repository declares no async functions, so there is no asynchronous code for a blocking call to stall.
R11 Import Boundaries — No recognizable feature-sliced/layered src layout — boundary rules not applicable.
R4 Test Coverage — the JS/TS workspace (6 production file(s)) has no JavaScript/TypeScript test, but it is 12.91% of this repository's production source and the other 87.09% carries 866 line(s) of test code this pass cannot read — an incidental frontend's reachability is not the repository's test posture, so it is not scored as one
R5 Dependency Freshness — no package-lock.json — dependency freshness not measured (would require an npm lockfile); JS/npm CVEs are scored in D30 (Dependency Vulnerabilities), which answers every ecosystem
R6 Tooling — no package.json in the repository — test/lint/typecheck wiring is read from package.json scripts (corroborated against CI), so this project's own toolchain isn't measured here
R8 Dependency Hygiene — Not measured — no package.json declares any dependency, so there is nothing to check imports against (imports may resolve through a host runtime rather than node).
S1 Web-Security Posture — Not assessed: these web-security controls are read from a source model (declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names, guard methods) that was not loaded for this repository — because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. Absence of an idiom this check recognises is NOT evidence that this repository lacks web-security controls: it may implement them entirely in its own ecosystem. This is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
X2 Cancellation propagation — no C# was loaded; this repository's Python was read, and no request in it can be cancelled by a caller — a Python request takes no token: asyncio cancels the task and trio or anyio the scope that made it, from outside the call, and requests, httpx, aiohttp and gRPC take a timeout, not a cancellation
X20 Mistyped argument guard — This check asks whether an argument guard reports an EMPTY value as a NULL one, which needs a language that throws a null-specific argument exception — .NET's ArgumentNullException, the JVM's NullPointerException, Dart's ArgumentError.notNull. This repository contains none of those languages: the ones it is written in have a single exception for a bad argument, so there is no pair of exceptions to confuse and nothing here for it to assess. Not a gap in the analyzer and not a finding about your code.
X32 Type resolved by simple name across every loaded assembly — This check is about how a .NET program searches the assemblies loaded into its process for a type, and this repository contains no .NET source, so there is nothing here for it to assess. Not a gap in the analyzer and not a finding about your code.
X4 Structured logging — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
X5 Nullable reference types — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
X6 Hand-rolled structured-format parsing — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
X7 Silent fallback defaults — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
X9 Subsumed condition operand — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
Appendix A — Findings (grouped)
The findings behind the scores, grouped by severity, then by dimension and kind. The high-severity issues are enumerated in full below; items per group are capped at 25 with any overflow stated explicitly per group, never silently truncated. The complete machine-readable list of every finding (all severities) is the companion findings.md in this report's bundle.
D4 · Code Duplication· Edited copy of a member (27 corresponding lines) · ×108
Edited copy of a member (27 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2257— REDACTED:2257-2339 | REDACTED:3290-3344 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 27 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (27 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_us_famous.py:14— akshare/stock/stock_us_famous.py:14-111 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1594-1685 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 27 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (27 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_us_pink.py:16— akshare/stock/stock_us_pink.py:16-114 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1594-1685 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 27 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (27 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:304— akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:304-407 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1594-1685 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 27 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (27 corresponding lines) REDACTED:268— REDACTED:268-348 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1594-1685 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 27 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (27 corresponding lines) REDACTED:354— REDACTED:354-458 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1594-1685 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 27 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (27 corresponding lines) REDACTED:109— REDACTED:109-199 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1226-1307 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 27 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (27 corresponding lines) REDACTED:109— REDACTED:109-199 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1311-1392 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 27 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (27 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2724— REDACTED:2724-2811 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1226-1307 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 27 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (27 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2724— REDACTED:2724-2811 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1311-1392 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 27 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (27 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46— akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46-117 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1226-1307 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 27 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (27 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46— akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46-117 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1311-1392 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 27 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (27 corresponding lines) REDACTED:88— REDACTED:88-168 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1226-1307 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 27 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (27 corresponding lines) REDACTED:88— REDACTED:88-168 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1311-1392 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 27 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (27 corresponding lines) akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:130— akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:130-205 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1226-1307 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 27 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (27 corresponding lines) akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:130— akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:130-205 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1311-1392 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 27 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (27 corresponding lines) akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:209— akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:209-290 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1226-1307 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 27 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (27 corresponding lines) akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:209— akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:209-290 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1311-1392 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 27 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (27 corresponding lines) REDACTED:113— REDACTED:113-180 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1226-1307 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 27 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (27 corresponding lines) REDACTED:113— REDACTED:113-180 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1311-1392 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 27 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (27 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1224— akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1224-1321 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1226-1307 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 27 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (27 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1224— akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1224-1321 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1311-1392 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 27 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (27 corresponding lines) akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1226— akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1226-1307 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:336-430 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 27 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (27 corresponding lines) akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1226— akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1226-1307 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:513-645 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 27 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (27 corresponding lines) akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1311— akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1311-1392 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:336-430 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 27 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
+ 83 more in this group — see findings.md.
D4 · Code Duplication· Edited copy of a member (26 corresponding lines) · ×107
Edited copy of a member (26 corresponding lines) akshare/index/index_stock_zh_csindex.py:18— akshare/index/index_stock_zh_csindex.py:18-69 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:960-1039 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 26 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (26 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46— akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46-117 | akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:304-407 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 26 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (26 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46— akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46-117 | REDACTED:268-348 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 26 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (26 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46— akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46-117 | REDACTED:354-458 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 26 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (26 corresponding lines) akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:209— akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:209-290 | akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:304-407 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 26 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (26 corresponding lines) akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:209— akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:209-290 | REDACTED:268-348 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 26 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (26 corresponding lines) akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:209— akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:209-290 | REDACTED:354-458 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 26 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (26 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:304— akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:304-407 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1224-1321 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 26 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (26 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:304— akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:304-407 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:16-121 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 26 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (26 corresponding lines) REDACTED:268— REDACTED:268-348 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1224-1321 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 26 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (26 corresponding lines) REDACTED:268— REDACTED:268-348 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:16-121 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 26 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (26 corresponding lines) REDACTED:354— REDACTED:354-458 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1224-1321 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 26 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (26 corresponding lines) REDACTED:354— REDACTED:354-458 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:16-121 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 26 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (26 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:45— akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:45-217 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1226-1307 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 26 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (26 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:45— akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:45-217 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1311-1392 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 26 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (26 corresponding lines) REDACTED:109— REDACTED:109-199 | akshare/option/option_risk_analysis_em.py:15-82 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 26 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (26 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2724— REDACTED:2724-2811 | akshare/option/option_risk_analysis_em.py:15-82 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 26 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (26 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46— akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46-117 | akshare/option/option_risk_analysis_em.py:15-82 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 26 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (26 corresponding lines) REDACTED:88— REDACTED:88-168 | akshare/option/option_risk_analysis_em.py:15-82 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 26 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (26 corresponding lines) akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:130— akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:130-205 | akshare/option/option_risk_analysis_em.py:15-82 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 26 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (26 corresponding lines) akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:209— akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:209-290 | akshare/option/option_risk_analysis_em.py:15-82 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 26 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (26 corresponding lines) REDACTED:113— REDACTED:113-180 | akshare/option/option_risk_analysis_em.py:15-82 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 26 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (26 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_risk_analysis_em.py:15— akshare/option/option_risk_analysis_em.py:15-82 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1224-1321 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 26 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (26 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_risk_analysis_em.py:15— akshare/option/option_risk_analysis_em.py:15-82 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:336-430 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 26 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (26 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_risk_analysis_em.py:15— akshare/option/option_risk_analysis_em.py:15-82 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:513-645 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 26 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
+ 82 more in this group — see findings.md.
D4 · Code Duplication· Edited copy of a member (48 corresponding lines) · ×83
Edited copy of a member (48 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2426— REDACTED:2426-2497 | akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:411-509 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 48 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (48 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2426— REDACTED:2426-2497 | REDACTED:462-560 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 48 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (48 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2426— REDACTED:2426-2497 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:125-229 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 48 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (48 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2426— REDACTED:2426-2497 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:233-337 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 48 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (48 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2426— REDACTED:2426-2497 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:341-445 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 48 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (48 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2426— REDACTED:2426-2497 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:562-667 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 48 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (48 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2426— REDACTED:2426-2497 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:671-776 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 48 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (48 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2426— REDACTED:2426-2497 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:845-949 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 48 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (48 corresponding lines) REDACTED:109— REDACTED:109-199 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:16-121 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 48 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (48 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:45— akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:45-217 | akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:130-205 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 48 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (48 corresponding lines) akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:209— akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:209-290 | REDACTED:19-125 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 48 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (48 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2426— REDACTED:2426-2497 | REDACTED:23-106 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 48 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (48 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2426— REDACTED:2426-2497 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:21-107 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 48 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (48 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2426— REDACTED:2426-2497 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:111-197 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 48 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (48 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2426— REDACTED:2426-2497 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:201-287 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 48 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (48 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2426— REDACTED:2426-2497 | REDACTED:49-121 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 48 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (48 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2257— REDACTED:2257-2339 | REDACTED:18-113 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 48 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (48 corresponding lines) REDACTED:18— REDACTED:18-113 | akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:411-509 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 48 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (48 corresponding lines) REDACTED:18— REDACTED:18-113 | REDACTED:462-560 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 48 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (48 corresponding lines) REDACTED:18— REDACTED:18-113 | REDACTED:23-106 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 48 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (48 corresponding lines) REDACTED:18— REDACTED:18-113 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:21-107 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 48 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (48 corresponding lines) REDACTED:18— REDACTED:18-113 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:111-197 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 48 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (48 corresponding lines) REDACTED:18— REDACTED:18-113 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:201-287 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 48 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (48 corresponding lines) REDACTED:18— REDACTED:18-113 | REDACTED:49-121 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 48 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (48 corresponding lines) REDACTED:18— REDACTED:18-113 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:125-229 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 48 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
+ 58 more in this group — see findings.md.
D4 · Code Duplication· Edited copy of a member (30 corresponding lines) · ×73
Edited copy of a member (30 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46— akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46-117 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:449-558 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 30 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (30 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46— akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46-117 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:21-158 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 30 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (30 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46— akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46-117 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:162-299 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 30 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (30 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46— akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46-117 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_yjyg_em.py:18-132 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 30 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (30 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46— akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46-117 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_fhps_em.py:16-138 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 30 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (30 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46— akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46-117 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:303-435 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 30 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (30 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46— akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46-117 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_yjbb_em.py:17-143 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 30 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (30 corresponding lines) REDACTED:18— REDACTED:18-113 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1594-1685 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 30 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (30 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_zh_ah_tx.py:41— akshare/stock/stock_zh_ah_tx.py:41-107 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1594-1685 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 30 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (30 corresponding lines) REDACTED:49— REDACTED:49-121 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1594-1685 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 30 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (30 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2257— REDACTED:2257-2339 | akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:209-290 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 30 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (30 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2426— REDACTED:2426-2497 | akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:209-290 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 30 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (30 corresponding lines) REDACTED:88— REDACTED:88-168 | akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:411-509 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 30 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (30 corresponding lines) REDACTED:88— REDACTED:88-168 | REDACTED:462-560 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 30 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (30 corresponding lines) REDACTED:88— REDACTED:88-168 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:21-107 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 30 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (30 corresponding lines) REDACTED:88— REDACTED:88-168 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:111-197 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 30 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (30 corresponding lines) REDACTED:88— REDACTED:88-168 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:201-287 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 30 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (30 corresponding lines) REDACTED:88— REDACTED:88-168 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:125-229 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 30 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (30 corresponding lines) REDACTED:88— REDACTED:88-168 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:233-337 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 30 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (30 corresponding lines) REDACTED:88— REDACTED:88-168 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:341-445 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 30 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (30 corresponding lines) REDACTED:88— REDACTED:88-168 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:562-667 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 30 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (30 corresponding lines) REDACTED:88— REDACTED:88-168 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:671-776 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 30 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (30 corresponding lines) REDACTED:88— REDACTED:88-168 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:845-949 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 30 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (30 corresponding lines) REDACTED:88— REDACTED:88-168 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1594-1685 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 30 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (30 corresponding lines) akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:130— akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:130-205 | akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:411-509 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 30 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
+ 48 more in this group — see findings.md.
D4 · Code Duplication· Edited copy of a member (42 corresponding lines) · ×69
Edited copy of a member (42 corresponding lines) REDACTED:659— REDACTED:659-700 | REDACTED:705-746 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 42 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (42 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2257— REDACTED:2257-2339 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:16-121 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 42 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (42 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2257— REDACTED:2257-2339 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1224-1321 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 42 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (42 corresponding lines) akshare/forex/forex_em.py:78— akshare/forex/forex_em.py:78-141 | akshare/index/index_global_em.py:96-159 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 42 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (42 corresponding lines) REDACTED:172— REDACTED:172-244 | akshare/index/index_global_em.py:96-159 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 42 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (42 corresponding lines) REDACTED:18— REDACTED:18-113 | akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:59-126 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 42 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (42 corresponding lines) akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:59— akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:59-126 | akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:485-600 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 42 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (42 corresponding lines) akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:59— akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:59-126 | REDACTED:15-109 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 42 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (42 corresponding lines) akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:59— akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:59-126 | akshare/option/option_risk_analysis_em.py:15-82 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 42 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (42 corresponding lines) akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:59— akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:59-126 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1025-1108 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 42 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (42 corresponding lines) akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:59— akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:59-126 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1137-1220 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 42 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (42 corresponding lines) akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:59— akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:59-126 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_account_em.py:15-92 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 42 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (42 corresponding lines) akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:59— akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:59-126 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:449-558 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 42 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (42 corresponding lines) REDACTED:1532— REDACTED:1532-1634 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_gbjg_em.py:63-155 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 42 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (42 corresponding lines) REDACTED:259— REDACTED:259-315 | akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:59-126 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 42 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (42 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1224— akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1224-1321 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:439-572 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 42 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (42 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_risk_analysis_em.py:15— akshare/option/option_risk_analysis_em.py:15-82 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gpzy_em.py:89-167 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 42 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (42 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_premium_analysis_em.py:15— akshare/option/option_premium_analysis_em.py:15-80 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gpzy_em.py:89-167 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 42 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (42 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_value_analysis_em.py:15— akshare/option/option_value_analysis_em.py:15-84 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gpzy_em.py:89-167 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 42 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (42 corresponding lines) REDACTED:259— REDACTED:259-315 | akshare/index/index_stock_hk.py:55-118 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 42 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (42 corresponding lines) akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:59— akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:59-126 | akshare/option/option_premium_analysis_em.py:15-80 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 42 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (42 corresponding lines) akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:59— akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:59-126 | akshare/option/option_value_analysis_em.py:15-84 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 42 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (42 corresponding lines) REDACTED:259— REDACTED:259-315 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gpzy_em.py:89-167 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 42 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (42 corresponding lines) REDACTED:15— REDACTED:15-109 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gpzy_em.py:89-167 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 42 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (42 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:57— akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:57-119 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gpzy_em.py:89-167 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 42 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
+ 44 more in this group — see findings.md.
D4 · Code Duplication· Edited copy of a member (29 corresponding lines) · ×66
Edited copy of a member (29 corresponding lines) akshare/index/index_zh_em.py:48— akshare/index/index_zh_em.py:48-175 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1695-1755 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 29 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (29 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2426— REDACTED:2426-2497 | akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:45-217 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 29 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (29 corresponding lines) REDACTED:109— REDACTED:109-199 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_ah_tx.py:41-107 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 29 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (29 corresponding lines) REDACTED:109— REDACTED:109-199 | REDACTED:49-121 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 29 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (29 corresponding lines) REDACTED:18— REDACTED:18-113 | akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46-117 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 29 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (29 corresponding lines) REDACTED:18— REDACTED:18-113 | akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:209-290 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 29 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (29 corresponding lines) REDACTED:18— REDACTED:18-113 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:16-121 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 29 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (29 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46— akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46-117 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_ah_tx.py:41-107 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 29 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (29 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46— akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46-117 | REDACTED:49-121 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 29 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (29 corresponding lines) REDACTED:88— REDACTED:88-168 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_ah_tx.py:41-107 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 29 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (29 corresponding lines) REDACTED:88— REDACTED:88-168 | REDACTED:49-121 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 29 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (29 corresponding lines) akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:130— akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:130-205 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_ah_tx.py:41-107 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 29 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (29 corresponding lines) akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:130— akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:130-205 | REDACTED:49-121 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 29 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (29 corresponding lines) akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:209— akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:209-290 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_ah_tx.py:41-107 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 29 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (29 corresponding lines) akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:209— akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:209-290 | REDACTED:49-121 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 29 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (29 corresponding lines) REDACTED:113— REDACTED:113-180 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_ah_tx.py:41-107 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 29 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (29 corresponding lines) REDACTED:113— REDACTED:113-180 | REDACTED:49-121 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 29 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (29 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_zh_ah_tx.py:41— akshare/stock/stock_zh_ah_tx.py:41-107 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:16-121 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 29 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (29 corresponding lines) REDACTED:49— REDACTED:49-121 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:16-121 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 29 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (29 corresponding lines) REDACTED:49— REDACTED:49-121 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:336-430 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 29 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (29 corresponding lines) REDACTED:49— REDACTED:49-121 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:513-645 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 29 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (29 corresponding lines) REDACTED:88— REDACTED:88-168 | REDACTED:15-109 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 29 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (29 corresponding lines) REDACTED:88— REDACTED:88-168 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:449-558 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 29 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (29 corresponding lines) akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:130— akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:130-205 | REDACTED:15-109 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 29 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (29 corresponding lines) akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:130— akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:130-205 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:449-558 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 29 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
+ 41 more in this group — see findings.md.
D4 · Code Duplication· Edited copy of a member (40 corresponding lines) · ×64
Edited copy of a member (40 corresponding lines) akshare/stock_feature/stock_fhps_em.py:16— akshare/stock_feature/stock_fhps_em.py:16-138 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:16-121 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 40 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (40 corresponding lines) akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:16— akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:16-121 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:303-435 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 40 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (40 corresponding lines) akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:16— akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:16-121 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_yjbb_em.py:17-143 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 40 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (40 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2257— REDACTED:2257-2339 | REDACTED:268-348 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 40 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (40 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:304— akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:304-407 | REDACTED:23-106 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 40 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (40 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:304— akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:304-407 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:21-107 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 40 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (40 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:304— akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:304-407 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:111-197 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 40 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (40 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:304— akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:304-407 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:201-287 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 40 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (40 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:304— akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:304-407 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_ah_tx.py:41-107 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 40 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (40 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:304— akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:304-407 | REDACTED:49-121 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 40 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (40 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:304— akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:304-407 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:125-229 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 40 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (40 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:304— akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:304-407 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:233-337 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 40 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (40 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:304— akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:304-407 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:341-445 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 40 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (40 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:304— akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:304-407 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:562-667 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 40 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (40 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:304— akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:304-407 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:671-776 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 40 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (40 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:304— akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:304-407 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:845-949 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 40 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (40 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:304— akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:304-407 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1226-1307 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 40 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (40 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:304— akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:304-407 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1311-1392 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 40 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (40 corresponding lines) REDACTED:268— REDACTED:268-348 | REDACTED:23-106 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 40 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (40 corresponding lines) REDACTED:268— REDACTED:268-348 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:21-107 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 40 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (40 corresponding lines) REDACTED:268— REDACTED:268-348 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:111-197 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 40 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (40 corresponding lines) REDACTED:268— REDACTED:268-348 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:201-287 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 40 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (40 corresponding lines) REDACTED:268— REDACTED:268-348 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_ah_tx.py:41-107 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 40 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (40 corresponding lines) REDACTED:268— REDACTED:268-348 | REDACTED:49-121 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 40 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (40 corresponding lines) REDACTED:268— REDACTED:268-348 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:125-229 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 40 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
+ 39 more in this group — see findings.md.
D4 · Code Duplication· Edited copy of a member (33 corresponding lines) · ×63
Edited copy of a member (33 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:45— akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:45-217 | akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:411-509 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 33 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (33 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:45— akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:45-217 | REDACTED:462-560 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 33 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (33 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:45— akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:45-217 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1594-1685 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 33 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (33 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:411— akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:411-509 | REDACTED:19-125 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 33 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (33 corresponding lines) REDACTED:462— REDACTED:462-560 | REDACTED:19-125 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 33 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (33 corresponding lines) REDACTED:23— REDACTED:23-106 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1594-1685 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 33 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (33 corresponding lines) REDACTED:109— REDACTED:109-199 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:21-107 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 33 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (33 corresponding lines) REDACTED:109— REDACTED:109-199 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:111-197 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 33 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (33 corresponding lines) REDACTED:109— REDACTED:109-199 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:201-287 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 33 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (33 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:21— akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:21-107 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:336-430 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 33 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (33 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:21— akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:21-107 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:513-645 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 33 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (33 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:111— akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:111-197 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:336-430 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 33 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (33 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:111— akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:111-197 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:513-645 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 33 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (33 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:201— akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:201-287 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:336-430 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 33 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (33 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:201— akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:201-287 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:513-645 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 33 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (33 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1025— akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1025-1108 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1594-1685 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 33 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (33 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1137— akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1137-1220 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1594-1685 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 33 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (33 corresponding lines) akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1594— akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1594-1685 | REDACTED:1193-1327 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 33 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (33 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2724— REDACTED:2724-2811 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:21-107 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 33 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (33 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2724— REDACTED:2724-2811 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:111-197 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 33 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (33 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2724— REDACTED:2724-2811 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:201-287 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 33 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (33 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1224— akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1224-1321 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:21-107 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 33 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (33 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1224— akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1224-1321 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:111-197 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 33 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (33 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1224— akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1224-1321 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:201-287 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 33 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (33 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_rank_em.py:34— akshare/fund/fund_rank_em.py:34-148 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gpzy_em.py:22-85 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 33 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
+ 38 more in this group — see findings.md.
D4 · Code Duplication· Edited copy of a member (25 corresponding lines) · ×63
Edited copy of a member (25 corresponding lines) REDACTED:467— REDACTED:467-492 | REDACTED:962-993 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 25 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (25 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:45— akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:45-217 | akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:304-407 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 25 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (25 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:45— akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:45-217 | REDACTED:268-348 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 25 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (25 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:45— akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:45-217 | REDACTED:354-458 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 25 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (25 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_commodity_sina.py:58— akshare/option/option_commodity_sina.py:58-136 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1224-1321 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 25 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (25 corresponding lines) REDACTED:109— REDACTED:109-199 | akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:59-126 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 25 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (25 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2724— REDACTED:2724-2811 | akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:59-126 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 25 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (25 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46— akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46-117 | akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:59-126 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 25 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (25 corresponding lines) akshare/index/index_stock_hk.py:149— akshare/index/index_stock_hk.py:149-215 | akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:59-126 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 25 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (25 corresponding lines) akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:59— akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:59-126 | akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:130-205 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 25 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (25 corresponding lines) akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:59— akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:59-126 | akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:209-290 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 25 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (25 corresponding lines) akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:59— akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:59-126 | REDACTED:113-180 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 25 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (25 corresponding lines) akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:59— akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:59-126 | akshare/reits/reits_basic.py:46-113 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 25 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (25 corresponding lines) akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:59— akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:59-126 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1224-1321 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 25 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (25 corresponding lines) akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:59— akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:59-126 | akshare/stock/stock_hk_famous.py:14-102 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 25 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (25 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:45— akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:45-217 | akshare/stock/stock_us_famous.py:14-111 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 25 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (25 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:45— akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:45-217 | akshare/stock/stock_us_pink.py:16-114 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 25 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (25 corresponding lines) REDACTED:15— REDACTED:15-109 | akshare/reits/reits_basic.py:46-113 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 25 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (25 corresponding lines) REDACTED:15— REDACTED:15-109 | akshare/stock/stock_hk_famous.py:14-102 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 25 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (25 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_risk_analysis_em.py:15— akshare/option/option_risk_analysis_em.py:15-82 | akshare/reits/reits_basic.py:46-113 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 25 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (25 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_risk_analysis_em.py:15— akshare/option/option_risk_analysis_em.py:15-82 | akshare/stock/stock_hk_famous.py:14-102 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 25 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (25 corresponding lines) akshare/reits/reits_basic.py:46— akshare/reits/reits_basic.py:46-113 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:449-558 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 25 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (25 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_hk_famous.py:14— akshare/stock/stock_hk_famous.py:14-102 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:449-558 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 25 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (25 corresponding lines) akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:59— akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:59-126 | akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:216-292 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 25 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (25 corresponding lines) REDACTED:259— REDACTED:259-315 | akshare/reits/reits_basic.py:46-113 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 25 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
+ 38 more in this group — see findings.md.
D4 · Code Duplication· Edited copy of a member (43 corresponding lines) · ×62
Edited copy of a member (43 corresponding lines) akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_ipo_ths.py:15— akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_ipo_ths.py:15-78 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_ipo_ths.py:82-130 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 43 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (43 corresponding lines) REDACTED:16— REDACTED:16-97 | REDACTED:16-103 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 43 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (43 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1224— akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1224-1321 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_fhps_em.py:16-138 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 43 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (43 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1224— akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1224-1321 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_yjbb_em.py:17-143 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 43 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (43 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2257— REDACTED:2257-2339 | akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:59-126 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 43 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (43 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2426— REDACTED:2426-2497 | akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:59-126 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 43 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (43 corresponding lines) akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:59— akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:59-126 | akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:411-509 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 43 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (43 corresponding lines) akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:59— akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:59-126 | REDACTED:462-560 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 43 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (43 corresponding lines) akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:59— akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:59-126 | REDACTED:23-106 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 43 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (43 corresponding lines) akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:59— akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:59-126 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:21-107 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 43 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (43 corresponding lines) akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:59— akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:59-126 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:111-197 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 43 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (43 corresponding lines) akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:59— akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:59-126 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:201-287 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 43 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (43 corresponding lines) akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:59— akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:59-126 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_ah_tx.py:41-107 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 43 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (43 corresponding lines) akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:59— akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:59-126 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1226-1307 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 43 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (43 corresponding lines) akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:59— akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:59-126 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1311-1392 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 43 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (43 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_rank_em.py:34— akshare/fund/fund_rank_em.py:34-148 | REDACTED:172-244 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 43 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (43 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_rank_em.py:247— akshare/fund/fund_rank_em.py:247-343 | REDACTED:172-244 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 43 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (43 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_rank_em.py:428— akshare/fund/fund_rank_em.py:428-520 | REDACTED:172-244 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 43 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (43 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:92— akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:92-186 | REDACTED:172-244 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 43 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (43 corresponding lines) REDACTED:172— REDACTED:172-244 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:23-119 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 43 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (43 corresponding lines) REDACTED:172— REDACTED:172-244 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:348-444 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 43 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (43 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:190— akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:190-273 | REDACTED:172-244 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 43 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (43 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:277— akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:277-361 | REDACTED:172-244 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 43 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (43 corresponding lines) akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:59— akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:59-126 | akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:57-119 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 43 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (43 corresponding lines) akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:59— akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:59-126 | REDACTED:20-112 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 43 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
+ 37 more in this group — see findings.md.
D4 · Code Duplication· Edited copy of a member (44 corresponding lines) · ×61
Edited copy of a member (44 corresponding lines) akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:449— akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:449-558 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:513-645 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 44 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (44 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_zh_ah_tx.py:41— akshare/stock/stock_zh_ah_tx.py:41-107 | REDACTED:1193-1327 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 44 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (44 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:45— akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:45-217 | akshare/reits/reits_basic.py:46-113 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 44 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (44 corresponding lines) akshare/index/index_stock_hk.py:149— akshare/index/index_stock_hk.py:149-215 | REDACTED:19-125 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 44 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (44 corresponding lines) REDACTED:259— REDACTED:259-315 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_account_em.py:15-92 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 44 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (44 corresponding lines) REDACTED:259— REDACTED:259-315 | REDACTED:15-109 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 44 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (44 corresponding lines) REDACTED:259— REDACTED:259-315 | akshare/option/option_risk_analysis_em.py:15-82 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 44 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (44 corresponding lines) REDACTED:259— REDACTED:259-315 | akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:411-509 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 44 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (44 corresponding lines) REDACTED:259— REDACTED:259-315 | REDACTED:462-560 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 44 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (44 corresponding lines) REDACTED:259— REDACTED:259-315 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:21-107 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 44 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (44 corresponding lines) REDACTED:259— REDACTED:259-315 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:111-197 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 44 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (44 corresponding lines) REDACTED:259— REDACTED:259-315 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:201-287 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 44 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (44 corresponding lines) REDACTED:259— REDACTED:259-315 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:125-229 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 44 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (44 corresponding lines) REDACTED:259— REDACTED:259-315 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:233-337 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 44 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (44 corresponding lines) REDACTED:259— REDACTED:259-315 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:341-445 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 44 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (44 corresponding lines) REDACTED:259— REDACTED:259-315 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:449-558 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 44 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (44 corresponding lines) REDACTED:259— REDACTED:259-315 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:562-667 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 44 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (44 corresponding lines) REDACTED:259— REDACTED:259-315 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:671-776 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 44 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (44 corresponding lines) REDACTED:259— REDACTED:259-315 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:845-949 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 44 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (44 corresponding lines) REDACTED:259— REDACTED:259-315 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1226-1307 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 44 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (44 corresponding lines) REDACTED:259— REDACTED:259-315 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1311-1392 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 44 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (44 corresponding lines) REDACTED:259— REDACTED:259-315 | REDACTED:2257-2339 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 44 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (44 corresponding lines) REDACTED:259— REDACTED:259-315 | REDACTED:2343-2422 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 44 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (44 corresponding lines) REDACTED:259— REDACTED:259-315 | REDACTED:2967-3048 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 44 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (44 corresponding lines) REDACTED:259— REDACTED:259-315 | REDACTED:3097-3177 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 44 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
+ 36 more in this group — see findings.md.
D4 · Code Duplication· Edited copy of a member (46 corresponding lines) · ×60
Edited copy of a member (46 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2426— REDACTED:2426-2497 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:449-558 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 46 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (46 corresponding lines) REDACTED:109— REDACTED:109-199 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:125-229 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 46 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (46 corresponding lines) REDACTED:109— REDACTED:109-199 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:233-337 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 46 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (46 corresponding lines) REDACTED:109— REDACTED:109-199 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:341-445 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 46 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (46 corresponding lines) REDACTED:109— REDACTED:109-199 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:562-667 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 46 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (46 corresponding lines) REDACTED:109— REDACTED:109-199 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:671-776 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 46 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (46 corresponding lines) REDACTED:109— REDACTED:109-199 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:845-949 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 46 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (46 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2257— REDACTED:2257-2339 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_ah_tx.py:41-107 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 46 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (46 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2426— REDACTED:2426-2497 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_ah_tx.py:41-107 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 46 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (46 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:411— akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:411-509 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_ah_tx.py:41-107 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 46 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (46 corresponding lines) REDACTED:462— REDACTED:462-560 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_ah_tx.py:41-107 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 46 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (46 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:21— akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:21-107 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_ah_tx.py:41-107 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 46 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (46 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:111— akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:111-197 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_ah_tx.py:41-107 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 46 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (46 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:201— akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:201-287 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_ah_tx.py:41-107 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 46 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (46 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_zh_ah_tx.py:41— akshare/stock/stock_zh_ah_tx.py:41-107 | REDACTED:49-121 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 46 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (46 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_zh_ah_tx.py:41— akshare/stock/stock_zh_ah_tx.py:41-107 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:125-229 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 46 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (46 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_zh_ah_tx.py:41— akshare/stock/stock_zh_ah_tx.py:41-107 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:233-337 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 46 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (46 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_zh_ah_tx.py:41— akshare/stock/stock_zh_ah_tx.py:41-107 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:341-445 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 46 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (46 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_zh_ah_tx.py:41— akshare/stock/stock_zh_ah_tx.py:41-107 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:562-667 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 46 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (46 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_zh_ah_tx.py:41— akshare/stock/stock_zh_ah_tx.py:41-107 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:671-776 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 46 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (46 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_zh_ah_tx.py:41— akshare/stock/stock_zh_ah_tx.py:41-107 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:845-949 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 46 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (46 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2426— REDACTED:2426-2497 | REDACTED:15-109 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 46 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (46 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_zh_ah_tx.py:41— akshare/stock/stock_zh_ah_tx.py:41-107 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1226-1307 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 46 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (46 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_zh_ah_tx.py:41— akshare/stock/stock_zh_ah_tx.py:41-107 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1311-1392 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 46 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (46 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2724— REDACTED:2724-2811 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:125-229 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 46 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
+ 35 more in this group — see findings.md.
D4 · Code Duplication· Edited copy of a member (31 corresponding lines) · ×54
Edited copy of a member (31 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2257— REDACTED:2257-2339 | akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46-117 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 31 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (31 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2426— REDACTED:2426-2497 | akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46-117 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 31 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (31 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2426— REDACTED:2426-2497 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:16-121 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 31 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (31 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46— akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46-117 | akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:411-509 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 31 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (31 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46— akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46-117 | REDACTED:462-560 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 31 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (31 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46— akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46-117 | akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:485-600 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 31 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (31 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46— akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46-117 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:125-229 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 31 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (31 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46— akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46-117 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:233-337 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 31 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (31 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46— akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46-117 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:341-445 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 31 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (31 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46— akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46-117 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:562-667 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 31 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (31 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46— akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46-117 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:671-776 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 31 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (31 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46— akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46-117 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:845-949 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 31 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (31 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46— akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46-117 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1594-1685 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 31 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (31 corresponding lines) REDACTED:88— REDACTED:88-168 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:16-121 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 31 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (31 corresponding lines) akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:130— akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:130-205 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:16-121 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 31 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (31 corresponding lines) akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:209— akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:209-290 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:16-121 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 31 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (31 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46— akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46-117 | REDACTED:23-106 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 31 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (31 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46— akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46-117 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:21-107 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 31 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (31 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46— akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46-117 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:111-197 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 31 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (31 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46— akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46-117 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:201-287 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 31 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (31 corresponding lines) REDACTED:113— REDACTED:113-180 | akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:411-509 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 31 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (31 corresponding lines) REDACTED:113— REDACTED:113-180 | REDACTED:462-560 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 31 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (31 corresponding lines) REDACTED:113— REDACTED:113-180 | REDACTED:23-106 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 31 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (31 corresponding lines) REDACTED:113— REDACTED:113-180 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:21-107 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 31 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (31 corresponding lines) REDACTED:113— REDACTED:113-180 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:111-197 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 31 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
+ 29 more in this group — see findings.md.
D4 · Code Duplication· Edited copy of a member (64 corresponding lines) · ×49
Edited copy of a member (64 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_rank_em.py:34— akshare/fund/fund_rank_em.py:34-148 | akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:296-399 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 64 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (64 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46— akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46-117 | akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:209-290 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 64 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (64 corresponding lines) akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:209— akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:209-290 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1224-1321 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 64 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (64 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1025— akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1025-1108 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:449-558 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 64 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (64 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1137— akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1137-1220 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:449-558 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 64 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (64 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2724— REDACTED:2724-2811 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1224-1321 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 64 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (64 corresponding lines) REDACTED:15— REDACTED:15-109 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1025-1108 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 64 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (64 corresponding lines) REDACTED:15— REDACTED:15-109 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1137-1220 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 64 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (64 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:411— akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:411-509 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1025-1108 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 64 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (64 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:411— akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:411-509 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1137-1220 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 64 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (64 corresponding lines) REDACTED:462— REDACTED:462-560 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1025-1108 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 64 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (64 corresponding lines) REDACTED:462— REDACTED:462-560 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1137-1220 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 64 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (64 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1025— akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1025-1108 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:21-107 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 64 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (64 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1025— akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1025-1108 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:111-197 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 64 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (64 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1025— akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1025-1108 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:201-287 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 64 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (64 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1025— akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1025-1108 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:125-229 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 64 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (64 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1025— akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1025-1108 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:233-337 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 64 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (64 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1025— akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1025-1108 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:341-445 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 64 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (64 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1025— akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1025-1108 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:562-667 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 64 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (64 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1025— akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1025-1108 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:671-776 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 64 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (64 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1025— akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1025-1108 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:845-949 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 64 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (64 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1137— akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1137-1220 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:21-107 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 64 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (64 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1137— akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1137-1220 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:111-197 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 64 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (64 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1137— akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1137-1220 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:201-287 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 64 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (64 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1137— akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1137-1220 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:125-229 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 64 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
+ 24 more in this group — see findings.md.
D4 · Code Duplication· Edited copy of a member (35 corresponding lines) · ×49
Edited copy of a member (35 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2257— REDACTED:2257-2339 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1594-1685 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 35 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (35 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1224— akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1224-1321 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:21-158 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 35 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (35 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1224— akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1224-1321 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:162-299 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 35 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (35 corresponding lines) akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:314— akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:314-390 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:692-786 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 35 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (35 corresponding lines) akshare/bond/bond_buy_back_em.py:159— akshare/bond/bond_buy_back_em.py:159-220 | akshare/fund/fund_rank_em.py:428-520 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 35 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (35 corresponding lines) REDACTED:30— REDACTED:30-90 | akshare/stock/stock_hold_control_em.py:114-193 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 35 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (35 corresponding lines) akshare/futures/futures_comm_qihuo.py:17— akshare/futures/futures_comm_qihuo.py:17-169 | REDACTED:43-120 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 35 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (35 corresponding lines) REDACTED:259— REDACTED:259-315 | REDACTED:2191-2253 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 35 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (35 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2191— REDACTED:2191-2253 | akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:304-407 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 35 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (35 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2191— REDACTED:2191-2253 | REDACTED:268-348 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 35 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (35 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2191— REDACTED:2191-2253 | REDACTED:354-458 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 35 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (35 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2191— REDACTED:2191-2253 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1025-1108 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 35 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (35 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2191— REDACTED:2191-2253 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1137-1220 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 35 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (35 corresponding lines) akshare/bond/bond_zh_sina.py:46— akshare/bond/bond_zh_sina.py:46-115 | REDACTED:2191-2253 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 35 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (35 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2191— REDACTED:2191-2253 | akshare/index/index_stock_hk.py:55-118 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 35 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (35 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2191— REDACTED:2191-2253 | akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:59-126 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 35 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (35 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2191— REDACTED:2191-2253 | REDACTED:15-109 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 35 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (35 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2191— REDACTED:2191-2253 | akshare/option/option_premium_analysis_em.py:15-80 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 35 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (35 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2191— REDACTED:2191-2253 | akshare/option/option_risk_analysis_em.py:15-82 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 35 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (35 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2191— REDACTED:2191-2253 | akshare/option/option_value_analysis_em.py:15-84 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 35 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (35 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2191— REDACTED:2191-2253 | akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:57-119 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 35 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (35 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2191— REDACTED:2191-2253 | akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:411-509 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 35 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (35 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2191— REDACTED:2191-2253 | REDACTED:20-112 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 35 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (35 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2191— REDACTED:2191-2253 | REDACTED:116-208 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 35 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (35 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2191— REDACTED:2191-2253 | REDACTED:462-560 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 35 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
+ 24 more in this group — see findings.md.
D4 · Code Duplication· Edited copy of a member (34 corresponding lines) · ×48
Edited copy of a member (34 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:411— akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:411-509 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:336-430 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 34 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (34 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:411— akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:411-509 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:513-645 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 34 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (34 corresponding lines) REDACTED:462— REDACTED:462-560 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:336-430 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 34 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (34 corresponding lines) REDACTED:462— REDACTED:462-560 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:513-645 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 34 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (34 corresponding lines) akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1594— akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1594-1685 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:336-430 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 34 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (34 corresponding lines) akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1594— akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1594-1685 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:513-645 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 34 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (34 corresponding lines) akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:449— akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:449-558 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:336-430 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 34 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (34 corresponding lines) akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1594— akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1594-1685 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:21-158 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 34 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (34 corresponding lines) akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1594— akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1594-1685 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:162-299 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 34 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (34 corresponding lines) akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1594— akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1594-1685 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_yjyg_em.py:18-132 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 34 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (34 corresponding lines) REDACTED:109— REDACTED:109-199 | akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:411-509 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 34 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (34 corresponding lines) REDACTED:109— REDACTED:109-199 | REDACTED:462-560 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 34 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (34 corresponding lines) REDACTED:109— REDACTED:109-199 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1594-1685 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 34 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (34 corresponding lines) akshare/stock_feature/stock_fhps_em.py:16— akshare/stock_feature/stock_fhps_em.py:16-138 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1594-1685 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 34 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (34 corresponding lines) akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1594— akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1594-1685 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:303-435 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 34 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (34 corresponding lines) akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1594— akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1594-1685 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_yjbb_em.py:17-143 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 34 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (34 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2724— REDACTED:2724-2811 | akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:411-509 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 34 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (34 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2724— REDACTED:2724-2811 | REDACTED:462-560 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 34 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (34 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2724— REDACTED:2724-2811 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1594-1685 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 34 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (34 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:411— akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:411-509 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1224-1321 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 34 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (34 corresponding lines) REDACTED:462— REDACTED:462-560 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1224-1321 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 34 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (34 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1224— akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1224-1321 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1594-1685 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 34 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (34 corresponding lines) REDACTED:33— REDACTED:33-118 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1594-1685 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 34 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (34 corresponding lines) akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:18— akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:18-116 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:692-786 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 34 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (34 corresponding lines) akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:314— akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:314-390 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:790-889 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 34 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
+ 23 more in this group — see findings.md.
D4 · Code Duplication· Edited copy of a member (18 corresponding lines) · ×43
Edited copy of a member (18 corresponding lines) REDACTED:1766— REDACTED:1766-1820 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_tx.py:47-122 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 18 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (18 corresponding lines) akshare/index/index_stock_zh_csindex.py:18— akshare/index/index_stock_zh_csindex.py:18-69 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_tx.py:47-122 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 18 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (18 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:14— akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:14-69 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_tx.py:47-122 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 18 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (18 corresponding lines) akshare/stock_feature/stock_cyq_em.py:17— akshare/stock_feature/stock_cyq_em.py:17-308 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_tx.py:47-122 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 18 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (18 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_aum_em.py:65— akshare/fund/fund_aum_em.py:65-95 | akshare/futures/futures_zh_sina.py:652-688 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 18 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (18 corresponding lines) akshare/futures/futures_zh_sina.py:652— akshare/futures/futures_zh_sina.py:652-688 | REDACTED:113-204 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 18 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (18 corresponding lines) REDACTED:109— REDACTED:109-199 | REDACTED:113-204 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 18 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (18 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2257— REDACTED:2257-2339 | REDACTED:113-204 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 18 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (18 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2724— REDACTED:2724-2811 | REDACTED:113-204 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 18 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (18 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1224— akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1224-1321 | REDACTED:113-204 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 18 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (18 corresponding lines) REDACTED:33— REDACTED:33-118 | REDACTED:113-204 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 18 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (18 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:14— akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:14-69 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_sina.py:532-560 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 18 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (18 corresponding lines) akshare/bond/bond_buy_back_em.py:159— akshare/bond/bond_buy_back_em.py:159-220 | REDACTED:297-334 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 18 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (18 corresponding lines) akshare/bond/bond_buy_back_em.py:159— akshare/bond/bond_buy_back_em.py:159-220 | REDACTED:338-375 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 18 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (18 corresponding lines) akshare/bond/bond_buy_back_em.py:159— akshare/bond/bond_buy_back_em.py:159-220 | REDACTED:381-418 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 18 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (18 corresponding lines) akshare/forex/forex_em.py:78— akshare/forex/forex_em.py:78-141 | REDACTED:297-334 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 18 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (18 corresponding lines) akshare/forex/forex_em.py:78— akshare/forex/forex_em.py:78-141 | REDACTED:338-375 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 18 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (18 corresponding lines) akshare/forex/forex_em.py:78— akshare/forex/forex_em.py:78-141 | REDACTED:381-418 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 18 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (18 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:92— akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:92-186 | REDACTED:297-334 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 18 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (18 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:92— akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:92-186 | REDACTED:338-375 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 18 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (18 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:92— akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:92-186 | REDACTED:381-418 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 18 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (18 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:190— akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:190-273 | REDACTED:297-334 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 18 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (18 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:190— akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:190-273 | REDACTED:338-375 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 18 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (18 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:190— akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:190-273 | REDACTED:381-418 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 18 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (18 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:277— akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:277-361 | REDACTED:297-334 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 18 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
+ 18 more in this group — see findings.md.
D4 · Code Duplication· Edited copy of a member (21 corresponding lines) · ×43
Edited copy of a member (21 corresponding lines) REDACTED:109— REDACTED:109-199 | akshare/index/index_stock_hk.py:55-118 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 21 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (21 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2724— REDACTED:2724-2811 | akshare/index/index_stock_hk.py:55-118 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 21 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (21 corresponding lines) akshare/forex/forex_em.py:17— akshare/forex/forex_em.py:17-74 | REDACTED:242-316 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 21 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (21 corresponding lines) akshare/forex/forex_em.py:17— akshare/forex/forex_em.py:17-74 | akshare/index/index_stock_hk.py:55-118 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 21 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (21 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46— akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46-117 | REDACTED:242-316 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 21 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (21 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46— akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46-117 | akshare/index/index_stock_hk.py:55-118 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 21 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (21 corresponding lines) REDACTED:88— REDACTED:88-168 | akshare/index/index_stock_hk.py:55-118 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 21 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (21 corresponding lines) REDACTED:242— REDACTED:242-316 | akshare/index/index_stock_hk.py:149-215 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 21 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (21 corresponding lines) REDACTED:242— REDACTED:242-316 | akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:209-290 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 21 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (21 corresponding lines) REDACTED:242— REDACTED:242-316 | REDACTED:113-180 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 21 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (21 corresponding lines) REDACTED:242— REDACTED:242-316 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1224-1321 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 21 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (21 corresponding lines) akshare/index/index_stock_hk.py:55— akshare/index/index_stock_hk.py:55-118 | akshare/index/index_stock_hk.py:149-215 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 21 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (21 corresponding lines) akshare/index/index_stock_hk.py:55— akshare/index/index_stock_hk.py:55-118 | akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:130-205 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 21 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (21 corresponding lines) akshare/index/index_stock_hk.py:55— akshare/index/index_stock_hk.py:55-118 | akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:209-290 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 21 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (21 corresponding lines) akshare/index/index_stock_hk.py:55— akshare/index/index_stock_hk.py:55-118 | REDACTED:113-180 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 21 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (21 corresponding lines) akshare/index/index_stock_hk.py:55— akshare/index/index_stock_hk.py:55-118 | akshare/reits/reits_basic.py:46-113 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 21 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (21 corresponding lines) akshare/index/index_stock_hk.py:55— akshare/index/index_stock_hk.py:55-118 | akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:216-292 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 21 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (21 corresponding lines) akshare/index/index_stock_hk.py:55— akshare/index/index_stock_hk.py:55-118 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1224-1321 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 21 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (21 corresponding lines) akshare/index/index_stock_hk.py:55— akshare/index/index_stock_hk.py:55-118 | akshare/stock/stock_hk_famous.py:14-102 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 21 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (21 corresponding lines) akshare/index/index_stock_hk.py:55— akshare/index/index_stock_hk.py:55-118 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:336-430 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 21 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (21 corresponding lines) REDACTED:259— REDACTED:259-315 | akshare/forex/forex_em.py:17-74 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 21 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (21 corresponding lines) akshare/forex/forex_em.py:17— akshare/forex/forex_em.py:17-74 | REDACTED:15-109 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 21 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (21 corresponding lines) akshare/forex/forex_em.py:17— akshare/forex/forex_em.py:17-74 | akshare/option/option_premium_analysis_em.py:15-80 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 21 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (21 corresponding lines) akshare/forex/forex_em.py:17— akshare/forex/forex_em.py:17-74 | akshare/option/option_risk_analysis_em.py:15-82 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 21 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (21 corresponding lines) akshare/forex/forex_em.py:17— akshare/forex/forex_em.py:17-74 | akshare/option/option_value_analysis_em.py:15-84 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 21 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
+ 18 more in this group — see findings.md.
D4 · Code Duplication· Edited copy of a member (36 corresponding lines) · ×35
Edited copy of a member (36 corresponding lines) akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:16— akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:16-121 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:336-430 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 36 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (36 corresponding lines) akshare/futures_derivative/futures_contract_info_ine.py:14— akshare/futures_derivative/futures_contract_info_ine.py:14-64 | akshare/futures_derivative/futures_contract_info_shfe.py:14-66 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 36 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (36 corresponding lines) REDACTED:33— REDACTED:33-118 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_margin_sse.py:71-134 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 36 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (36 corresponding lines) akshare/bond/bond_buy_back_em.py:159— akshare/bond/bond_buy_back_em.py:159-220 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:23-119 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 36 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (36 corresponding lines) akshare/bond/bond_buy_back_em.py:159— akshare/bond/bond_buy_back_em.py:159-220 | akshare/stock/stock_hold_num_cninfo.py:31-103 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 36 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (36 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2426— REDACTED:2426-2497 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_margin_sse.py:71-134 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 36 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (36 corresponding lines) akshare/forex/forex_em.py:17— akshare/forex/forex_em.py:17-74 | REDACTED:19-125 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 36 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (36 corresponding lines) akshare/bond/bond_buy_back_em.py:159— akshare/bond/bond_buy_back_em.py:159-220 | akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:92-186 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 36 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (36 corresponding lines) akshare/bond/bond_buy_back_em.py:159— akshare/bond/bond_buy_back_em.py:159-220 | akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:190-273 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 36 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (36 corresponding lines) akshare/bond/bond_buy_back_em.py:159— akshare/bond/bond_buy_back_em.py:159-220 | akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:277-361 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 36 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (36 corresponding lines) akshare/index/index_stock_hk.py:236— akshare/index/index_stock_hk.py:236-288 | akshare/reits/reits_basic.py:117-170 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 36 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (36 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_report_cninfo.py:162— akshare/fund/fund_report_cninfo.py:162-227 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_gbjg_em.py:63-155 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 36 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (36 corresponding lines) akshare/futures/futures_comm_qihuo.py:17— akshare/futures/futures_comm_qihuo.py:17-169 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:18-116 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 36 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (36 corresponding lines) akshare/futures/futures_comm_qihuo.py:17— akshare/futures/futures_comm_qihuo.py:17-169 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:120-219 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 36 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (36 corresponding lines) akshare/futures/futures_comm_qihuo.py:17— akshare/futures/futures_comm_qihuo.py:17-169 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_qsjy_em.py:14-92 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 36 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (36 corresponding lines) REDACTED:482— REDACTED:482-549 | akshare/futures_derivative/futures_contract_info_shfe.py:14-66 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 36 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (36 corresponding lines) akshare/forex/forex_em.py:78— akshare/forex/forex_em.py:78-141 | akshare/fund/fund_rank_em.py:428-520 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 36 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (36 corresponding lines) akshare/index/index_global_em.py:96— akshare/index/index_global_em.py:96-159 | REDACTED:19-91 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 36 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (36 corresponding lines) akshare/index/index_global_em.py:96— akshare/index/index_global_em.py:96-159 | REDACTED:20-81 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 36 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (36 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:304— akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:304-407 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_margin_sse.py:138-203 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 36 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (36 corresponding lines) REDACTED:268— REDACTED:268-348 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_margin_sse.py:138-203 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 36 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (36 corresponding lines) REDACTED:354— REDACTED:354-458 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_margin_sse.py:138-203 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 36 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (36 corresponding lines) akshare/bond/bond_china.py:85— akshare/bond/bond_china.py:85-139 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_margin_sse.py:71-134 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 36 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (36 corresponding lines) akshare/bond/bond_zh_sina.py:46— akshare/bond/bond_zh_sina.py:46-115 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_margin_sse.py:138-203 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 36 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (36 corresponding lines) akshare/index/index_stock_hk.py:55— akshare/index/index_stock_hk.py:55-118 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_margin_sse.py:138-203 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 36 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
+ 10 more in this group — see findings.md.
D4 · Code Duplication· Edited copy of a member (41 corresponding lines) · ×35
Edited copy of a member (41 corresponding lines) akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:16— akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:16-121 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_yjyg_em.py:18-132 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 41 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (41 corresponding lines) REDACTED:109— REDACTED:109-199 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:449-558 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 41 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (41 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2257— REDACTED:2257-2339 | akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:45-217 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 41 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (41 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2257— REDACTED:2257-2339 | akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:304-407 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 41 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (41 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2257— REDACTED:2257-2339 | REDACTED:354-458 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 41 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (41 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1224— akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1224-1321 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:303-435 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 41 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (41 corresponding lines) akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:59— akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:59-126 | REDACTED:1193-1327 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 41 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (41 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:23— akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:23-119 | REDACTED:20-81 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 41 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (41 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:348— akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:348-444 | REDACTED:20-81 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 41 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (41 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_rank_em.py:34— akshare/fund/fund_rank_em.py:34-148 | REDACTED:20-81 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 41 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (41 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:92— akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:92-186 | REDACTED:20-81 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 41 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (41 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:190— akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:190-273 | REDACTED:20-81 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 41 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (41 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:277— akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:277-361 | REDACTED:20-81 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 41 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (41 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:304— akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:304-407 | REDACTED:33-118 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 41 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (41 corresponding lines) REDACTED:354— REDACTED:354-458 | REDACTED:33-118 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 41 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (41 corresponding lines) akshare/index/index_stock_hk.py:55— akshare/index/index_stock_hk.py:55-118 | REDACTED:20-117 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 41 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (41 corresponding lines) akshare/index/index_stock_hk.py:55— akshare/index/index_stock_hk.py:55-118 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gpzy_em.py:89-167 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 41 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (41 corresponding lines) akshare/index/index_stock_hk.py:55— akshare/index/index_stock_hk.py:55-118 | REDACTED:1193-1327 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 41 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (41 corresponding lines) akshare/index/index_stock_hk.py:55— akshare/index/index_stock_hk.py:55-118 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:21-158 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 41 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (41 corresponding lines) akshare/index/index_stock_hk.py:55— akshare/index/index_stock_hk.py:55-118 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:162-299 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 41 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (41 corresponding lines) akshare/index/index_stock_hk.py:55— akshare/index/index_stock_hk.py:55-118 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:303-435 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 41 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (41 corresponding lines) akshare/index/index_stock_hk.py:55— akshare/index/index_stock_hk.py:55-118 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:439-572 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 41 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (41 corresponding lines) akshare/index/index_stock_hk.py:55— akshare/index/index_stock_hk.py:55-118 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gpzy_em.py:196-301 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 41 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (41 corresponding lines) REDACTED:259— REDACTED:259-315 | REDACTED:174-333 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 41 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (41 corresponding lines) akshare/bond/bond_zh_sina.py:46— akshare/bond/bond_zh_sina.py:46-115 | REDACTED:1139-1202 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 41 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
+ 10 more in this group — see findings.md.
D4 · Code Duplication· Edited copy of a member (22 corresponding lines) · ×34
Edited copy of a member (22 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_ipo_summary_cninfo.py:31— akshare/stock/stock_ipo_summary_cninfo.py:31-108 | REDACTED:85-190 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 22 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (22 corresponding lines) akshare/futures/futures_zh_sina.py:616— akshare/futures/futures_zh_sina.py:616-648 | akshare/futures/futures_zh_sina.py:652-688 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 22 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (22 corresponding lines) REDACTED:92— REDACTED:92-121 | REDACTED:89-118 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 22 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (22 corresponding lines) REDACTED:242— REDACTED:242-316 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1594-1685 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 22 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (22 corresponding lines) akshare/index/index_stock_hk.py:55— akshare/index/index_stock_hk.py:55-118 | akshare/stock/stock_us_famous.py:14-111 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 22 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (22 corresponding lines) akshare/index/index_stock_hk.py:55— akshare/index/index_stock_hk.py:55-118 | akshare/stock/stock_us_pink.py:16-114 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 22 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (22 corresponding lines) akshare/index/index_stock_hk.py:55— akshare/index/index_stock_hk.py:55-118 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1594-1685 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 22 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (22 corresponding lines) akshare/bond/bond_zh_sina.py:46— akshare/bond/bond_zh_sina.py:46-115 | akshare/forex/forex_em.py:17-74 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 22 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (22 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2257— REDACTED:2257-2339 | akshare/forex/forex_em.py:17-74 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 22 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (22 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2426— REDACTED:2426-2497 | akshare/forex/forex_em.py:17-74 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 22 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (22 corresponding lines) akshare/forex/forex_em.py:17— akshare/forex/forex_em.py:17-74 | REDACTED:18-113 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 22 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (22 corresponding lines) akshare/forex/forex_em.py:17— akshare/forex/forex_em.py:17-74 | akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:59-126 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 22 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (22 corresponding lines) akshare/forex/forex_em.py:17— akshare/forex/forex_em.py:17-74 | akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:57-119 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 22 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (22 corresponding lines) akshare/forex/forex_em.py:17— akshare/forex/forex_em.py:17-74 | akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:304-407 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 22 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (22 corresponding lines) akshare/forex/forex_em.py:17— akshare/forex/forex_em.py:17-74 | akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:411-509 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 22 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (22 corresponding lines) akshare/forex/forex_em.py:17— akshare/forex/forex_em.py:17-74 | REDACTED:20-112 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 22 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (22 corresponding lines) akshare/forex/forex_em.py:17— akshare/forex/forex_em.py:17-74 | REDACTED:116-208 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 22 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (22 corresponding lines) akshare/forex/forex_em.py:17— akshare/forex/forex_em.py:17-74 | REDACTED:268-348 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 22 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (22 corresponding lines) akshare/forex/forex_em.py:17— akshare/forex/forex_em.py:17-74 | REDACTED:354-458 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 22 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (22 corresponding lines) akshare/forex/forex_em.py:17— akshare/forex/forex_em.py:17-74 | REDACTED:462-560 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 22 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (22 corresponding lines) akshare/forex/forex_em.py:17— akshare/forex/forex_em.py:17-74 | akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:216-292 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 22 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (22 corresponding lines) akshare/forex/forex_em.py:17— akshare/forex/forex_em.py:17-74 | akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:485-600 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 22 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (22 corresponding lines) akshare/forex/forex_em.py:17— akshare/forex/forex_em.py:17-74 | REDACTED:23-106 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 22 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (22 corresponding lines) akshare/forex/forex_em.py:17— akshare/forex/forex_em.py:17-74 | REDACTED:33-118 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 22 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (22 corresponding lines) akshare/forex/forex_em.py:17— akshare/forex/forex_em.py:17-74 | akshare/stock/stock_us_famous.py:14-111 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 22 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
+ 9 more in this group — see findings.md.
D4 · Code Duplication· Edited copy of a member (32 corresponding lines) · ×33
Edited copy of a member (32 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2426— REDACTED:2426-2497 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1594-1685 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 32 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (32 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46— akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46-117 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:16-121 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 32 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (32 corresponding lines) REDACTED:113— REDACTED:113-180 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:16-121 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 32 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (32 corresponding lines) REDACTED:109— REDACTED:109-199 | REDACTED:23-106 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 32 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (32 corresponding lines) REDACTED:15— REDACTED:15-109 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1594-1685 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 32 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (32 corresponding lines) REDACTED:23— REDACTED:23-106 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:16-121 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 32 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (32 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:45— akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:45-217 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:21-107 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 32 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (32 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:45— akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:45-217 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:111-197 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 32 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (32 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:45— akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:45-217 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:201-287 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 32 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (32 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:21— akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:21-107 | REDACTED:19-125 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 32 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (32 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:111— akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:111-197 | REDACTED:19-125 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 32 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (32 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:201— akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:201-287 | REDACTED:19-125 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 32 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (32 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2724— REDACTED:2724-2811 | REDACTED:23-106 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 32 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (32 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1224— akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1224-1321 | REDACTED:23-106 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 32 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (32 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1224— akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1224-1321 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdhs.py:131-227 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 32 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (32 corresponding lines) REDACTED:109— REDACTED:109-199 | REDACTED:259-315 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 32 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (32 corresponding lines) REDACTED:259— REDACTED:259-315 | REDACTED:2724-2811 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 32 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (32 corresponding lines) REDACTED:259— REDACTED:259-315 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1224-1321 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 32 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (32 corresponding lines) REDACTED:259— REDACTED:259-315 | REDACTED:19-125 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 32 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (32 corresponding lines) REDACTED:259— REDACTED:259-315 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:513-645 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 32 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (32 corresponding lines) REDACTED:259— REDACTED:259-315 | akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:45-217 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 32 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (32 corresponding lines) REDACTED:259— REDACTED:259-315 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:16-121 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 32 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (32 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:45— akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:45-217 | REDACTED:33-118 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 32 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (32 corresponding lines) REDACTED:18— REDACTED:18-113 | REDACTED:242-316 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 32 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (32 corresponding lines) REDACTED:259— REDACTED:259-315 | REDACTED:242-316 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 32 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
+ 8 more in this group — see findings.md.
D4 · Code Duplication· Edited copy of a member (47 corresponding lines) · ×33
Edited copy of a member (47 corresponding lines) REDACTED:18— REDACTED:18-113 | REDACTED:15-109 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 47 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (47 corresponding lines) REDACTED:18— REDACTED:18-113 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:449-558 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 47 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (47 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2724— REDACTED:2724-2811 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:16-121 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 47 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (47 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_risk_analysis_em.py:15— akshare/option/option_risk_analysis_em.py:15-82 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1025-1108 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 47 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (47 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_risk_analysis_em.py:15— akshare/option/option_risk_analysis_em.py:15-82 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_fhps_em.py:16-138 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 47 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (47 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_risk_analysis_em.py:15— akshare/option/option_risk_analysis_em.py:15-82 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdhs.py:131-227 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 47 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (47 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_risk_analysis_em.py:15— akshare/option/option_risk_analysis_em.py:15-82 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_yjbb_em.py:17-143 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 47 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (47 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_risk_analysis_em.py:15— akshare/option/option_risk_analysis_em.py:15-82 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1137-1220 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 47 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (47 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_risk_analysis_em.py:15— akshare/option/option_risk_analysis_em.py:15-82 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_yjyg_em.py:18-132 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 47 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (47 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1224— akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1224-1321 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:125-229 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 47 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (47 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1224— akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1224-1321 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:233-337 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 47 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (47 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1224— akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1224-1321 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:341-445 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 47 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (47 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1224— akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1224-1321 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:562-667 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 47 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (47 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1224— akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1224-1321 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:671-776 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 47 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (47 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1224— akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1224-1321 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:845-949 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 47 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (47 corresponding lines) REDACTED:18— REDACTED:18-113 | REDACTED:33-118 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 47 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (47 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1025— akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1025-1108 | REDACTED:33-118 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 47 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (47 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1137— akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1137-1220 | REDACTED:33-118 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 47 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (47 corresponding lines) REDACTED:15— REDACTED:15-109 | REDACTED:33-118 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 47 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (47 corresponding lines) REDACTED:33— REDACTED:33-118 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:449-558 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 47 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (47 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2257— REDACTED:2257-2339 | akshare/option/option_value_analysis_em.py:15-84 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 47 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (47 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_value_analysis_em.py:15— akshare/option/option_value_analysis_em.py:15-84 | REDACTED:33-118 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 47 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (47 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_value_analysis_em.py:15— akshare/option/option_value_analysis_em.py:15-84 | akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:485-600 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 47 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (47 corresponding lines) akshare/bond/bond_zh_sina.py:46— akshare/bond/bond_zh_sina.py:46-115 | REDACTED:18-113 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 47 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (47 corresponding lines) akshare/bond/bond_zh_sina.py:46— akshare/bond/bond_zh_sina.py:46-115 | akshare/crypto/crypto_hold.py:14-74 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 47 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) akshare/economic/macro_constitute.py:211— `except` takes every exception and records none of it — the body neither logs it, rethrows it, nor even names it, so the failure is discarded as completely as by an empty catch and only the substituted value survives. Log it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, narrow the catch to the exception this call can actually raise, or say in a comment on the catch why the failure genuinely cannot matter.
Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) REDACTED:453— `except` takes every exception and records none of it — the body neither logs it, rethrows it, nor even names it, so the failure is discarded as completely as by an empty catch and only the substituted value survives. Log it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, narrow the catch to the exception this call can actually raise, or say in a comment on the catch why the failure genuinely cannot matter.
Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) akshare/futures/futures_zh_sina.py:448— `except` takes every exception and records none of it — the body neither logs it, rethrows it, nor even names it, so the failure is discarded as completely as by an empty catch and only the substituted value survives. Log it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, narrow the catch to the exception this call can actually raise, or say in a comment on the catch why the failure genuinely cannot matter.
Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) REDACTED:216— `except` takes every exception and records none of it — the body neither logs it, rethrows it, nor even names it, so the failure is discarded as completely as by an empty catch and only the substituted value survives. Log it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, narrow the catch to the exception this call can actually raise, or say in a comment on the catch why the failure genuinely cannot matter.
Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) REDACTED:49— `except` takes every exception and records none of it — the body neither logs it, rethrows it, nor even names it, so the failure is discarded as completely as by an empty catch and only the substituted value survives. Log it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, narrow the catch to the exception this call can actually raise, or say in a comment on the catch why the failure genuinely cannot matter.
Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) REDACTED:322— `except` takes every exception and records none of it — the body neither logs it, rethrows it, nor even names it, so the failure is discarded as completely as by an empty catch and only the substituted value survives. Log it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, narrow the catch to the exception this call can actually raise, or say in a comment on the catch why the failure genuinely cannot matter.
Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) REDACTED:315— `except` takes every exception and records none of it — the body neither logs it, rethrows it, nor even names it, so the failure is discarded as completely as by an empty catch and only the substituted value survives. Log it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, narrow the catch to the exception this call can actually raise, or say in a comment on the catch why the failure genuinely cannot matter.
Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) REDACTED:770— `except` takes every exception and records none of it — the body neither logs it, rethrows it, nor even names it, so the failure is discarded as completely as by an empty catch and only the substituted value survives. Log it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, narrow the catch to the exception this call can actually raise, or say in a comment on the catch why the failure genuinely cannot matter.
Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) REDACTED:1318— `except` takes every exception and records none of it — the body neither logs it, rethrows it, nor even names it, so the failure is discarded as completely as by an empty catch and only the substituted value survives. Log it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, narrow the catch to the exception this call can actually raise, or say in a comment on the catch why the failure genuinely cannot matter.
Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) REDACTED:1326— `except` takes every exception and records none of it — the body neither logs it, rethrows it, nor even names it, so the failure is discarded as completely as by an empty catch and only the substituted value survives. Log it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, narrow the catch to the exception this call can actually raise, or say in a comment on the catch why the failure genuinely cannot matter.
Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) akshare/futures_derivative/futures_index_sina.py:81— `except` takes every exception and records none of it — the body neither logs it, rethrows it, nor even names it, so the failure is discarded as completely as by an empty catch and only the substituted value survives. Log it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, narrow the catch to the exception this call can actually raise, or say in a comment on the catch why the failure genuinely cannot matter.
Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) akshare/news/news_cctv.py:66— `except` takes every exception and records none of it — the body neither logs it, rethrows it, nor even names it, so the failure is discarded as completely as by an empty catch and only the substituted value survives. Log it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, narrow the catch to the exception this call can actually raise, or say in a comment on the catch why the failure genuinely cannot matter.
Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) akshare/news/news_cctv.py:117— `except` takes every exception and records none of it — the body neither logs it, rethrows it, nor even names it, so the failure is discarded as completely as by an empty catch and only the substituted value survives. Log it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, narrow the catch to the exception this call can actually raise, or say in a comment on the catch why the failure genuinely cannot matter.
Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) akshare/news/news_cctv.py:170— `except` takes every exception and records none of it — the body neither logs it, rethrows it, nor even names it, so the failure is discarded as completely as by an empty catch and only the substituted value survives. Log it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, narrow the catch to the exception this call can actually raise, or say in a comment on the catch why the failure genuinely cannot matter.
Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) REDACTED:174— `except` takes every exception and records none of it — the body neither logs it, rethrows it, nor even names it, so the failure is discarded as completely as by an empty catch and only the substituted value survives. Log it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, narrow the catch to the exception this call can actually raise, or say in a comment on the catch why the failure genuinely cannot matter.
Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) REDACTED:39— `except` takes every exception and records none of it — the body neither logs it, rethrows it, nor even names it, so the failure is discarded as completely as by an empty catch and only the substituted value survives. Log it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, narrow the catch to the exception this call can actually raise, or say in a comment on the catch why the failure genuinely cannot matter.
Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) REDACTED:103— `except` takes every exception and records none of it — the body neither logs it, rethrows it, nor even names it, so the failure is discarded as completely as by an empty catch and only the substituted value survives. Log it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, narrow the catch to the exception this call can actually raise, or say in a comment on the catch why the failure genuinely cannot matter.
Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) REDACTED:185— `except` takes every exception and records none of it — the body neither logs it, rethrows it, nor even names it, so the failure is discarded as completely as by an empty catch and only the substituted value survives. Log it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, narrow the catch to the exception this call can actually raise, or say in a comment on the catch why the failure genuinely cannot matter.
Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) REDACTED:209— `except` takes every exception and records none of it — the body neither logs it, rethrows it, nor even names it, so the failure is discarded as completely as by an empty catch and only the substituted value survives. Log it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, narrow the catch to the exception this call can actually raise, or say in a comment on the catch why the failure genuinely cannot matter.
Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) REDACTED:233— `except` takes every exception and records none of it — the body neither logs it, rethrows it, nor even names it, so the failure is discarded as completely as by an empty catch and only the substituted value survives. Log it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, narrow the catch to the exception this call can actually raise, or say in a comment on the catch why the failure genuinely cannot matter.
Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) REDACTED:257— `except` takes every exception and records none of it — the body neither logs it, rethrows it, nor even names it, so the failure is discarded as completely as by an empty catch and only the substituted value survives. Log it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, narrow the catch to the exception this call can actually raise, or say in a comment on the catch why the failure genuinely cannot matter.
Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) REDACTED:300— `except` takes every exception and records none of it — the body neither logs it, rethrows it, nor even names it, so the failure is discarded as completely as by an empty catch and only the substituted value survives. Log it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, narrow the catch to the exception this call can actually raise, or say in a comment on the catch why the failure genuinely cannot matter.
Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) REDACTED:324— `except` takes every exception and records none of it — the body neither logs it, rethrows it, nor even names it, so the failure is discarded as completely as by an empty catch and only the substituted value survives. Log it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, narrow the catch to the exception this call can actually raise, or say in a comment on the catch why the failure genuinely cannot matter.
Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) REDACTED:348— `except` takes every exception and records none of it — the body neither logs it, rethrows it, nor even names it, so the failure is discarded as completely as by an empty catch and only the substituted value survives. Log it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, narrow the catch to the exception this call can actually raise, or say in a comment on the catch why the failure genuinely cannot matter.
Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) REDACTED:372— `except` takes every exception and records none of it — the body neither logs it, rethrows it, nor even names it, so the failure is discarded as completely as by an empty catch and only the substituted value survives. Log it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, narrow the catch to the exception this call can actually raise, or say in a comment on the catch why the failure genuinely cannot matter.
+ 8 more in this group — see findings.md.
D4 · Code Duplication· Edited copy of a member (45 corresponding lines) · ×31
Edited copy of a member (45 corresponding lines) REDACTED:18— REDACTED:18-113 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_ah_tx.py:41-107 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 45 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (45 corresponding lines) REDACTED:15— REDACTED:15-109 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_ah_tx.py:41-107 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 45 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (45 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_zh_ah_tx.py:41— akshare/stock/stock_zh_ah_tx.py:41-107 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:449-558 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 45 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (45 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_zh_ah_tx.py:41— akshare/stock/stock_zh_ah_tx.py:41-107 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_yjbb_em.py:17-143 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 45 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (45 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_zh_ah_tx.py:41— akshare/stock/stock_zh_ah_tx.py:41-107 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_yjyg_em.py:18-132 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 45 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (45 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1025— akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1025-1108 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_ah_tx.py:41-107 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 45 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (45 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1137— akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1137-1220 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_ah_tx.py:41-107 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 45 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (45 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_zh_ah_tx.py:41— akshare/stock/stock_zh_ah_tx.py:41-107 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_account_em.py:15-92 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 45 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (45 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1224— akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1224-1321 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_yjyg_em.py:18-132 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 45 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (45 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46— akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46-117 | akshare/reits/reits_basic.py:46-113 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 45 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (45 corresponding lines) akshare/index/index_stock_hk.py:149— akshare/index/index_stock_hk.py:149-215 | akshare/reits/reits_basic.py:46-113 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 45 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (45 corresponding lines) akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:209— akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:209-290 | akshare/reits/reits_basic.py:46-113 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 45 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (45 corresponding lines) akshare/reits/reits_basic.py:46— akshare/reits/reits_basic.py:46-113 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1224-1321 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 45 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (45 corresponding lines) REDACTED:88— REDACTED:88-168 | akshare/index/index_stock_hk.py:149-215 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 45 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (45 corresponding lines) akshare/index/index_stock_hk.py:149— akshare/index/index_stock_hk.py:149-215 | akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:130-205 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 45 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (45 corresponding lines) akshare/index/index_stock_hk.py:149— akshare/index/index_stock_hk.py:149-215 | REDACTED:113-180 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 45 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (45 corresponding lines) akshare/index/index_stock_hk.py:149— akshare/index/index_stock_hk.py:149-215 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:336-430 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 45 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (45 corresponding lines) akshare/index/index_stock_hk.py:149— akshare/index/index_stock_hk.py:149-215 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:513-645 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 45 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (45 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2426— REDACTED:2426-2497 | akshare/option/option_risk_analysis_em.py:15-82 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 45 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (45 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_risk_analysis_em.py:15— akshare/option/option_risk_analysis_em.py:15-82 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_ah_tx.py:41-107 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 45 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (45 corresponding lines) REDACTED:18— REDACTED:18-113 | akshare/option/option_risk_analysis_em.py:15-82 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 45 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (45 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_risk_analysis_em.py:15— akshare/option/option_risk_analysis_em.py:15-82 | akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:485-600 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 45 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (45 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_risk_analysis_em.py:15— akshare/option/option_risk_analysis_em.py:15-82 | akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:57-119 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 45 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (45 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_risk_analysis_em.py:15— akshare/option/option_risk_analysis_em.py:15-82 | REDACTED:33-118 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 45 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (45 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_premium_analysis_em.py:15— akshare/option/option_premium_analysis_em.py:15-80 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1025-1108 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 45 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
+ 6 more in this group — see findings.md.
D4 · Code Duplication· Edited copy of a member (17 corresponding lines) · ×30
Edited copy of a member (17 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:92— akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:92-186 | REDACTED:194-291 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 17 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (17 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:23— akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:23-119 | REDACTED:194-291 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 17 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (17 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:348— akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:348-444 | REDACTED:194-291 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 17 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (17 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_ipo_summary_cninfo.py:31— akshare/stock/stock_ipo_summary_cninfo.py:31-108 | REDACTED:194-291 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 17 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (17 corresponding lines) REDACTED:259— REDACTED:259-315 | REDACTED:3290-3344 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 17 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (17 corresponding lines) REDACTED:259— REDACTED:259-315 | REDACTED:113-204 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 17 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (17 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1025— akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1025-1108 | REDACTED:113-204 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 17 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (17 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1137— akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1137-1220 | REDACTED:113-204 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 17 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (17 corresponding lines) REDACTED:113— REDACTED:113-204 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_account_em.py:15-92 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 17 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (17 corresponding lines) REDACTED:113— REDACTED:113-204 | REDACTED:19-125 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 17 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (17 corresponding lines) REDACTED:113— REDACTED:113-204 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_fhps_em.py:16-138 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 17 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (17 corresponding lines) REDACTED:113— REDACTED:113-204 | REDACTED:1193-1327 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 17 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (17 corresponding lines) REDACTED:113— REDACTED:113-204 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:439-572 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 17 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (17 corresponding lines) REDACTED:113— REDACTED:113-204 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_yjbb_em.py:17-143 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 17 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (17 corresponding lines) REDACTED:113— REDACTED:113-204 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_yjyg_em.py:18-132 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 17 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (17 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_rank_em.py:428— akshare/fund/fund_rank_em.py:428-520 | REDACTED:297-334 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 17 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (17 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_rank_em.py:428— akshare/fund/fund_rank_em.py:428-520 | REDACTED:338-375 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 17 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (17 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_rank_em.py:428— akshare/fund/fund_rank_em.py:428-520 | REDACTED:381-418 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 17 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (17 corresponding lines) REDACTED:172— REDACTED:172-244 | REDACTED:297-334 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 17 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (17 corresponding lines) REDACTED:172— REDACTED:172-244 | REDACTED:338-375 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 17 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (17 corresponding lines) REDACTED:172— REDACTED:172-244 | REDACTED:381-418 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 17 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (17 corresponding lines) REDACTED:297— REDACTED:297-334 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gpzy_em.py:22-85 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 17 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (17 corresponding lines) REDACTED:297— REDACTED:297-334 | REDACTED:19-91 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 17 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (17 corresponding lines) REDACTED:297— REDACTED:297-334 | REDACTED:20-81 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 17 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (17 corresponding lines) REDACTED:338— REDACTED:338-375 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gpzy_em.py:22-85 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 17 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
+ 5 more in this group — see findings.md.
D4 · Code Duplication· Edited copy of a member (39 corresponding lines) · ×28
Edited copy of a member (39 corresponding lines) REDACTED:15— REDACTED:15-109 | akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:304-407 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 39 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (39 corresponding lines) REDACTED:15— REDACTED:15-109 | REDACTED:268-348 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 39 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (39 corresponding lines) REDACTED:15— REDACTED:15-109 | REDACTED:354-458 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 39 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (39 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:304— akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:304-407 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:449-558 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 39 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (39 corresponding lines) REDACTED:268— REDACTED:268-348 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:449-558 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 39 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (39 corresponding lines) REDACTED:354— REDACTED:354-458 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:449-558 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 39 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (39 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1025— akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1025-1108 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:16-121 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 39 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (39 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1137— akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1137-1220 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:16-121 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 39 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (39 corresponding lines) akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:16— akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:16-121 | REDACTED:1193-1327 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 39 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (39 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2724— REDACTED:2724-2811 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:449-558 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 39 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (39 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1224— akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1224-1321 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:449-558 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 39 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (39 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_risk_analysis_em.py:15— akshare/option/option_risk_analysis_em.py:15-82 | akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:304-407 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 39 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (39 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_risk_analysis_em.py:15— akshare/option/option_risk_analysis_em.py:15-82 | REDACTED:268-348 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 39 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (39 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_risk_analysis_em.py:15— akshare/option/option_risk_analysis_em.py:15-82 | REDACTED:354-458 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 39 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (39 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:92— akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:92-186 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:692-786 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 39 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (39 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_report_cninfo.py:162— akshare/fund/fund_report_cninfo.py:162-227 | akshare/stock/stock_hold_control_em.py:114-193 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 39 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (39 corresponding lines) REDACTED:259— REDACTED:259-315 | akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:304-407 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 39 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (39 corresponding lines) REDACTED:259— REDACTED:259-315 | REDACTED:268-348 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 39 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (39 corresponding lines) REDACTED:259— REDACTED:259-315 | REDACTED:354-458 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 39 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (39 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:92— akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:92-186 | akshare/stock/stock_hold_num_cninfo.py:31-103 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 39 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (39 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:190— akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:190-273 | akshare/stock/stock_hold_num_cninfo.py:31-103 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 39 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (39 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:277— akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:277-361 | akshare/stock/stock_hold_num_cninfo.py:31-103 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 39 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (39 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:92— akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:92-186 | akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:403-481 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 39 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (39 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:190— akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:190-273 | akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:403-481 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 39 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (39 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:277— akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:277-361 | akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:403-481 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 39 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
+ 3 more in this group — see findings.md.
D4 · Code Duplication· Edited copy of a member (37 corresponding lines) · ×27
Edited copy of a member (37 corresponding lines) akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:16— akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:16-121 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:21-158 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 37 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (37 corresponding lines) akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:16— akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:16-121 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:162-299 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 37 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (37 corresponding lines) akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:16— akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:16-121 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:439-572 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 37 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (37 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2191— REDACTED:2191-2253 | REDACTED:33-118 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 37 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (37 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_report_cninfo.py:162— akshare/fund/fund_report_cninfo.py:162-227 | REDACTED:30-90 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 37 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (37 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2191— REDACTED:2191-2253 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_account_em.py:15-92 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 37 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (37 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2191— REDACTED:2191-2253 | REDACTED:2343-2422 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 37 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (37 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2191— REDACTED:2191-2253 | REDACTED:2426-2497 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 37 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (37 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2191— REDACTED:2191-2253 | REDACTED:2501-2574 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 37 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (37 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2191— REDACTED:2191-2253 | REDACTED:2967-3048 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 37 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (37 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2191— REDACTED:2191-2253 | REDACTED:3097-3177 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 37 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (37 corresponding lines) akshare/forex/forex_em.py:17— akshare/forex/forex_em.py:17-74 | REDACTED:88-168 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 37 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (37 corresponding lines) akshare/forex/forex_em.py:17— akshare/forex/forex_em.py:17-74 | akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:130-205 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 37 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (37 corresponding lines) akshare/forex/forex_em.py:17— akshare/forex/forex_em.py:17-74 | REDACTED:113-180 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 37 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (37 corresponding lines) akshare/forex/forex_em.py:17— akshare/forex/forex_em.py:17-74 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:336-430 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 37 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (37 corresponding lines) REDACTED:172— REDACTED:172-244 | akshare/stock/stock_hold_num_cninfo.py:31-103 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 37 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (37 corresponding lines) REDACTED:16— REDACTED:16-97 | REDACTED:14-67 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 37 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (37 corresponding lines) REDACTED:482— REDACTED:482-549 | akshare/futures_derivative/futures_contract_info_ine.py:14-64 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 37 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (37 corresponding lines) akshare/forex/forex_em.py:78— akshare/forex/forex_em.py:78-141 | akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:92-186 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 37 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (37 corresponding lines) akshare/forex/forex_em.py:78— akshare/forex/forex_em.py:78-141 | akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:190-273 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 37 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (37 corresponding lines) akshare/forex/forex_em.py:78— akshare/forex/forex_em.py:78-141 | akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:277-361 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 37 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (37 corresponding lines) akshare/forex/forex_em.py:78— akshare/forex/forex_em.py:78-141 | akshare/stock/stock_hold_num_cninfo.py:31-103 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 37 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (37 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:92— akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:92-186 | akshare/index/index_global_em.py:96-159 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 37 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (37 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:190— akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:190-273 | akshare/index/index_global_em.py:96-159 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 37 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (37 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:277— akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:277-361 | akshare/index/index_global_em.py:96-159 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 37 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
+ 2 more in this group — see findings.md.
D4 · Code Duplication· Edited copy of a member (60 corresponding lines) · ×26
Edited copy of a member (60 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:411— akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:411-509 | REDACTED:23-106 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 60 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (60 corresponding lines) REDACTED:462— REDACTED:462-560 | REDACTED:23-106 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 60 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (60 corresponding lines) REDACTED:23— REDACTED:23-106 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:21-107 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 60 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (60 corresponding lines) REDACTED:23— REDACTED:23-106 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:111-197 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 60 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (60 corresponding lines) REDACTED:23— REDACTED:23-106 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:201-287 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 60 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (60 corresponding lines) REDACTED:23— REDACTED:23-106 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:125-229 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 60 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (60 corresponding lines) REDACTED:23— REDACTED:23-106 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:233-337 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 60 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (60 corresponding lines) REDACTED:23— REDACTED:23-106 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:341-445 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 60 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (60 corresponding lines) REDACTED:23— REDACTED:23-106 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:562-667 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 60 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (60 corresponding lines) REDACTED:23— REDACTED:23-106 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:671-776 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 60 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (60 corresponding lines) REDACTED:23— REDACTED:23-106 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:845-949 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 60 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (60 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2257— REDACTED:2257-2339 | REDACTED:2967-3048 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 60 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (60 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2257— REDACTED:2257-2339 | REDACTED:3097-3177 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 60 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (60 corresponding lines) akshare/index/index_stock_hk.py:149— akshare/index/index_stock_hk.py:149-215 | akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:209-290 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 60 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (60 corresponding lines) REDACTED:23— REDACTED:23-106 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1226-1307 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 60 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (60 corresponding lines) REDACTED:23— REDACTED:23-106 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1311-1392 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 60 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (60 corresponding lines) akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1226— akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1226-1307 | REDACTED:1193-1327 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 60 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (60 corresponding lines) akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1226— akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1226-1307 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:21-158 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 60 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (60 corresponding lines) akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1226— akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1226-1307 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:162-299 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 60 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (60 corresponding lines) akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1226— akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1226-1307 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:303-435 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 60 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (60 corresponding lines) akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1311— akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1311-1392 | REDACTED:1193-1327 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 60 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (60 corresponding lines) akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1311— akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1311-1392 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:21-158 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 60 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (60 corresponding lines) akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1311— akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1311-1392 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:162-299 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 60 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (60 corresponding lines) akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1311— akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1311-1392 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:303-435 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 60 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (60 corresponding lines) akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1226— akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1226-1307 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:439-572 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 60 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
+ 1 more in this group — see findings.md.
D4 · Code Duplication· Edited copy of a member (65 corresponding lines) · ×26
Edited copy of a member (65 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:21— akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:21-107 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:21-158 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 65 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (65 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:21— akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:21-107 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:162-299 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 65 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (65 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:21— akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:21-107 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:303-435 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 65 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (65 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:111— akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:111-197 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:21-158 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 65 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (65 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:111— akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:111-197 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:162-299 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 65 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (65 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:111— akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:111-197 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:303-435 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 65 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (65 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:201— akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:201-287 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:21-158 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 65 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (65 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:201— akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:201-287 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:162-299 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 65 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (65 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:201— akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:201-287 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:303-435 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 65 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (65 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1224— akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1224-1321 | REDACTED:19-125 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 65 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (65 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:21— akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:21-107 | REDACTED:1193-1327 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 65 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (65 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:111— akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:111-197 | REDACTED:1193-1327 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 65 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (65 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:201— akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:201-287 | REDACTED:1193-1327 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 65 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (65 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_risk_analysis_em.py:15— akshare/option/option_risk_analysis_em.py:15-82 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:21-107 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 65 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (65 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_risk_analysis_em.py:15— akshare/option/option_risk_analysis_em.py:15-82 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:111-197 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 65 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (65 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_risk_analysis_em.py:15— akshare/option/option_risk_analysis_em.py:15-82 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:201-287 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 65 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (65 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_risk_analysis_em.py:15— akshare/option/option_risk_analysis_em.py:15-82 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:125-229 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 65 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (65 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_risk_analysis_em.py:15— akshare/option/option_risk_analysis_em.py:15-82 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:233-337 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 65 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (65 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_risk_analysis_em.py:15— akshare/option/option_risk_analysis_em.py:15-82 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:341-445 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 65 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (65 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_risk_analysis_em.py:15— akshare/option/option_risk_analysis_em.py:15-82 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:562-667 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 65 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (65 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_risk_analysis_em.py:15— akshare/option/option_risk_analysis_em.py:15-82 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:671-776 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 65 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (65 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_risk_analysis_em.py:15— akshare/option/option_risk_analysis_em.py:15-82 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:845-949 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 65 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (65 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_risk_analysis_em.py:15— akshare/option/option_risk_analysis_em.py:15-82 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1226-1307 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 65 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (65 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_risk_analysis_em.py:15— akshare/option/option_risk_analysis_em.py:15-82 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1311-1392 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 65 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (65 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:411— akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:411-509 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:439-572 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 65 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
FileTooLong: utils/demjson.py akshare/utils/demjson.py— FileTooLong — 4686 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 4186 over it, 9.37× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.
FileTooLong: REDACTED REDACTED— FileTooLong — 4287 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded; the length bar is tripled for a single-responsibility module of 4 or fewer top-level units). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 3787 over it, 8.57× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.
FileTooLong: REDACTED REDACTED— FileTooLong — 2849 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 2349 over it, 5.70× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.
FileTooLong: REDACTED REDACTED— FileTooLong — 2679 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded; the length bar is tripled for a single-responsibility module of 4 or fewer top-level units). The bar is 1500 significant lines; this is 1179 over it, 1.79× 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: movie/jm.js akshare/movie/jm.js— FileTooLong — 1823 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded; the length bar is tripled for a single-responsibility module of 4 or fewer top-level units). The bar is 1500 significant lines; this is 323 over it, 1.22× 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: stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py— FileTooLong — 1577 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 1077 over it, 3.15× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.
FileTooLong: REDACTED REDACTED— FileTooLong — 1379 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 879 over it, 2.76× 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: fund/fund_em.py akshare/fund/fund_em.py— FileTooLong — 1060 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 560 over it, 2.12× 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: stock/stock_fund_em.py akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py— FileTooLong — 1049 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 549 over it, 2.10× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.
FileTooLong: REDACTED REDACTED— FileTooLong — 977 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 477 over it, 1.95× 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: stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py— FileTooLong — 819 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 319 over it, 1.64× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.
FileTooLong: REDACTED REDACTED— FileTooLong — 814 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 314 over it, 1.63× 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: data/ths.js akshare/data/ths.js— FileTooLong — 807 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), about 99% of them inside a single declaration: v_cookie (2-978). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 307 over it, 1.61× the bar. Moving the declarations that sit BESIDE it into sibling files will not shorten this file. Extract from INSIDE that declaration instead: lift each cohesive group of its body — the parts that share the same inputs and are named together — into its own unit in a sibling file, and have the original call them.
FileTooLong: stock_feature/ths.js akshare/stock_feature/ths.js— FileTooLong — 807 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), about 99% of them inside a single declaration: v_cookie (2-978). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 307 over it, 1.61× the bar. Moving the declarations that sit BESIDE it into sibling files will not shorten this file. Extract from INSIDE that declaration instead: lift each cohesive group of its body — the parts that share the same inputs and are named together — into its own unit in a sibling file, and have the original call them.
FileTooLong: stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py— FileTooLong — 788 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 288 over it, 1.58× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.
FileTooLong: REDACTED REDACTED— FileTooLong — 692 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 192 over it, 1.38× 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: REDACTED REDACTED— FileTooLong — 688 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 188 over it, 1.38× 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: REDACTED REDACTED— FileTooLong — 679 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 179 over it, 1.36× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.
FileTooLong: REDACTED REDACTED— FileTooLong — 670 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 170 over it, 1.34× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.
FileTooLong: REDACTED REDACTED— FileTooLong — 665 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 165 over it, 1.33× 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: stock_fundamental/stock_finance_sina.py akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_sina.py— FileTooLong — 600 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 100 over it, 1.20× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.
FileTooLong: REDACTED REDACTED— FileTooLong — 588 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 88 over it, 1.18× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.
FileTooLong: REDACTED REDACTED— FileTooLong — 522 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 22 over it, 1.04× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.
FileTooLong: REDACTED REDACTED— FileTooLong — 513 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 13 over it, 1.03× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.
FileTooLong: REDACTED REDACTED— FileTooLong — 504 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 4 over it, 1.01× 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.
D4 · Code Duplication· Edited copy of a member (49 corresponding lines) · ×25
Edited copy of a member (49 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:45— akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:45-217 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:125-229 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 49 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (49 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:45— akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:45-217 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:233-337 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 49 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (49 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:45— akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:45-217 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:341-445 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 49 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (49 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:45— akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:45-217 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:562-667 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 49 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (49 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:45— akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:45-217 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:671-776 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 49 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (49 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:45— akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:45-217 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:845-949 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 49 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (49 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46— akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46-117 | REDACTED:19-125 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 49 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (49 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46— akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46-117 | akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:130-205 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 49 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (49 corresponding lines) REDACTED:88— REDACTED:88-168 | akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:209-290 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 49 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (49 corresponding lines) akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:130— akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:130-205 | akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:209-290 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 49 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (49 corresponding lines) akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:209— akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:209-290 | REDACTED:113-180 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 49 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (49 corresponding lines) akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:209— akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:209-290 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:336-430 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 49 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (49 corresponding lines) akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:209— akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:209-290 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:513-645 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 49 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (49 corresponding lines) akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:130— akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:130-205 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1224-1321 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 49 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (49 corresponding lines) REDACTED:33— REDACTED:33-118 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_account_em.py:15-92 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 49 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (49 corresponding lines) akshare/bond/bond_zh_sina.py:46— akshare/bond/bond_zh_sina.py:46-115 | REDACTED:23-106 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 49 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (49 corresponding lines) REDACTED:49— REDACTED:49-121 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:439-572 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 49 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (49 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_value_analysis_em.py:15— akshare/option/option_value_analysis_em.py:15-84 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1025-1108 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 49 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (49 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_value_analysis_em.py:15— akshare/option/option_value_analysis_em.py:15-84 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1137-1220 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 49 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (49 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_value_analysis_em.py:15— akshare/option/option_value_analysis_em.py:15-84 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_fhps_em.py:16-138 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 49 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (49 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_value_analysis_em.py:15— akshare/option/option_value_analysis_em.py:15-84 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdhs.py:131-227 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 49 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (49 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_value_analysis_em.py:15— akshare/option/option_value_analysis_em.py:15-84 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_yjbb_em.py:17-143 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 49 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (49 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_value_analysis_em.py:15— akshare/option/option_value_analysis_em.py:15-84 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_yjyg_em.py:18-132 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 49 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (49 corresponding lines) akshare/qdii/qdii_jsl.py:15— akshare/qdii/qdii_jsl.py:15-85 | akshare/stock/stock_share_hold.py:22-115 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 49 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (49 corresponding lines) akshare/qdii/qdii_jsl.py:89— akshare/qdii/qdii_jsl.py:89-157 | akshare/stock/stock_share_hold.py:22-115 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 49 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
D4 · Code Duplication· Edited copy of a member (87 corresponding lines) · ×25
Edited copy of a member (87 corresponding lines) akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:449— akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:449-558 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:21-158 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 87 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (87 corresponding lines) akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:449— akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:449-558 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:162-299 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 87 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (87 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:21— akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:21-107 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:111-197 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 87 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (87 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:21— akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:21-107 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:201-287 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 87 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (87 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:21— akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:21-107 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:125-229 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 87 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (87 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:21— akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:21-107 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:233-337 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 87 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (87 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:21— akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:21-107 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:341-445 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 87 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (87 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:21— akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:21-107 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:562-667 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 87 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (87 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:21— akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:21-107 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:671-776 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 87 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (87 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:21— akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:21-107 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:845-949 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 87 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (87 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:111— akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:111-197 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:201-287 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 87 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (87 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:111— akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:111-197 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:125-229 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 87 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (87 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:111— akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:111-197 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:233-337 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 87 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (87 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:111— akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:111-197 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:341-445 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 87 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (87 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:111— akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:111-197 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:562-667 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 87 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (87 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:111— akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:111-197 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:671-776 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 87 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (87 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:111— akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:111-197 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:845-949 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 87 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (87 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:201— akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:201-287 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:125-229 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 87 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (87 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:201— akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:201-287 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:233-337 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 87 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (87 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:201— akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:201-287 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:341-445 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 87 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (87 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:201— akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:201-287 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:562-667 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 87 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (87 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:201— akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:201-287 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:671-776 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 87 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (87 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:201— akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:201-287 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:845-949 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 87 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (87 corresponding lines) akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:449— akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:449-558 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:303-435 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 87 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (87 corresponding lines) akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:449— akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:449-558 | REDACTED:1193-1327 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 87 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
D4 · Code Duplication· Edited copy of a member (59 corresponding lines) · ×25
Edited copy of a member (59 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2257— REDACTED:2257-2339 | akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:411-509 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 59 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (59 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2257— REDACTED:2257-2339 | REDACTED:462-560 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 59 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (59 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2257— REDACTED:2257-2339 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:125-229 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 59 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (59 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2257— REDACTED:2257-2339 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:233-337 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 59 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (59 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2257— REDACTED:2257-2339 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:341-445 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 59 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (59 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2257— REDACTED:2257-2339 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:562-667 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 59 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (59 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2257— REDACTED:2257-2339 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:671-776 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 59 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (59 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2257— REDACTED:2257-2339 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:845-949 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 59 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (59 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2257— REDACTED:2257-2339 | REDACTED:23-106 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 59 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (59 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2257— REDACTED:2257-2339 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:21-107 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 59 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (59 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2257— REDACTED:2257-2339 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:111-197 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 59 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (59 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2257— REDACTED:2257-2339 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:201-287 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 59 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (59 corresponding lines) REDACTED:15— REDACTED:15-109 | REDACTED:23-106 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 59 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (59 corresponding lines) REDACTED:23— REDACTED:23-106 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:449-558 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 59 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (59 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2257— REDACTED:2257-2339 | REDACTED:2343-2422 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 59 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (59 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1025— akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1025-1108 | REDACTED:23-106 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 59 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (59 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1137— akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1137-1220 | REDACTED:23-106 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 59 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (59 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_risk_analysis_em.py:15— akshare/option/option_risk_analysis_em.py:15-82 | akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:411-509 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 59 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (59 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_risk_analysis_em.py:15— akshare/option/option_risk_analysis_em.py:15-82 | REDACTED:462-560 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 59 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (59 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2257— REDACTED:2257-2339 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1226-1307 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 59 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (59 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2257— REDACTED:2257-2339 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1311-1392 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 59 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (59 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2257— REDACTED:2257-2339 | REDACTED:20-112 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 59 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (59 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2257— REDACTED:2257-2339 | REDACTED:116-208 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 59 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (59 corresponding lines) akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1226— akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1226-1307 | REDACTED:174-333 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 59 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (59 corresponding lines) akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1311— akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1311-1392 | REDACTED:174-333 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 59 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
D4 · Code Duplication· Edited copy of a member (63 corresponding lines) · ×23
Edited copy of a member (63 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_rank_em.py:34— akshare/fund/fund_rank_em.py:34-148 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:229-332 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 63 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (63 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:45— akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:45-217 | akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:209-290 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 63 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (63 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_hold_control_cninfo.py:107— akshare/stock/stock_hold_control_cninfo.py:107-195 | akshare/stock/stock_hold_num_cninfo.py:31-103 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 63 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (63 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2724— REDACTED:2724-2811 | akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:45-217 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 63 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (63 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:92— akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:92-186 | akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:296-399 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 63 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (63 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_premium_analysis_em.py:15— akshare/option/option_premium_analysis_em.py:15-80 | REDACTED:20-112 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 63 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (63 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_premium_analysis_em.py:15— akshare/option/option_premium_analysis_em.py:15-80 | REDACTED:116-208 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 63 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (63 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_premium_analysis_em.py:15— akshare/option/option_premium_analysis_em.py:15-80 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:21-107 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 63 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (63 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_premium_analysis_em.py:15— akshare/option/option_premium_analysis_em.py:15-80 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:111-197 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 63 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (63 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_premium_analysis_em.py:15— akshare/option/option_premium_analysis_em.py:15-80 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:201-287 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 63 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (63 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_premium_analysis_em.py:15— akshare/option/option_premium_analysis_em.py:15-80 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:125-229 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 63 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (63 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_premium_analysis_em.py:15— akshare/option/option_premium_analysis_em.py:15-80 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:233-337 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 63 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (63 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_premium_analysis_em.py:15— akshare/option/option_premium_analysis_em.py:15-80 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:341-445 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 63 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (63 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_premium_analysis_em.py:15— akshare/option/option_premium_analysis_em.py:15-80 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:562-667 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 63 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (63 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_premium_analysis_em.py:15— akshare/option/option_premium_analysis_em.py:15-80 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:671-776 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 63 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (63 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_premium_analysis_em.py:15— akshare/option/option_premium_analysis_em.py:15-80 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:845-949 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 63 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (63 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_premium_analysis_em.py:15— akshare/option/option_premium_analysis_em.py:15-80 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1226-1307 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 63 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (63 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_premium_analysis_em.py:15— akshare/option/option_premium_analysis_em.py:15-80 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1311-1392 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 63 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (63 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:411— akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:411-509 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gpzy_em.py:196-301 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 63 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (63 corresponding lines) REDACTED:462— REDACTED:462-560 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gpzy_em.py:196-301 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 63 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (63 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:21— akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:21-107 | REDACTED:174-333 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 63 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (63 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:111— akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:111-197 | REDACTED:174-333 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 63 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (63 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:201— akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:201-287 | REDACTED:174-333 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 63 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
D4 · Code Duplication· Edited copy of a member (53 corresponding lines) · ×22
Edited copy of a member (53 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:304— akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:304-407 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1025-1108 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 53 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (53 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:304— akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:304-407 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1137-1220 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 53 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (53 corresponding lines) REDACTED:268— REDACTED:268-348 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1025-1108 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 53 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (53 corresponding lines) REDACTED:268— REDACTED:268-348 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1137-1220 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 53 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (53 corresponding lines) REDACTED:15— REDACTED:15-109 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdhs.py:131-227 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 53 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (53 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:411— akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:411-509 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdhs.py:131-227 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 53 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (53 corresponding lines) REDACTED:462— REDACTED:462-560 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdhs.py:131-227 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 53 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (53 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:21— akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:21-107 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdhs.py:131-227 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 53 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (53 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:111— akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:111-197 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdhs.py:131-227 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 53 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (53 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:201— akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:201-287 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdhs.py:131-227 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 53 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (53 corresponding lines) akshare/forex/forex_em.py:78— akshare/forex/forex_em.py:78-141 | REDACTED:172-244 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 53 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (53 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2257— REDACTED:2257-2339 | REDACTED:2501-2574 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 53 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (53 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_rank_em.py:34— akshare/fund/fund_rank_em.py:34-148 | akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:190-273 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 53 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (53 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_rank_em.py:247— akshare/fund/fund_rank_em.py:247-343 | akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:190-273 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 53 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (53 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:190— akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:190-273 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:23-119 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 53 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (53 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:190— akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:190-273 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:348-444 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 53 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (53 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:277— akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:277-361 | akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:296-399 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 53 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (53 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_rank_em.py:428— akshare/fund/fund_rank_em.py:428-520 | akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:277-361 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 53 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (53 corresponding lines) REDACTED:3181— REDACTED:3181-3233 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_margin_sse.py:71-134 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 53 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (53 corresponding lines) REDACTED:3181— REDACTED:3181-3233 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_margin_sse.py:138-203 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 53 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (53 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:57— akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:57-119 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gpzy_em.py:196-301 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 53 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (53 corresponding lines) REDACTED:15— REDACTED:15-109 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:223-310 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 53 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
D4 · Code Duplication· Edited copy of a member (52 corresponding lines) · ×21
Edited copy of a member (52 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:45— akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:45-217 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:449-558 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 52 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (52 corresponding lines) REDACTED:23— REDACTED:23-106 | REDACTED:49-121 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 52 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (52 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2257— REDACTED:2257-2339 | REDACTED:49-121 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 52 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (52 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:411— akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:411-509 | REDACTED:49-121 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 52 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (52 corresponding lines) REDACTED:462— REDACTED:462-560 | REDACTED:49-121 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 52 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (52 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:21— akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:21-107 | REDACTED:49-121 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 52 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (52 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:111— akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:111-197 | REDACTED:49-121 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 52 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (52 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:201— akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:201-287 | REDACTED:49-121 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 52 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (52 corresponding lines) REDACTED:49— REDACTED:49-121 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:125-229 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 52 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (52 corresponding lines) REDACTED:49— REDACTED:49-121 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:233-337 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 52 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (52 corresponding lines) REDACTED:49— REDACTED:49-121 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:341-445 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 52 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (52 corresponding lines) REDACTED:49— REDACTED:49-121 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:562-667 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 52 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (52 corresponding lines) REDACTED:49— REDACTED:49-121 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:671-776 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 52 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (52 corresponding lines) REDACTED:49— REDACTED:49-121 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:845-949 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 52 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (52 corresponding lines) REDACTED:113— REDACTED:113-180 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1224-1321 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 52 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (52 corresponding lines) REDACTED:49— REDACTED:49-121 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1226-1307 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 52 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (52 corresponding lines) REDACTED:49— REDACTED:49-121 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1311-1392 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 52 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (52 corresponding lines) akshare/forex/forex_em.py:17— akshare/forex/forex_em.py:17-74 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1224-1321 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 52 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (52 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:190— akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:190-273 | akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:296-399 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 52 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (52 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_rank_em.py:428— akshare/fund/fund_rank_em.py:428-520 | akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:190-273 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 52 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (52 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:57— akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:57-119 | REDACTED:49-121 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 52 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
D4 · Code Duplication· Edited copy of a member (55 corresponding lines) · ×21
Edited copy of a member (55 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:45— akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:45-217 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:336-430 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 55 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (55 corresponding lines) REDACTED:354— REDACTED:354-458 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1025-1108 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 55 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (55 corresponding lines) REDACTED:354— REDACTED:354-458 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1137-1220 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 55 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (55 corresponding lines) akshare/qdii/qdii_jsl.py:15— akshare/qdii/qdii_jsl.py:15-85 | akshare/qdii/qdii_jsl.py:161-227 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 55 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (55 corresponding lines) REDACTED:15— REDACTED:15-109 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_account_em.py:15-92 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 55 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (55 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:411— akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:411-509 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_account_em.py:15-92 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 55 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (55 corresponding lines) REDACTED:462— REDACTED:462-560 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_account_em.py:15-92 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 55 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (55 corresponding lines) REDACTED:23— REDACTED:23-106 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_account_em.py:15-92 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 55 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (55 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:21— akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:21-107 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_account_em.py:15-92 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 55 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (55 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:111— akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:111-197 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_account_em.py:15-92 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 55 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (55 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:201— akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:201-287 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_account_em.py:15-92 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 55 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (55 corresponding lines) akshare/qdii/qdii_jsl.py:15— akshare/qdii/qdii_jsl.py:15-85 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:692-786 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 55 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (55 corresponding lines) akshare/qdii/qdii_jsl.py:89— akshare/qdii/qdii_jsl.py:89-157 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:692-786 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 55 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (55 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:57— akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:57-119 | REDACTED:20-117 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 55 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (55 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:57— akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:57-119 | REDACTED:1193-1327 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 55 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (55 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:57— akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:57-119 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:21-158 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 55 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (55 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:57— akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:57-119 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:162-299 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 55 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (55 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:57— akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:57-119 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:303-435 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 55 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (55 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:57— akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:57-119 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:439-572 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 55 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (55 corresponding lines) akshare/qdii/qdii_jsl.py:15— akshare/qdii/qdii_jsl.py:15-85 | REDACTED:17-120 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 55 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (55 corresponding lines) akshare/qdii/qdii_jsl.py:89— akshare/qdii/qdii_jsl.py:89-157 | REDACTED:17-120 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 55 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
D4 · Code Duplication· Edited copy of a member (51 corresponding lines) · ×20
Edited copy of a member (51 corresponding lines) akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:16— akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:16-121 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:513-645 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 51 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (51 corresponding lines) REDACTED:109— REDACTED:109-199 | akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46-117 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 51 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (51 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:45— akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:45-217 | REDACTED:113-180 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 51 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (51 corresponding lines) REDACTED:49— REDACTED:49-121 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_fhps_em.py:16-138 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 51 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (51 corresponding lines) REDACTED:15— REDACTED:15-109 | REDACTED:49-121 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 51 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (51 corresponding lines) REDACTED:49— REDACTED:49-121 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:449-558 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 51 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (51 corresponding lines) REDACTED:49— REDACTED:49-121 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_yjbb_em.py:17-143 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 51 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (51 corresponding lines) REDACTED:49— REDACTED:49-121 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_yjyg_em.py:18-132 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 51 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (51 corresponding lines) REDACTED:49— REDACTED:49-121 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdhs.py:131-227 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 51 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (51 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2724— REDACTED:2724-2811 | akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46-117 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 51 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (51 corresponding lines) REDACTED:88— REDACTED:88-168 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1224-1321 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 51 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (51 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1025— akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1025-1108 | REDACTED:49-121 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 51 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (51 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1137— akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1137-1220 | REDACTED:49-121 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 51 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (51 corresponding lines) REDACTED:49— REDACTED:49-121 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_account_em.py:15-92 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 51 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (51 corresponding lines) akshare/forex/forex_em.py:17— akshare/forex/forex_em.py:17-74 | akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:209-290 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 51 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (51 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:57— akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:57-119 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_account_em.py:15-92 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 51 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (51 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:57— akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:57-119 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdhs.py:131-227 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 51 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (51 corresponding lines) akshare/qdii/qdii_jsl.py:15— akshare/qdii/qdii_jsl.py:15-85 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:506-592 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 51 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (51 corresponding lines) akshare/qdii/qdii_jsl.py:89— akshare/qdii/qdii_jsl.py:89-157 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:506-592 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 51 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (51 corresponding lines) REDACTED:49— REDACTED:49-121 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:223-310 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 51 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
D4 · Code Duplication· Edited copy of a member (23 corresponding lines) · ×20
Edited copy of a member (23 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_ipo_summary_cninfo.py:31— akshare/stock/stock_ipo_summary_cninfo.py:31-108 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:692-786 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 23 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (23 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:14— akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:14-69 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:960-1039 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 23 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (23 corresponding lines) REDACTED:109— REDACTED:109-199 | akshare/option/option_premium_analysis_em.py:15-80 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 23 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (23 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2724— REDACTED:2724-2811 | akshare/option/option_premium_analysis_em.py:15-80 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 23 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (23 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46— akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46-117 | akshare/option/option_premium_analysis_em.py:15-80 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 23 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (23 corresponding lines) REDACTED:88— REDACTED:88-168 | akshare/option/option_premium_analysis_em.py:15-80 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 23 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (23 corresponding lines) akshare/index/index_stock_hk.py:149— akshare/index/index_stock_hk.py:149-215 | akshare/option/option_premium_analysis_em.py:15-80 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 23 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (23 corresponding lines) akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:130— akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:130-205 | akshare/option/option_premium_analysis_em.py:15-80 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 23 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (23 corresponding lines) akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:209— akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:209-290 | akshare/option/option_premium_analysis_em.py:15-80 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 23 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (23 corresponding lines) REDACTED:113— REDACTED:113-180 | akshare/option/option_premium_analysis_em.py:15-80 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 23 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (23 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_premium_analysis_em.py:15— akshare/option/option_premium_analysis_em.py:15-80 | akshare/reits/reits_basic.py:46-113 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 23 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (23 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_premium_analysis_em.py:15— akshare/option/option_premium_analysis_em.py:15-80 | akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:216-292 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 23 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (23 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_premium_analysis_em.py:15— akshare/option/option_premium_analysis_em.py:15-80 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1224-1321 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 23 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (23 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_premium_analysis_em.py:15— akshare/option/option_premium_analysis_em.py:15-80 | akshare/stock/stock_hk_famous.py:14-102 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 23 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (23 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_premium_analysis_em.py:15— akshare/option/option_premium_analysis_em.py:15-80 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:336-430 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 23 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (23 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_premium_analysis_em.py:15— akshare/option/option_premium_analysis_em.py:15-80 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:513-645 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 23 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (23 corresponding lines) akshare/forex/forex_em.py:17— akshare/forex/forex_em.py:17-74 | akshare/stock/stock_hk_famous.py:14-102 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 23 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (23 corresponding lines) REDACTED:129— REDACTED:129-409 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:18-116 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 23 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (23 corresponding lines) REDACTED:129— REDACTED:129-409 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:314-390 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 23 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (23 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_commodity_sina.py:17— akshare/option/option_commodity_sina.py:17-52 | akshare/option/option_commodity_sina.py:58-136 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 23 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
D4 · Code Duplication· Edited copy of a member (28 corresponding lines) · ×19
Edited copy of a member (28 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_ipo_summary_cninfo.py:31— akshare/stock/stock_ipo_summary_cninfo.py:31-108 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_fhps_em.py:142-265 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 28 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (28 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:45— akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:45-217 | REDACTED:18-113 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 28 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (28 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:45— akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:45-217 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_ah_tx.py:41-107 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 28 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (28 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:45— akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:45-217 | REDACTED:49-121 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 28 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (28 corresponding lines) REDACTED:49— REDACTED:49-121 | REDACTED:19-125 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 28 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (28 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46— akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46-117 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:439-572 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 28 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (28 corresponding lines) akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:209— akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:209-290 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:439-572 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 28 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (28 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_rank_em.py:247— akshare/fund/fund_rank_em.py:247-343 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_gbjg_em.py:63-155 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 28 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (28 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:92— akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:92-186 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_gbjg_em.py:63-155 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 28 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (28 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:190— akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:190-273 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_gbjg_em.py:63-155 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 28 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (28 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:277— akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:277-361 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_gbjg_em.py:63-155 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 28 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (28 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:23— akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:23-119 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_gbjg_em.py:63-155 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 28 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (28 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:348— akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:348-444 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_gbjg_em.py:63-155 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 28 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (28 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:57— akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:57-119 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1594-1685 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 28 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (28 corresponding lines) REDACTED:259— REDACTED:259-315 | akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46-117 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 28 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (28 corresponding lines) REDACTED:259— REDACTED:259-315 | REDACTED:88-168 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 28 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (28 corresponding lines) REDACTED:259— REDACTED:259-315 | akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:130-205 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 28 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (28 corresponding lines) REDACTED:259— REDACTED:259-315 | akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:209-290 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 28 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (28 corresponding lines) REDACTED:3181— REDACTED:3181-3233 | REDACTED:33-118 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 28 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
D4 · Code Duplication· Edited copy of a member (67 corresponding lines) · ×19
Edited copy of a member (67 corresponding lines) akshare/qdii/qdii_jsl.py:89— akshare/qdii/qdii_jsl.py:89-157 | akshare/qdii/qdii_jsl.py:161-227 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 67 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (67 corresponding lines) REDACTED:109— REDACTED:109-199 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1224-1321 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 67 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (67 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46— akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46-117 | akshare/index/index_stock_hk.py:149-215 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 67 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (67 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:411— akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:411-509 | REDACTED:1193-1327 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 67 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (67 corresponding lines) REDACTED:462— REDACTED:462-560 | REDACTED:1193-1327 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 67 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (67 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_value_analysis_em.py:15— akshare/option/option_value_analysis_em.py:15-84 | REDACTED:20-112 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 67 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (67 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_value_analysis_em.py:15— akshare/option/option_value_analysis_em.py:15-84 | REDACTED:116-208 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 67 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (67 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_value_analysis_em.py:15— akshare/option/option_value_analysis_em.py:15-84 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:21-107 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 67 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (67 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_value_analysis_em.py:15— akshare/option/option_value_analysis_em.py:15-84 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:111-197 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 67 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (67 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_value_analysis_em.py:15— akshare/option/option_value_analysis_em.py:15-84 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:201-287 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 67 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (67 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_value_analysis_em.py:15— akshare/option/option_value_analysis_em.py:15-84 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:125-229 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 67 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (67 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_value_analysis_em.py:15— akshare/option/option_value_analysis_em.py:15-84 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:233-337 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 67 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (67 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_value_analysis_em.py:15— akshare/option/option_value_analysis_em.py:15-84 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:341-445 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 67 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (67 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_value_analysis_em.py:15— akshare/option/option_value_analysis_em.py:15-84 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:562-667 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 67 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (67 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_value_analysis_em.py:15— akshare/option/option_value_analysis_em.py:15-84 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:671-776 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 67 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (67 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_value_analysis_em.py:15— akshare/option/option_value_analysis_em.py:15-84 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:845-949 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 67 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (67 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_value_analysis_em.py:15— akshare/option/option_value_analysis_em.py:15-84 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1226-1307 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 67 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (67 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_value_analysis_em.py:15— akshare/option/option_value_analysis_em.py:15-84 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1311-1392 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 67 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (67 corresponding lines) REDACTED:15— REDACTED:15-109 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gpzy_em.py:196-301 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 67 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
D4 · Code Duplication· Edited copy of a member (50 corresponding lines) · ×18
Edited copy of a member (50 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:45— akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:45-217 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:16-121 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 50 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (50 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2257— REDACTED:2257-2339 | REDACTED:2426-2497 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 50 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (50 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46— akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46-117 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:336-430 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 50 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (50 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46— akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46-117 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:513-645 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 50 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (50 corresponding lines) REDACTED:109— REDACTED:109-199 | akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:209-290 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 50 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (50 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46— akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46-117 | REDACTED:88-168 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 50 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (50 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46— akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46-117 | REDACTED:113-180 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 50 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (50 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:45— akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:45-217 | REDACTED:88-168 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 50 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (50 corresponding lines) REDACTED:49— REDACTED:49-121 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:21-158 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 50 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (50 corresponding lines) REDACTED:49— REDACTED:49-121 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:162-299 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 50 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (50 corresponding lines) REDACTED:49— REDACTED:49-121 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:303-435 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 50 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (50 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2724— REDACTED:2724-2811 | akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:209-290 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 50 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (50 corresponding lines) REDACTED:49— REDACTED:49-121 | REDACTED:20-117 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 50 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (50 corresponding lines) REDACTED:49— REDACTED:49-121 | REDACTED:1193-1327 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 50 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (50 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2257— REDACTED:2257-2339 | REDACTED:33-118 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 50 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (50 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2426— REDACTED:2426-2497 | REDACTED:33-118 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 50 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (50 corresponding lines) akshare/qdii/qdii_jsl.py:15— akshare/qdii/qdii_jsl.py:15-85 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:598-688 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 50 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (50 corresponding lines) akshare/qdii/qdii_jsl.py:89— akshare/qdii/qdii_jsl.py:89-157 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:598-688 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 50 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
D4 · Code Duplication· Edited copy of a member (66 corresponding lines) · ×18
Edited copy of a member (66 corresponding lines) REDACTED:109— REDACTED:109-199 | akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:45-217 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 66 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (66 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46— akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46-117 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1224-1321 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 66 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (66 corresponding lines) REDACTED:15— REDACTED:15-109 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:21-107 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 66 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (66 corresponding lines) REDACTED:15— REDACTED:15-109 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:111-197 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 66 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (66 corresponding lines) REDACTED:15— REDACTED:15-109 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:201-287 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 66 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (66 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:21— akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:21-107 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_fhps_em.py:16-138 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 66 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (66 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:21— akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:21-107 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_yjbb_em.py:17-143 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 66 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (66 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:21— akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:21-107 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_yjyg_em.py:18-132 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 66 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (66 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:111— akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:111-197 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_fhps_em.py:16-138 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 66 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (66 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:111— akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:111-197 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_yjbb_em.py:17-143 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 66 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (66 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:111— akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:111-197 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_yjyg_em.py:18-132 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 66 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (66 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:201— akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:201-287 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_fhps_em.py:16-138 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 66 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (66 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:201— akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:201-287 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_yjbb_em.py:17-143 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 66 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (66 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:201— akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:201-287 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_yjyg_em.py:18-132 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 66 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (66 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1224— akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1224-1321 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:513-645 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 66 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (66 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:45— akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:45-217 | akshare/index/index_stock_hk.py:149-215 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 66 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (66 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2257— REDACTED:2257-2339 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_margin_sse.py:138-203 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 66 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (66 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_risk_analysis_em.py:15— akshare/option/option_risk_analysis_em.py:15-82 | akshare/option/option_value_analysis_em.py:15-84 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 66 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
D4 · Code Duplication· Edited copy of a member (57 corresponding lines) · ×18
Edited copy of a member (57 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2257— REDACTED:2257-2339 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_account_em.py:15-92 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 57 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (57 corresponding lines) akshare/qdii/qdii_jsl.py:15— akshare/qdii/qdii_jsl.py:15-85 | akshare/qdii/qdii_jsl.py:89-157 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 57 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (57 corresponding lines) REDACTED:23— REDACTED:23-106 | REDACTED:1193-1327 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 57 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (57 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_rank_em.py:428— akshare/fund/fund_rank_em.py:428-520 | akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:92-186 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 57 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (57 corresponding lines) REDACTED:43— REDACTED:43-120 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_qsjy_em.py:14-92 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 57 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (57 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_premium_analysis_em.py:15— akshare/option/option_premium_analysis_em.py:15-80 | akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:411-509 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 57 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (57 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_premium_analysis_em.py:15— akshare/option/option_premium_analysis_em.py:15-80 | REDACTED:462-560 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 57 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (57 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2257— REDACTED:2257-2339 | akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:57-119 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 57 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (57 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:57— akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:57-119 | akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:411-509 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 57 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (57 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:57— akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:57-119 | REDACTED:20-112 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 57 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (57 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:57— akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:57-119 | REDACTED:116-208 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 57 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (57 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:57— akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:57-119 | REDACTED:462-560 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 57 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (57 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:57— akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:57-119 | REDACTED:23-106 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 57 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (57 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:57— akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:57-119 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:21-107 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 57 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (57 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:57— akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:57-119 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:111-197 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 57 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (57 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:57— akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:57-119 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:201-287 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 57 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (57 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:57— akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:57-119 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1226-1307 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 57 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (57 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:57— akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:57-119 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1311-1392 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 57 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
D4 · Code Duplication· Edited copy of a member (38 corresponding lines) · ×16
Edited copy of a member (38 corresponding lines) REDACTED:297— REDACTED:297-334 | REDACTED:338-375 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 38 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (38 corresponding lines) REDACTED:297— REDACTED:297-334 | REDACTED:381-418 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 38 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (38 corresponding lines) REDACTED:338— REDACTED:338-375 | REDACTED:381-418 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 38 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (38 corresponding lines) akshare/bond/bond_gb_sina.py:14— akshare/bond/bond_gb_sina.py:14-51 | akshare/bond/bond_gb_sina.py:55-96 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 38 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (38 corresponding lines) REDACTED:33— REDACTED:33-118 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_margin_sse.py:138-203 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 38 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (38 corresponding lines) REDACTED:109— REDACTED:109-199 | akshare/forex/forex_em.py:17-74 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 38 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (38 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2724— REDACTED:2724-2811 | akshare/forex/forex_em.py:17-74 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 38 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (38 corresponding lines) akshare/forex/forex_em.py:17— akshare/forex/forex_em.py:17-74 | akshare/reits/reits_basic.py:46-113 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 38 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (38 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2426— REDACTED:2426-2497 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_margin_sse.py:138-203 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 38 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (38 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_premium_analysis_em.py:15— akshare/option/option_premium_analysis_em.py:15-80 | akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:304-407 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 38 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (38 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_premium_analysis_em.py:15— akshare/option/option_premium_analysis_em.py:15-80 | REDACTED:268-348 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 38 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (38 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_premium_analysis_em.py:15— akshare/option/option_premium_analysis_em.py:15-80 | REDACTED:354-458 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 38 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (38 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_value_analysis_em.py:15— akshare/option/option_value_analysis_em.py:15-84 | akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:304-407 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 38 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (38 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_value_analysis_em.py:15— akshare/option/option_value_analysis_em.py:15-84 | REDACTED:268-348 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 38 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (38 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_value_analysis_em.py:15— akshare/option/option_value_analysis_em.py:15-84 | REDACTED:354-458 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 38 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (38 corresponding lines) akshare/bond/bond_china.py:85— akshare/bond/bond_china.py:85-139 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_margin_sse.py:138-203 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 38 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
D4 · Code Duplication· Edited copy of a member (61 corresponding lines) · ×16
Edited copy of a member (61 corresponding lines) REDACTED:19— REDACTED:19-91 | REDACTED:20-81 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 61 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (61 corresponding lines) akshare/index/index_stock_hk.py:149— akshare/index/index_stock_hk.py:149-215 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1224-1321 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 61 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (61 corresponding lines) REDACTED:15— REDACTED:15-109 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1226-1307 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 61 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (61 corresponding lines) REDACTED:15— REDACTED:15-109 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1311-1392 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 61 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (61 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1025— akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1025-1108 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1226-1307 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 61 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (61 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1025— akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1025-1108 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1311-1392 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 61 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (61 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1137— akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1137-1220 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1226-1307 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 61 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (61 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1137— akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1137-1220 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1311-1392 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 61 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (61 corresponding lines) akshare/stock_feature/stock_fhps_em.py:16— akshare/stock_feature/stock_fhps_em.py:16-138 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1226-1307 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 61 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (61 corresponding lines) akshare/stock_feature/stock_fhps_em.py:16— akshare/stock_feature/stock_fhps_em.py:16-138 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1311-1392 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 61 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (61 corresponding lines) akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1226— akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1226-1307 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_yjbb_em.py:17-143 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 61 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (61 corresponding lines) akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1226— akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1226-1307 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_yjyg_em.py:18-132 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 61 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (61 corresponding lines) akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1311— akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1311-1392 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_yjbb_em.py:17-143 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 61 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (61 corresponding lines) akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1311— akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1311-1392 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_yjyg_em.py:18-132 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 61 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (61 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_value_analysis_em.py:15— akshare/option/option_value_analysis_em.py:15-84 | akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:411-509 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 61 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (61 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_value_analysis_em.py:15— akshare/option/option_value_analysis_em.py:15-84 | REDACTED:462-560 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 61 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
D4 · Code Duplication· Edited copy of a member (24 corresponding lines) · ×15
Edited copy of a member (24 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_commodity_sina.py:58— akshare/option/option_commodity_sina.py:58-136 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:16-121 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 24 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (24 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_commodity_sina.py:58— akshare/option/option_commodity_sina.py:58-136 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:125-229 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 24 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (24 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_commodity_sina.py:58— akshare/option/option_commodity_sina.py:58-136 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:233-337 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 24 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (24 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_commodity_sina.py:58— akshare/option/option_commodity_sina.py:58-136 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:341-445 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 24 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (24 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_commodity_sina.py:58— akshare/option/option_commodity_sina.py:58-136 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:562-667 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 24 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (24 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_commodity_sina.py:58— akshare/option/option_commodity_sina.py:58-136 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:671-776 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 24 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (24 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_commodity_sina.py:58— akshare/option/option_commodity_sina.py:58-136 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:845-949 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 24 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (24 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:45— akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:45-217 | akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:59-126 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 24 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (24 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_premium_analysis_em.py:15— akshare/option/option_premium_analysis_em.py:15-80 | REDACTED:19-125 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 24 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (24 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_premium_analysis_em.py:15— akshare/option/option_premium_analysis_em.py:15-80 | akshare/stock/stock_us_famous.py:14-111 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 24 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (24 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_premium_analysis_em.py:15— akshare/option/option_premium_analysis_em.py:15-80 | akshare/stock/stock_us_pink.py:16-114 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 24 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (24 corresponding lines) REDACTED:113— REDACTED:113-204 | REDACTED:332-382 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 24 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (24 corresponding lines) akshare/bond/bond_zh_sina.py:46— akshare/bond/bond_zh_sina.py:46-115 | akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:45-217 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 24 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (24 corresponding lines) REDACTED:1766— REDACTED:1766-1820 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:18-116 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 24 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (24 corresponding lines) REDACTED:1013— REDACTED:1013-1055 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:18-116 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 24 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
D4 · Code Duplication· Edited copy of a member (84 corresponding lines) · ×14
Edited copy of a member (84 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:411— akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:411-509 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:125-229 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 84 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (84 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:411— akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:411-509 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:233-337 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 84 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (84 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:411— akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:411-509 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:341-445 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 84 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (84 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:411— akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:411-509 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:562-667 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 84 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (84 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:411— akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:411-509 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:671-776 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 84 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (84 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:411— akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:411-509 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:845-949 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 84 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (84 corresponding lines) REDACTED:462— REDACTED:462-560 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:125-229 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 84 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (84 corresponding lines) REDACTED:462— REDACTED:462-560 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:233-337 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 84 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (84 corresponding lines) REDACTED:462— REDACTED:462-560 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:341-445 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 84 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (84 corresponding lines) REDACTED:462— REDACTED:462-560 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:562-667 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 84 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (84 corresponding lines) REDACTED:462— REDACTED:462-560 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:671-776 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 84 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (84 corresponding lines) REDACTED:462— REDACTED:462-560 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:845-949 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 84 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (84 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:411— akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:411-509 | REDACTED:20-112 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 84 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (84 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:411— akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:411-509 | REDACTED:116-208 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 84 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
D4 · Code Duplication· Edited copy of a member (69 corresponding lines) · ×13
Edited copy of a member (69 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:411— akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:411-509 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_yjyg_em.py:18-132 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 69 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (69 corresponding lines) REDACTED:462— REDACTED:462-560 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_yjyg_em.py:18-132 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 69 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (69 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:411— akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:411-509 | akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:485-600 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 69 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (69 corresponding lines) REDACTED:462— REDACTED:462-560 | akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:485-600 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 69 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (69 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:411— akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:411-509 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_fhps_em.py:16-138 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 69 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (69 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:411— akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:411-509 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_yjbb_em.py:17-143 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 69 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (69 corresponding lines) REDACTED:462— REDACTED:462-560 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_fhps_em.py:16-138 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 69 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (69 corresponding lines) REDACTED:462— REDACTED:462-560 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_yjbb_em.py:17-143 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 69 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (69 corresponding lines) REDACTED:15— REDACTED:15-109 | akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:411-509 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 69 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (69 corresponding lines) REDACTED:15— REDACTED:15-109 | REDACTED:462-560 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 69 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (69 corresponding lines) REDACTED:15— REDACTED:15-109 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:439-572 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 69 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (69 corresponding lines) REDACTED:15— REDACTED:15-109 | REDACTED:20-112 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 69 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (69 corresponding lines) REDACTED:15— REDACTED:15-109 | REDACTED:116-208 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 69 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
D4 · Code Duplication· Edited copy of a member (72 corresponding lines) · ×13
Edited copy of a member (72 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2426— REDACTED:2426-2497 | REDACTED:2967-3048 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 72 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (72 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2426— REDACTED:2426-2497 | REDACTED:3097-3177 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 72 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (72 corresponding lines) REDACTED:15— REDACTED:15-109 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:125-229 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 72 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (72 corresponding lines) REDACTED:15— REDACTED:15-109 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:233-337 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 72 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (72 corresponding lines) REDACTED:15— REDACTED:15-109 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:341-445 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 72 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (72 corresponding lines) REDACTED:15— REDACTED:15-109 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:449-558 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 72 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (72 corresponding lines) REDACTED:15— REDACTED:15-109 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:562-667 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 72 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (72 corresponding lines) REDACTED:15— REDACTED:15-109 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:671-776 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 72 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (72 corresponding lines) REDACTED:15— REDACTED:15-109 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:845-949 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 72 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (72 corresponding lines) REDACTED:15— REDACTED:15-109 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_fhps_em.py:16-138 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 72 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (72 corresponding lines) REDACTED:15— REDACTED:15-109 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_yjbb_em.py:17-143 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 72 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (72 corresponding lines) REDACTED:15— REDACTED:15-109 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_yjyg_em.py:18-132 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 72 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (72 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2426— REDACTED:2426-2497 | REDACTED:2501-2574 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 72 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
D4 · Code Duplication· Edited copy of a member (56 corresponding lines) · ×13
Edited copy of a member (56 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1224— akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1224-1321 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:336-430 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 56 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (56 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2257— REDACTED:2257-2339 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1025-1108 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 56 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (56 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2257— REDACTED:2257-2339 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1137-1220 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 56 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (56 corresponding lines) akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:18— akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:18-116 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:436-509 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 56 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (56 corresponding lines) akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:314— akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:314-390 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:436-509 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 56 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (56 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:57— akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:57-119 | akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:485-600 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 56 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (56 corresponding lines) REDACTED:15— REDACTED:15-109 | akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:57-119 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 56 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (56 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:57— akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:57-119 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1025-1108 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 56 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (56 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:57— akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:57-119 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1137-1220 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 56 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (56 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:57— akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:57-119 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_fhps_em.py:16-138 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 56 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (56 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:57— akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:57-119 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:449-558 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 56 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (56 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:57— akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:57-119 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_yjbb_em.py:17-143 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 56 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (56 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:57— akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:57-119 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_yjyg_em.py:18-132 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 56 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) REDACTED:121— REDACTED:121-125 | akshare/fund/fund_manager.py:84-88 — 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 `REDACTED:121` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) REDACTED:145— REDACTED:145-149 | REDACTED:177-181 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) akshare/futures/futures_contract_detail.py:28— akshare/futures/futures_contract_detail.py:28-32 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_market_legu.py:27-31 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) akshare/option/option_premium_analysis_em.py:76— akshare/option/option_premium_analysis_em.py:76-80 | akshare/option/option_value_analysis_em.py:78-84 — before extracting anything, compare `akshare/option/option_premium_analysis_em.py` and `akshare/option/option_value_analysis_em.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 4 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 143 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. The `return` at the foot of the matched lines is the enclosing body's own terminal exit, not an early one: it moves with them unchanged, and each site calls the extracted unit from the position that `return` occupied — no decision has to be handed back and re-acted on. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `akshare/option/option_value_analysis_em.py:78` calls `to_numeric` and `akshare/option/option_premium_analysis_em.py:76` does not — after which the two agree again for 5 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:586— akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:586-590 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:645-649 — 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. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:586` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) REDACTED:238— REDACTED:238-243 | REDACTED:220-224 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `REDACTED` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 15 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 166 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. 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. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `REDACTED:237` calls `to_datetime` and `REDACTED:219` does not — after which the two agree again for 4 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) REDACTED:273— REDACTED:273-279 | REDACTED:249-253 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `REDACTED` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 15 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 166 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. 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. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `REDACTED:272` calls `to_datetime` and `REDACTED:248` does not — after which the two agree again for 4 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) REDACTED:293— REDACTED:293-297 | REDACTED:351-355 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `REDACTED` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 7 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 178 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) akshare/stock_feature/stock_esg_sina.py:25— akshare/stock_feature/stock_esg_sina.py:25-29 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_esg_sina.py:277-281 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) akshare/stock_feature/stock_gpzy_em.py:472— akshare/stock_feature/stock_gpzy_em.py:472-497 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:218-222 — before extracting anything, compare `akshare/stock_feature/stock_gpzy_em.py` and `akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 21 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 373 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:218` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) akshare/bond/bond_buy_back_em.py:79— akshare/bond/bond_buy_back_em.py:79-83 | akshare/bond/bond_buy_back_em.py:151-155 — 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. The `return` at the foot of the matched lines is the enclosing body's own terminal exit, not an early one: it moves with them unchanged, and each site calls the extracted unit from the position that `return` occupied — no decision has to be handed back and re-acted on.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) akshare/futures/futures_hq_sina.py:142— akshare/futures/futures_hq_sina.py:142-146 | akshare/futures/futures_zh_sina.py:244-248 — 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 `akshare/futures/futures_hq_sina.py:142` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) REDACTED:78— REDACTED:78-82 | REDACTED:133-137 — 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. The `return` at the foot of the matched lines is the enclosing body's own terminal exit, not an early one: it moves with them unchanged, and each site calls the extracted unit from the position that `return` occupied — no decision has to be handed back and re-acted on. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `REDACTED:132` calls `join` and `REDACTED:77` does not — after which the two agree again for 4 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
D4 · Code Duplication· Edited copy of a member (54 corresponding lines) · ×10
Edited copy of a member (54 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:45— akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:45-217 | akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:485-600 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 54 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (54 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_rank_em.py:34— akshare/fund/fund_rank_em.py:34-148 | akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:277-361 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 54 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (54 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_rank_em.py:247— akshare/fund/fund_rank_em.py:247-343 | akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:277-361 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 54 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (54 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:277— akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:277-361 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:23-119 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 54 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (54 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:277— akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:277-361 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:348-444 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 54 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (54 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:57— akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:57-119 | REDACTED:174-333 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 54 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (54 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:57— akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:57-119 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:223-310 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 54 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (54 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:21— akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:21-107 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:223-310 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 54 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (54 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:111— akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:111-197 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:223-310 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 54 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (54 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:201— akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:201-287 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:223-310 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 54 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
D4 · Code Duplication· Members sharing a duplicated core (4 members, 50+ identical tokens) · ×10
Members sharing a duplicated core (4 members, 50+ identical tokens) akshare/bond/bond_cb_ths.py:14— akshare/bond/bond_cb_ths.py:14-88 | REDACTED:243-283 | akshare/index/index_spot.py:14-42 | akshare/index/index_stock_zh_csindex.py:73-105 — These 4 members share a duplicated core: a run of at least 50 identical tokens appears in every one of them. That run is NOT broken out as duplicated-block rows below — it is what admitted this row, and the blocks below cover only the part of it that clears the block floor, so they understate the correspondence. Read the members as one construct written 4 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 4 times.
Members sharing a duplicated core (4 members, 50+ identical tokens) REDACTED:46— REDACTED:46-104 | akshare/economic/macro_constitute.py:18-79 | akshare/economic/macro_constitute.py:83-144 | REDACTED:17-75 — These 4 members share a duplicated core: a run of at least 50 identical tokens appears in every one of them. That run is NOT broken out as duplicated-block rows below — it is what admitted this row, and the blocks below cover only the part of it that clears the block floor, so they understate the correspondence. Read the members as one construct written 4 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 4 times.
Members sharing a duplicated core (4 members, 50+ identical tokens) akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:15— akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:15-88 | akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:92-186 | akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:190-273 | akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:277-361 — These 4 members share a duplicated core: a run of at least 50 identical tokens appears in every one of them. That run is NOT broken out as duplicated-block rows below — it is what admitted this row, and the blocks below cover only the part of it that clears the block floor, so they understate the correspondence. Read the members as one construct written 4 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 4 times.
Members sharing a duplicated core (4 members, 50+ identical tokens) REDACTED:38— REDACTED:38-79 | REDACTED:85-153 | REDACTED:270-325 | REDACTED:329-383 — These 4 members share a duplicated core: a run of at least 50 identical tokens appears in every one of them. That run is NOT broken out as duplicated-block rows below — it is what admitted this row, and the blocks below cover only the part of it that clears the block floor, so they understate the correspondence. Read the members as one construct written 4 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 4 times.
Members sharing a duplicated core (4 members, 50+ identical tokens) REDACTED:110— REDACTED:110-252 | REDACTED:139-310 | REDACTED:318-347 | REDACTED:130-278 — These 4 members share a duplicated core: a run of at least 50 identical tokens appears in every one of them. That run is NOT broken out as duplicated-block rows below — it is what admitted this row, and the blocks below cover only the part of it that clears the block floor, so they understate the correspondence. Read the members as one construct written 4 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 4 times.
Members sharing a duplicated core (4 members, 50+ identical tokens) akshare/stock/stock_profile_em.py:14— akshare/stock/stock_profile_em.py:14-76 | akshare/stock/stock_profile_em.py:80-150 | akshare/stock/stock_profile_em.py:154-234 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_comparison_em.py:73-159 — These 4 members share a duplicated core: a run of at least 50 identical tokens appears in every one of them. That run is NOT broken out as duplicated-block rows below — it is what admitted this row, and the blocks below cover only the part of it that clears the block floor, so they understate the correspondence. Read the members as one construct written 4 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 4 times.
Members sharing a duplicated core (4 members, 50+ identical tokens) akshare/stock_feature/stock_hsgt_exchange_rate.py:19— akshare/stock_feature/stock_hsgt_exchange_rate.py:19-44 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hsgt_exchange_rate.py:48-73 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hsgt_exchange_rate.py:77-131 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hsgt_exchange_rate.py:135-189 — These 4 members share a duplicated core: a run of at least 50 identical tokens appears in every one of them. That run is NOT broken out as duplicated-block rows below — it is what admitted this row, and the blocks below cover only the part of it that clears the block floor, so they understate the correspondence. Read the members as one construct written 4 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 4 times.
Members sharing a duplicated core (4 members, 50+ identical tokens) akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_sina.py:92— akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_sina.py:92-125 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_sina.py:129-163 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_sina.py:167-205 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_sina.py:209-247 — These 4 members share a duplicated core: a run of at least 50 identical tokens appears in every one of them. That run is NOT broken out as duplicated-block rows below — it is what admitted this row, and the blocks below cover only the part of it that clears the block floor, so they understate the correspondence. Read the members as one construct written 4 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 4 times.
Members sharing a duplicated core (4 members, 50+ identical tokens) akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_ths.py:21— akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_ths.py:21-55 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_ths.py:61-89 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_ths.py:95-127 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_ths.py:133-165 — These 4 members share a duplicated core: a run of at least 50 identical tokens appears in every one of them. That run is NOT broken out as duplicated-block rows below — it is what admitted this row, and the blocks below cover only the part of it that clears the block floor, so they understate the correspondence. Read the members as one construct written 4 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 4 times.
Members sharing a duplicated core (4 members, 50+ identical tokens) akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_ths.py:197— akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_ths.py:197-288 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_ths.py:294-385 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_ths.py:391-482 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_ths.py:488-579 — 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 (13 lines × 2) REDACTED:1799— REDACTED:1799-1811 | REDACTED:2074-2086 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (13 lines × 2) REDACTED:3731— REDACTED:3731-3743 | REDACTED:229-242 — 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 (13 lines × 2) akshare/futures_derivative/futures_hog.py:85— akshare/futures_derivative/futures_hog.py:85-97 | akshare/futures_derivative/futures_hog.py:98-110 — 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. 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 (13 lines × 2) akshare/fx/fx_quote.py:33— akshare/fx/fx_quote.py:33-45 | akshare/fx/fx_quote.py:90-102 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. The `return` at the foot of the matched lines is the enclosing body's own terminal exit, not an early one: it moves with them unchanged, and each site calls the extracted unit from the position that `return` occupied — no decision has to be handed back and re-acted on.
Duplicated block (13 lines × 2) REDACTED:146— REDACTED:146-158 | REDACTED:173-185 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `REDACTED:145` calls `simplefilter` and `REDACTED:171` 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 (13 lines × 2) REDACTED:43— REDACTED:43-60 | akshare/rate/repo_rate.py:73-85 — 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, `akshare/rate/repo_rate.py:72` calls `DataFrame`, `to_list` and `REDACTED:42` 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 (13 lines × 2) akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:49— akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:49-61 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:190-202 — 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 `akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:49` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
Duplicated block (13 lines × 2) akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_sina.py:594— akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_sina.py:594-606 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_sina.py:664-676 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (13 lines × 2) akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_sina.py:639— akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_sina.py:639-651 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_sina.py:697-710 — 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. 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 (13 lines × 2) akshare/bond/bond_cb_sina.py:16— akshare/bond/bond_cb_sina.py:16-28 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_sina.py:484-496 — 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. 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 (11 lines × 2) akshare/economic/macro_china_nbs.py:548— akshare/economic/macro_china_nbs.py:548-558 | akshare/economic/macro_china_nbs.py:677-687 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (11 lines × 2) akshare/fund/fund_portfolio_em.py:184— akshare/fund/fund_portfolio_em.py:184-194 | akshare/fund/fund_portfolio_em.py:314-324 — 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 `akshare/fund/fund_portfolio_em.py:184` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
Duplicated block (11 lines × 2) akshare/futures/futures_zh_sina.py:325— akshare/futures/futures_zh_sina.py:325-335 | akshare/futures/futures_zh_sina.py:527-537 — 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 `akshare/futures/futures_zh_sina.py:325` 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 (11 lines × 2) REDACTED:312— REDACTED:312-322 | REDACTED:370-380 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (11 lines × 2) akshare/index/index_stock_zh_csindex.py:38— akshare/index/index_stock_zh_csindex.py:38-58 | akshare/stock/stock_new_cninfo.py:59-69 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice.
Duplicated block (11 lines × 2) REDACTED:178— REDACTED:178-188 | REDACTED:240-250 — 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. 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 (11 lines × 2) REDACTED:209— REDACTED:209-219 | REDACTED:252-262 — 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. 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 (11 lines × 2) akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_sina.py:543— akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_sina.py:543-553 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_sina.py:618-630 — 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 `akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_sina.py:618` 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 (11 lines × 2) akshare/utils/demjson.py:463— akshare/utils/demjson.py:463-473 | akshare/utils/demjson.py:594-604 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (11 lines × 2) akshare/utils/demjson.py:5820— akshare/utils/demjson.py:5820-5830 | akshare/utils/demjson.py:5833-5843 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) REDACTED:695— REDACTED:695-700 | REDACTED:741-746 — 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. The `return` at the foot of the matched lines is the enclosing body's own terminal exit, not an early one: it moves with them unchanged, and each site calls the extracted unit from the position that `return` occupied — no decision has to be handed back and re-acted on.
Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) REDACTED:3647— REDACTED:3647-3652 | REDACTED:3682-3687 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) akshare/fund/fund_init_ths.py:127— akshare/fund/fund_init_ths.py:127-133 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_ipo_review.py:116-121 — 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 `akshare/fund/fund_init_ths.py:127` 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. The `return` at the foot of the matched lines is the enclosing body's own terminal exit, not an early one: it moves with them unchanged, and each site calls the extracted unit from the position that `return` occupied — no decision has to be handed back and re-acted on.
Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) akshare/movie/movie_yien.py:494— akshare/movie/movie_yien.py:494-499 | akshare/movie/movie_yien.py:573-578 — 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. The `return` at the foot of the matched lines is the enclosing body's own terminal exit, not an early one: it moves with them unchanged, and each site calls the extracted unit from the position that `return` occupied — no decision has to be handed back and re-acted on.
Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) REDACTED:66— REDACTED:66-72 | REDACTED:517-522 — 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 `REDACTED:66` 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. 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 `trade_date` to `str = "20251016"` in one and `str = "20230724"` 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. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `REDACTED:523` calls `strftime` and `REDACTED:72` does not — after which the two agree again for 4 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:174— akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:174-179 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_yjbb_em.py:51-56 — before extracting anything, compare `akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py` and `akshare/stock_feature/stock_yjbb_em.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 7 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 89 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 (6 lines × 2) REDACTED:123— REDACTED:123-128 | REDACTED:177-182 — 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 (6 lines × 2) REDACTED:231— REDACTED:231-236 | REDACTED:214-219 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `REDACTED` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 15 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 166 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `REDACTED:237` calls `to_datetime` and `REDACTED:220` 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 (6 lines × 2) REDACTED:189— REDACTED:189-194 | REDACTED:147-152 — 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 (6 lines × 2) REDACTED:244— REDACTED:244-249 | REDACTED:273-278 — 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. The `return` at the foot of the matched lines is the enclosing body's own terminal exit, not an early one: it moves with them unchanged, and each site calls the extracted unit from the position that `return` occupied — no decision has to be handed back and re-acted on.
D4 · Code Duplication· Edited copy of a member (62 corresponding lines) · ×9
Edited copy of a member (62 corresponding lines) REDACTED:16— REDACTED:16-92 | REDACTED:96-163 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 62 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (62 corresponding lines) REDACTED:16— REDACTED:16-92 | REDACTED:167-234 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 62 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (62 corresponding lines) akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:18— akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:18-116 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gpzy_em.py:89-167 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 62 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (62 corresponding lines) akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:314— akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:314-390 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gpzy_em.py:89-167 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 62 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (62 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2191— REDACTED:2191-2253 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_margin_sse.py:71-134 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 62 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (62 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2191— REDACTED:2191-2253 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_margin_sse.py:138-203 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 62 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (62 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:21— akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:21-107 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gpzy_em.py:196-301 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 62 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (62 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:111— akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:111-197 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gpzy_em.py:196-301 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 62 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (62 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:201— akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:201-287 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gpzy_em.py:196-301 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 62 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
D4 · Code Duplication· Edited copy of a member (19 corresponding lines) · ×9
Edited copy of a member (19 corresponding lines) REDACTED:1766— REDACTED:1766-1820 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:960-1039 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 19 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (19 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2044— REDACTED:2044-2095 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:960-1039 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 19 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (19 corresponding lines) REDACTED:3700— REDACTED:3700-3755 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_cyq_em.py:17-308 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 19 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (19 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:92— akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:92-186 | REDACTED:85-190 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 19 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (19 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:23— akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:23-119 | REDACTED:85-190 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 19 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (19 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:348— akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:348-444 | REDACTED:85-190 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 19 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (19 corresponding lines) akshare/futures/futures_zh_sina.py:652— akshare/futures/futures_zh_sina.py:652-688 | REDACTED:332-382 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 19 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (19 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_ipo_summary_cninfo.py:31— akshare/stock/stock_ipo_summary_cninfo.py:31-108 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:790-889 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 19 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (19 corresponding lines) akshare/economic/macro_other.py:15— akshare/economic/macro_other.py:15-50 | REDACTED:332-382 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 19 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 4) REDACTED:3309— REDACTED:3309-3313 | REDACTED:3367-3371 | REDACTED:3648-3652 | REDACTED:3683-3687 — 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.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 4) akshare/fund/fund_manager.py:49— akshare/fund/fund_manager.py:49-78 | REDACTED:237-241 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_yjyg_em.py:50-54 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_yjyg_em.py:167-171 — before extracting anything, compare `akshare/fund/fund_manager.py` and `REDACTED` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 3 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 50 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 `REDACTED:237` 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) REDACTED:1275— REDACTED:1275-1279 | akshare/futures_derivative/futures_cot_sina.py:36-40 | akshare/futures_derivative/futures_cot_sina.py:44-48 | akshare/futures_derivative/futures_cot_sina.py:52-56 — 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.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 4) REDACTED:75— REDACTED:75-79 | REDACTED:149-153 | REDACTED:321-325 | REDACTED:379-383 — 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. The `return` at the foot of the matched lines is the enclosing body's own terminal exit, not an early one: it moves with them unchanged, and each site calls the extracted unit from the position that `return` occupied — no decision has to be handed back and re-acted on.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 4) akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:349— akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:349-353 | REDACTED:398-402 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1009-1020 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_hold.py:114-122 — before extracting anything, compare `akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py` and `REDACTED` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 17 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 428 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1009` 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. 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. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_hold.py:114` calls `to_numeric` and `akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:349` does not — after which the two agree again for 5 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 4) REDACTED:122— REDACTED:122-126 | REDACTED:185-189 | REDACTED:332-336 | REDACTED:176-180 — there are 4 copies across 3 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.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 4) REDACTED:267— REDACTED:267-271 | REDACTED:303-307 | REDACTED:244-248 | REDACTED:273-277 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `REDACTED` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 15 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 166 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `REDACTED:272` calls `to_datetime` and `REDACTED:249` 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 (5 lines × 4) REDACTED:414— REDACTED:414-418 | REDACTED:439-443 | REDACTED:328-332 | REDACTED:353-357 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `REDACTED` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 15 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 166 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 4) akshare/stock_feature/stock_hsgt_exchange_rate.py:37— akshare/stock_feature/stock_hsgt_exchange_rate.py:37-41 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hsgt_exchange_rate.py:66-70 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hsgt_exchange_rate.py:124-128 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hsgt_exchange_rate.py:182-186 — 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 `akshare/stock_feature/stock_hsgt_exchange_rate.py:37` 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.
D4 · Code Duplication· Edited copy of a member (68 corresponding lines) · ×8
Edited copy of a member (68 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:411— akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:411-509 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:21-158 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 68 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (68 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:411— akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:411-509 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:162-299 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 68 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (68 corresponding lines) REDACTED:462— REDACTED:462-560 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:21-158 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 68 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (68 corresponding lines) REDACTED:462— REDACTED:462-560 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:162-299 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 68 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (68 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:411— akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:411-509 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:303-435 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 68 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (68 corresponding lines) REDACTED:462— REDACTED:462-560 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:303-435 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 68 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (68 corresponding lines) REDACTED:96— REDACTED:96-163 | REDACTED:167-234 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 68 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (68 corresponding lines) REDACTED:15— REDACTED:15-109 | REDACTED:174-333 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 68 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
D4 · Code Duplication· Edited copy of a member (81 corresponding lines) · ×8
Edited copy of a member (81 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:411— akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:411-509 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:21-107 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 81 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (81 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:411— akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:411-509 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:111-197 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 81 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (81 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:411— akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:411-509 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:201-287 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 81 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (81 corresponding lines) REDACTED:462— REDACTED:462-560 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:21-107 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 81 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (81 corresponding lines) REDACTED:462— REDACTED:462-560 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:111-197 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 81 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (81 corresponding lines) REDACTED:462— REDACTED:462-560 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:201-287 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 81 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (81 corresponding lines) akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:449— akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:449-558 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1226-1307 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 81 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (81 corresponding lines) akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:449— akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:449-558 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1311-1392 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 81 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Duplicated block (15 lines × 2) akshare/economic/macro_info_ws.py:73— akshare/economic/macro_info_ws.py:73-88 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_pankou_em.py:122-136 — 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 `akshare/economic/macro_info_ws.py:73` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately.
Duplicated block (15 lines × 2) REDACTED:701— REDACTED:701-715 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_yzxdr_em.py:59-79 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice.
Duplicated block (15 lines × 2) REDACTED:618— REDACTED:618-632 | akshare/option/cons.py:134-148 — `REDACTED` and `akshare/option/cons.py` are one unit implemented once per sibling directory, so they are most likely parallel implementations of one contract rather than a copy of each other — this scan matched 4 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 66 lines. If both are selected at run time, neither can be retired in favour of the other, and the lines that DIFFER between them are the reason both exist. The move that pays here is to hoist the identical part into a shared location the whole family can reach and give what differs a parameter or a seam, so a change lands once instead of once per sibling; extracting one helper per block leaves every sibling to drift on its own. 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 (15 lines × 2) akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:40— akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:40-54 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_restricted_em.py:147-168 — before extracting anything, compare `akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py` and `akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_restricted_em.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 10 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 160 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (15 lines × 2) REDACTED:396— REDACTED:396-410 | REDACTED:310-324 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `REDACTED` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 15 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 166 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. 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 (15 lines × 2) akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:299— akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:299-313 | REDACTED:62-76 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice.
Duplicated block (15 lines × 2) akshare/stock_feature/stock_hot_xq.py:64— akshare/stock_feature/stock_hot_xq.py:64-78 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_inner_trade_xq.py:55-69 — 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. The `return` at the foot of the matched lines is the enclosing body's own terminal exit, not an early one: it moves with them unchanged, and each site calls the extracted unit from the position that `return` occupied — no decision has to be handed back and re-acted on.
Duplicated block (15 lines × 2) REDACTED:145— REDACTED:145-159 | REDACTED:178-192 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. The `return` at the foot of the matched lines is the enclosing body's own terminal exit, not an early one: it moves with them unchanged, and each site calls the extracted unit from the position that `return` occupied — no decision has to be handed back and re-acted on.
D4 · Code Duplication· Edited copy of a member (75 corresponding lines) · ×7
Edited copy of a member (75 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1025— akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1025-1108 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1137-1220 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 75 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (75 corresponding lines) akshare/stock_feature/stock_fhps_em.py:16— akshare/stock_feature/stock_fhps_em.py:16-138 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:125-229 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 75 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (75 corresponding lines) akshare/stock_feature/stock_fhps_em.py:16— akshare/stock_feature/stock_fhps_em.py:16-138 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:233-337 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 75 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (75 corresponding lines) akshare/stock_feature/stock_fhps_em.py:16— akshare/stock_feature/stock_fhps_em.py:16-138 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:341-445 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 75 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (75 corresponding lines) akshare/stock_feature/stock_fhps_em.py:16— akshare/stock_feature/stock_fhps_em.py:16-138 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:562-667 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 75 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (75 corresponding lines) akshare/stock_feature/stock_fhps_em.py:16— akshare/stock_feature/stock_fhps_em.py:16-138 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:671-776 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 75 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (75 corresponding lines) akshare/stock_feature/stock_fhps_em.py:16— akshare/stock_feature/stock_fhps_em.py:16-138 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:845-949 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 75 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
D4 · Code Duplication· Edited copy of a member (71 corresponding lines) · ×7
Edited copy of a member (71 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:45— akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:45-217 | akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46-117 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 71 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (71 corresponding lines) REDACTED:15— REDACTED:15-109 | akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:485-600 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 71 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (71 corresponding lines) REDACTED:15— REDACTED:15-109 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:21-158 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 71 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (71 corresponding lines) REDACTED:15— REDACTED:15-109 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:162-299 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 71 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (71 corresponding lines) REDACTED:15— REDACTED:15-109 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:303-435 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 71 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (71 corresponding lines) REDACTED:15— REDACTED:15-109 | REDACTED:1193-1327 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 71 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (71 corresponding lines) akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:18— akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:18-116 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:223-310 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 71 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
D4 · Code Duplication· Edited copy of a member (82 corresponding lines) · ×7
Edited copy of a member (82 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:21— akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:21-107 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1226-1307 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 82 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (82 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:21— akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:21-107 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1311-1392 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 82 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (82 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:111— akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:111-197 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1226-1307 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 82 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (82 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:111— akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:111-197 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1311-1392 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 82 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (82 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:201— akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:201-287 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1226-1307 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 82 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (82 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:201— akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:201-287 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1311-1392 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 82 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (82 corresponding lines) akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1226— akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1226-1307 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1311-1392 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 82 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
D4 · Code Duplication· Edited copy of a member (14 corresponding lines) · ×7
Edited copy of a member (14 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_etf_ths.py:16— akshare/fund/fund_etf_ths.py:16-107 | akshare/fund/fund_rank_em.py:247-343 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 14 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (14 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_etf_ths.py:16— akshare/fund/fund_etf_ths.py:16-107 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:23-119 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 14 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (14 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_etf_ths.py:16— akshare/fund/fund_etf_ths.py:16-107 | akshare/stock/stock_ipo_summary_cninfo.py:31-108 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 14 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (14 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_etf_ths.py:16— akshare/fund/fund_etf_ths.py:16-107 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_fhps_em.py:142-265 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 14 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (14 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:190— akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:190-273 | akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:14-69 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 14 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (14 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:277— akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:277-361 | akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:14-69 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 14 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (14 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_etf_ths.py:16— akshare/fund/fund_etf_ths.py:16-107 | REDACTED:20-81 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 14 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
D4 · Code Duplication· Edited copy of a member (11 corresponding lines) · ×7
Edited copy of a member (11 corresponding lines) REDACTED:60— REDACTED:60-110 | REDACTED:19-85 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 11 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (11 corresponding lines) REDACTED:20— REDACTED:20-74 | REDACTED:43-120 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 11 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (11 corresponding lines) REDACTED:20— REDACTED:20-74 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:18-116 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 11 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (11 corresponding lines) REDACTED:20— REDACTED:20-74 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:120-219 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 11 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (11 corresponding lines) REDACTED:20— REDACTED:20-74 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_qsjy_em.py:14-92 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 11 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (11 corresponding lines) akshare/bond/bond_convert.py:166— akshare/bond/bond_convert.py:166-294 | akshare/option/option_current_szse.py:15-95 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 11 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (11 corresponding lines) akshare/bond/bond_convert.py:166— akshare/bond/bond_convert.py:166-294 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_zf_pg.py:100-193 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 11 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Duplicated block (28 lines × 2) akshare/economic/macro_constitute.py:18— akshare/economic/macro_constitute.py:18-45 | akshare/economic/macro_constitute.py:83-110 — 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. 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 (28 lines × 2) REDACTED:18— REDACTED:18-45 | REDACTED:16-46 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from both call sites, so a change lands once. 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. Note first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: the declarations holding them bind `symbol` to `str = "LOF基金"` in one and `str = "股票型基金"` 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 (28 lines × 2) akshare/movie/video_yien.py:66— akshare/movie/video_yien.py:66-93 | akshare/movie/video_yien.py:97-124 — 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. 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 (28 lines × 2) akshare/spot/spot_sge.py:164— akshare/spot/spot_sge.py:164-191 | akshare/spot/spot_sge.py:195-222 — 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. 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 (28 lines × 2) akshare/stock_feature/stock_fhps_em.py:208— akshare/stock_feature/stock_fhps_em.py:208-235 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_tfp_em.py:46-77 — before extracting anything, compare `akshare/stock_feature/stock_fhps_em.py` and `akshare/stock_feature/stock_tfp_em.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 4 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 131 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `akshare/stock_feature/stock_fhps_em.py:208` 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. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `akshare/stock_feature/stock_fhps_em.py:236` calls `to_datetime` and `akshare/stock_feature/stock_tfp_em.py:78` 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 (28 lines × 2) akshare/stock_feature/stock_margin_szse.py:16— akshare/stock_feature/stock_margin_szse.py:16-43 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_margin_szse.py:96-123 — 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. 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. Note first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: the declarations holding them bind `date` to `str = "20221129"` in one and `str = "20230925"` 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 (28 lines × 2) REDACTED:418— REDACTED:418-445 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_zf_pg.py:57-89 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `akshare/stock_feature/stock_zf_pg.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 3 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 96 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `REDACTED:417` calls `reset_index` and `akshare/stock_feature/stock_zf_pg.py:55` does not — after which the two agree again for 4 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
Duplicated block (6 lines × 3) REDACTED:672— REDACTED:672-677 | REDACTED:718-723 | REDACTED:792-797 — 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 `REDACTED:672` 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 (6 lines × 3) akshare/futures_derivative/futures_cot_sina.py:36— akshare/futures_derivative/futures_cot_sina.py:36-41 | akshare/futures_derivative/futures_cot_sina.py:44-49 | akshare/futures_derivative/futures_cot_sina.py:52-57 — 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. The `return` at the foot of the matched lines is the enclosing body's own terminal exit, not an early one: it moves with them unchanged, and each site calls the extracted unit from the position that `return` occupied — no decision has to be handed back and re-acted on.
Duplicated block (6 lines × 3) akshare/futures_derivative/futures_cot_sina.py:36— akshare/futures_derivative/futures_cot_sina.py:36-41 | akshare/futures_derivative/futures_cot_sina.py:44-49 | akshare/futures_derivative/futures_hog.py:181-186 — 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. The `return` at the foot of the matched lines is the enclosing body's own terminal exit, not an early one: it moves with them unchanged, and each site calls the extracted unit from the position that `return` occupied — no decision has to be handed back and re-acted on.
Duplicated block (6 lines × 3) akshare/futures_derivative/futures_cot_sina.py:37— akshare/futures_derivative/futures_cot_sina.py:37-42 | akshare/futures_derivative/futures_cot_sina.py:45-50 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_profit_forecast_hk_etnet.py:75-80 — 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 `akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_profit_forecast_hk_etnet.py:75` 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. 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 (6 lines × 3) akshare/index/index_sw.py:70— akshare/index/index_sw.py:70-75 | akshare/index/index_sw.py:131-136 | akshare/index/index_sw.py:193-198 — 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 `akshare/index/index_sw.py:70` 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 (6 lines × 3) akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:35— akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:35-40 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gpzy_em.py:43-48 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_tfp_em.py:37-42 — before extracting anything, compare `akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py` and `akshare/stock_feature/stock_gpzy_em.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 16 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 367 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 after the matched lines, `akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:42` calls `reset_index` and `akshare/stock_feature/stock_gpzy_em.py:51` 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 (6 lines × 3) REDACTED:245— REDACTED:245-250 | REDACTED:248-254 | REDACTED:260-266 — 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 `REDACTED:248` 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. The `return` at the foot of the matched lines is the enclosing body's own terminal exit, not an early one: it moves with them unchanged, and each site calls the extracted unit from the position that `return` occupied — no decision has to be handed back and re-acted on.
Swallowed exception (empty catch) akshare/data/ths.js:235— 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) akshare/data/ths.js:249— 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) akshare/data/ths.js:275— 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) akshare/data/ths.js:445— 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) akshare/data/ths.js:712— 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) akshare/futures/futures_roll_yield.py:157— 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) REDACTED:352— 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.
Duplicated block (27 lines × 2) akshare/bond/bond_cbond.py:43— akshare/bond/bond_cbond.py:43-69 | akshare/bond/bond_cbond.py:101-127 — 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. The `return` at the foot of the matched lines is the enclosing body's own terminal exit, not an early one: it moves with them unchanged, and each site calls the extracted unit from the position that `return` occupied — no decision has to be handed back and re-acted on. Note first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: the declarations holding them bind `indicator` to `str = "全价"` in one and `str = "财富"` 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 (27 lines × 2) REDACTED:73— REDACTED:73-99 | REDACTED:44-70 — 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 (27 lines × 2) akshare/economic/macro_constitute.py:48— akshare/economic/macro_constitute.py:48-74 | akshare/economic/macro_constitute.py:113-139 — 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 (27 lines × 2) akshare/stock/stock_us_js.py:45— akshare/stock/stock_us_js.py:45-71 | REDACTED:814-848 — 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 `REDACTED:814` 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 (27 lines × 2) akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:893— akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:893-919 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:956-982 — 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. 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 (27 lines × 2) akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:926— akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:926-952 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:989-1015 — 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. The `return` at the foot of the matched lines is the enclosing body's own terminal exit, not an early one: it moves with them unchanged, and each site calls the extracted unit from the position that `return` occupied — no decision has to be handed back and re-acted on.
Duplicated block (21 lines × 2) akshare/fund/fund_rank_em.py:55— akshare/fund/fund_rank_em.py:55-80 | akshare/fund/fund_rank_em.py:159-179 — 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 (21 lines × 2) REDACTED:116— REDACTED:116-136 | REDACTED:160-180 — 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 `REDACTED:116` 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. The `return` at the foot of the matched lines is the enclosing body's own terminal exit, not an early one: it moves with them unchanged, and each site calls the extracted unit from the position that `return` occupied — no decision has to be handed back and re-acted on.
Duplicated block (21 lines × 2) akshare/news/news_cctv.py:84— akshare/news/news_cctv.py:84-105 | akshare/news/news_cctv.py:130-150 — 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 `akshare/news/news_cctv.py:84` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
Duplicated block (21 lines × 2) REDACTED:368— REDACTED:368-388 | REDACTED:448-468 — 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. 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 (21 lines × 2) akshare/stock/stock_hk_hot_rank_em.py:109— akshare/stock/stock_hk_hot_rank_em.py:109-129 | akshare/stock/stock_hot_rank_em.py:151-171 — before extracting anything, compare `akshare/stock/stock_hk_hot_rank_em.py` and `akshare/stock/stock_hot_rank_em.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 4 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 77 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. 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. Note first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: the declarations holding them bind `symbol` to `str = "00700"` in one and `str = "SZ000665"` 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) REDACTED:101— REDACTED:101-121 | REDACTED:98-118 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `REDACTED` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 7 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 178 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. The `return` at the foot of the matched lines is the enclosing body's own terminal exit, not an early one: it moves with them unchanged, and each site calls the extracted unit from the position that `return` occupied — no decision has to be handed back and re-acted on. Note first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: the declarations holding them bind `symbol` to `str = "阿里巴巴概念"` in one and `str = "半导体"` 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 (7 lines × 2) REDACTED:592— REDACTED:592-598 | REDACTED:742-748 — 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. 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 (7 lines × 2) akshare/futures/futures_comm_qihuo.py:163— akshare/futures/futures_comm_qihuo.py:163-169 | REDACTED:72-78 — 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. The `return` at the foot of the matched lines is the enclosing body's own terminal exit, not an early one: it moves with them unchanged, and each site calls the extracted unit from the position that `return` occupied — no decision has to be handed back and re-acted on.
Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) akshare/movie/movie_yien.py:254— akshare/movie/movie_yien.py:254-260 | akshare/movie/movie_yien.py:331-337 — 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. The `return` at the foot of the matched lines is the enclosing body's own terminal exit, not an early one: it moves with them unchanged, and each site calls the extracted unit from the position that `return` occupied — no decision has to be handed back and re-acted on.
Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) REDACTED:178— REDACTED:178-184 | REDACTED:226-232 — 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. 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 (7 lines × 2) REDACTED:236— REDACTED:236-242 | REDACTED:250-256 — 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. 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 (7 lines × 2) REDACTED:267— REDACTED:267-273 | REDACTED:303-309 — 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. The `return` at the foot of the matched lines is the enclosing body's own terminal exit, not an early one: it moves with them unchanged, and each site calls the extracted unit from the position that `return` occupied — no decision has to be handed back and re-acted on.
D4 · Code Duplication· Edited copy of a member (86 corresponding lines) · ×5
Edited copy of a member (86 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:23— akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:23-119 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:348-444 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 86 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (86 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:21— akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:21-107 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:449-558 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 86 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (86 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:111— akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:111-197 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:449-558 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 86 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (86 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:201— akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:201-287 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:449-558 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 86 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (86 corresponding lines) akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:449— akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:449-558 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_yjbb_em.py:17-143 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 86 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
D4 · Code Duplication· Edited copy of a member (20 corresponding lines) · ×5
Edited copy of a member (20 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_current_szse.py:15— akshare/option/option_current_szse.py:15-95 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdhs.py:16-127 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 20 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (20 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_aum_em.py:65— akshare/fund/fund_aum_em.py:65-95 | REDACTED:113-204 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 20 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (20 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:45— akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:45-217 | REDACTED:242-316 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 20 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (20 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:45— akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:45-217 | akshare/index/index_stock_hk.py:55-118 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 20 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (20 corresponding lines) akshare/index/index_stock_hk.py:55— akshare/index/index_stock_hk.py:55-118 | REDACTED:19-125 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 20 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
D4 · Code Duplication· Edited copy of a member (13 corresponding lines) · ×5
Edited copy of a member (13 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_current_szse.py:15— akshare/option/option_current_szse.py:15-95 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gpzy_em.py:196-301 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 13 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (13 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:190— akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:190-273 | REDACTED:85-190 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 13 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (13 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:190— akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:190-273 | REDACTED:194-291 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 13 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (13 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:277— akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:277-361 | REDACTED:85-190 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 13 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (13 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:277— akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:277-361 | REDACTED:194-291 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 13 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
D4 · Code Duplication· Edited copy of a member (16 corresponding lines) · ×5
Edited copy of a member (16 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:92— akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:92-186 | akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:14-69 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 16 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (16 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:14— akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:14-69 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:23-119 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 16 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (16 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:14— akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:14-69 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:348-444 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 16 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (16 corresponding lines) akshare/bond/bond_gb_sina.py:14— akshare/bond/bond_gb_sina.py:14-51 | akshare/index/index_stock_zh_csindex.py:18-69 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 16 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (16 corresponding lines) akshare/bond/bond_gb_sina.py:55— akshare/bond/bond_gb_sina.py:55-96 | akshare/index/index_stock_zh_csindex.py:18-69 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 16 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
D4 · Code Duplication· Edited copy of a member (12 corresponding lines) · ×5
Edited copy of a member (12 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_commodity_sina.py:58— akshare/option/option_commodity_sina.py:58-136 | akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:57-119 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 12 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (12 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_commodity_sina.py:58— akshare/option/option_commodity_sina.py:58-136 | REDACTED:20-112 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 12 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (12 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_commodity_sina.py:58— akshare/option/option_commodity_sina.py:58-136 | REDACTED:116-208 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 12 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (12 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_etf_ths.py:16— akshare/fund/fund_etf_ths.py:16-107 | akshare/stock/stock_hold_num_cninfo.py:31-103 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 12 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (12 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:57— akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:57-119 | REDACTED:113-204 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 12 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Duplicated block (23 lines × 2) REDACTED:49— REDACTED:49-71 | REDACTED:113-138 — 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. 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. Note first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: the declarations holding them bind `date` to `str = "20220517"` in one and `str = "20220331"` 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 (23 lines × 2) akshare/fund/fund_xq.py:81— akshare/fund/fund_xq.py:81-103 | akshare/fund/fund_xq.py:227-250 — 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. 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 (23 lines × 2) REDACTED:41— REDACTED:41-63 | akshare/stock/stock_share_changes_cninfo.py:55-77 — 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 (23 lines × 2) akshare/stock_feature/stock_fhps_em.py:28— akshare/stock_feature/stock_fhps_em.py:28-50 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_fhps_em.py:150-172 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `akshare/stock_feature/stock_fhps_em.py:26` calls `simplefilter` and `akshare/stock_feature/stock_fhps_em.py:148` 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 (23 lines × 2) akshare/stock_feature/stock_hsgt_exchange_rate.py:19— akshare/stock_feature/stock_hsgt_exchange_rate.py:19-41 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hsgt_exchange_rate.py:48-70 — 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 `akshare/stock_feature/stock_hsgt_exchange_rate.py:19` 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 (17 lines × 2) REDACTED:98— REDACTED:98-116 | REDACTED:129-145 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `REDACTED:98` 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 (17 lines × 2) REDACTED:199— REDACTED:199-215 | REDACTED:250-266 — 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. The `return` at the foot of the matched lines is the enclosing body's own terminal exit, not an early one: it moves with them unchanged, and each site calls the extracted unit from the position that `return` occupied — no decision has to be handed back and re-acted on.
Duplicated block (17 lines × 2) akshare/futures_derivative/futures_hog.py:127— akshare/futures_derivative/futures_hog.py:127-143 | akshare/futures_derivative/futures_hog.py:212-228 — 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. 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 (17 lines × 2) REDACTED:243— REDACTED:243-259 | REDACTED:279-295 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `REDACTED:243` 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 (17 lines × 2) REDACTED:72— REDACTED:72-88 | REDACTED:69-85 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `REDACTED` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 7 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 178 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. 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 lines × 2) akshare/fund/fund_etf_sse.py:53— akshare/fund/fund_etf_sse.py:53-64 | akshare/fund/fund_init_em.py:56-73 — 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 `akshare/fund/fund_init_em.py:56` 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 (12 lines × 2) akshare/index/index_stock_us_sina.py:19— akshare/index/index_stock_us_sina.py:19-30 | REDACTED:118-134 — 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. 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. Note first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: the declarations holding them bind `symbol` to `str = ".INX"` in one and `str = "FB"` 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 (12 lines × 2) REDACTED:225— REDACTED:225-236 | REDACTED:254-265 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (12 lines × 2) akshare/stock_feature/stock_gxl_lg.py:40— akshare/stock_feature/stock_gxl_lg.py:40-51 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gxl_lg.py:71-82 — 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. The `return` at the foot of the matched lines is the enclosing body's own terminal exit, not an early one: it moves with them unchanged, and each site calls the extracted unit from the position that `return` occupied — no decision has to be handed back and re-acted on.
Duplicated block (12 lines × 2) akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:44— akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:44-55 | REDACTED:28-39 — 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. 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 × 3) REDACTED:207— REDACTED:207-240 | akshare/economic/macro_other.py:72-94 | akshare/rate/repo_rate.py:59-68 — before extracting anything, compare `akshare/economic/macro_other.py` and `akshare/rate/repo_rate.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 3 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 68 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. Note first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: the declarations holding them bind `end_date` to `str = "20231204"` in one and `str = "20221017"` 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. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `REDACTED:205` calls `bond_china_close_return_map` and `akshare/economic/macro_other.py:69` 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 (10 lines × 3) REDACTED:67— REDACTED:67-77 | REDACTED:314-323 | REDACTED:372-381 — 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 (10 lines × 3) REDACTED:255— REDACTED:255-264 | REDACTED:274-283 | REDACTED:293-302 — 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 (10 lines × 3) REDACTED:29— REDACTED:29-38 | REDACTED:46-55 | REDACTED:62-71 — 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. 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 × 3) REDACTED:37— REDACTED:37-46 | REDACTED:70-79 | REDACTED:101-110 — 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 `REDACTED:37` 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 lines × 2) REDACTED:76— REDACTED:76-84 | akshare/bond/bond_zh_sina.py:129-137 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `akshare/bond/bond_zh_sina.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 5 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 129 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `REDACTED:76` 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 lines × 2) akshare/futures/futures_zh_sina.py:46— akshare/futures/futures_zh_sina.py:46-54 | akshare/futures/futures_zh_sina.py:72-80 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) akshare/stock/stock_share_hold.py:55— akshare/stock/stock_share_hold.py:55-65 | akshare/stock/stock_share_hold.py:143-151 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) akshare/stock_feature/stock_hk_valuation_baidu.py:48— akshare/stock_feature/stock_hk_valuation_baidu.py:48-56 | REDACTED:51-59 — 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. The `return` at the foot of the matched lines is the enclosing body's own terminal exit, not an early one: it moves with them unchanged, and each site calls the extracted unit from the position that `return` occupied — no decision has to be handed back and re-acted on.
Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) REDACTED:134— REDACTED:134-142 | REDACTED:708-716 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 6) REDACTED:189— REDACTED:189-195 | akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:393-397 | akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:252-256 | akshare/index/index_zh_em.py:260-264 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1104-1108 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1527-1531 — there are 6 copies across 5 file(s) — more copies than files, so at least one file holds the block twice. Extract it once into a single shared function every call site can reach and call it from all 6 sites; resolving a subset leaves the remainder to drift apart. 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 (5 lines × 6) REDACTED:340— REDACTED:340-344 | REDACTED:282-308 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_fhps_em.py:51-55 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdhs.py:66-106 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdhs.py:166-207 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdzjc_em.py:55-59 — there are 6 copies across 5 file(s) — more copies than files, so at least one file holds the block twice. Extract it once into a single shared function every call site can reach and call it from all 6 sites; resolving a subset leaves the remainder to drift apart. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `REDACTED:340` 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 × 6) akshare/futures_derivative/futures_hog.py:163— akshare/futures_derivative/futures_hog.py:163-173 | akshare/futures_derivative/futures_hog.py:196-200 | REDACTED:853-862 | REDACTED:922-931 | REDACTED:990-999 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_profit_forecast_hk_etnet.py:74-79 — there are 6 copies across 3 file(s) — more copies than files, so at least one file holds the block twice. Extract it once into a single shared function every call site can reach and call it from all 6 sites; resolving a subset leaves the remainder to drift apart. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `akshare/futures_derivative/futures_hog.py:163` 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. The `return` at the foot of the matched lines is the enclosing body's own terminal exit, not an early one: it moves with them unchanged, and each site calls the extracted unit from the position that `return` occupied — no decision has to be handed back and re-acted on. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_profit_forecast_hk_etnet.py:73` calls `to_numeric` and `akshare/futures_derivative/futures_hog.py:163` 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 (5 lines × 6) REDACTED:243— REDACTED:243-251 | REDACTED:279-287 | REDACTED:225-229 | REDACTED:254-258 | REDACTED:186-192 | REDACTED:217-223 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `REDACTED` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 15 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 166 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `REDACTED:243` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 6) REDACTED:380— REDACTED:380-384 | REDACTED:475-479 | REDACTED:583-587 | REDACTED:691-695 | REDACTED:1106-1110 | REDACTED:1574-1578 — all 6 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.
Hotspot: akshare/economic/macro_china_nbs.py akshare/economic/macro_china_nbs.py:385— akshare/economic/macro_china_nbs.py changed 2 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 23 in macro_china_nbs._build_nbs_dts at line 385. 2 of those changes were fix/bug commits, so the churn is repair rather than feature work. Before the next change lands here, make sure the area it touches is under test, then split that area out of the file so the following change is smaller than this one — a file this often edited pays the complexity back every time. Counted over 2026-07-15..2026-10-13, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-07-15 12:08:53 +08:00' --until='2026-10-13 12:08:53 +08:00' --full-history --no-merges -- akshare/economic/macro_china_nbs.py`: 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: akshare/other/other_taptap.py akshare/other/other_taptap.py:72— akshare/other/other_taptap.py changed 2 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 20 in other_taptap.game_hot_rank_taptap at line 72. 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 2026-07-15..2026-10-13, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-07-15 12:08:53 +08:00' --until='2026-10-13 12:08:53 +08:00' --full-history --no-merges -- akshare/other/other_taptap.py`: 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: scripts/check_punctuation.py scripts/check_punctuation.py:419— scripts/check_punctuation.py changed 2 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 16 in check_punctuation.main at line 419. 1 of those changes was a fix/bug commit, and the other 1 changed it for other reasons — this file is under both repair and feature pressure. Before the next change lands here, make sure the area it touches is under test, then split that area out of the file so the following change is smaller than this one — a file this often edited pays the complexity back every time. Counted over 2026-07-15..2026-10-13, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-07-15 12:08:53 +08:00' --until='2026-10-13 12:08:53 +08:00' --full-history --no-merges -- scripts/check_punctuation.py`: 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: akshare/fund/fund_init_ths.py akshare/fund/fund_init_ths.py:15— akshare/fund/fund_init_ths.py changed 2 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 16 in fund_init_ths.fund_new_found_ths at line 15. 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 2026-07-15..2026-10-13, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-07-15 12:08:53 +08:00' --until='2026-10-13 12:08:53 +08:00' --full-history --no-merges -- akshare/fund/fund_init_ths.py`: 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.
D4 · Code Duplication· Edited copy of a member (76 corresponding lines) · ×4
Edited copy of a member (76 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:411— akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:411-509 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1226-1307 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 76 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (76 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:411— akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:411-509 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1311-1392 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 76 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (76 corresponding lines) REDACTED:462— REDACTED:462-560 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1226-1307 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 76 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (76 corresponding lines) REDACTED:462— REDACTED:462-560 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1311-1392 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 76 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
D4 · Code Duplication· Edited copy of a member (15 corresponding lines) · ×4
Edited copy of a member (15 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_etf_ths.py:16— akshare/fund/fund_etf_ths.py:16-107 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_fhps_em.py:16-138 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 15 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (15 corresponding lines) REDACTED:259— REDACTED:259-315 | akshare/option/option_commodity_sina.py:58-136 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 15 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (15 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_ipo_summary_cninfo.py:31— akshare/stock/stock_ipo_summary_cninfo.py:31-108 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:598-688 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 15 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (15 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_em.py:708— akshare/fund/fund_em.py:708-738 | akshare/fund/fund_em.py:1059-1088 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 15 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
D4 · Code Duplication· Members sharing a duplicated core (6 members, 50+ identical tokens) · ×4
Members sharing a duplicated core (6 members, 50+ identical tokens) REDACTED:840— REDACTED:840-866 | REDACTED:871-894 | REDACTED:998-1022 | REDACTED:1027-1051 | REDACTED:1056-1080 | REDACTED:1085-1109 — These 6 members share a duplicated core: a run of at least 50 identical tokens appears in every one of them. That run is NOT broken out as duplicated-block rows below — it is what admitted this row, and the blocks below cover only the part of it that clears the block floor, so they understate the correspondence. Read the members as one construct written 6 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 6 times.
Members sharing a duplicated core (6 members, 50+ identical tokens) REDACTED:16— REDACTED:16-160 | REDACTED:164-273 | REDACTED:279-388 | REDACTED:413-525 | REDACTED:531-643 | REDACTED:723-807 — These 6 members share a duplicated core: a run of at least 50 identical tokens appears in every one of them. That run is NOT broken out as duplicated-block rows below — it is what admitted this row, and the blocks below cover only the part of it that clears the block floor, so they understate the correspondence. Read the members as one construct written 6 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 6 times.
Members sharing a duplicated core (6 members, 50+ identical tokens) akshare/stock/stock_hk_comparison_em.py:14— akshare/stock/stock_hk_comparison_em.py:14-58 | akshare/stock/stock_hk_comparison_em.py:62-115 | akshare/stock/stock_hk_comparison_em.py:119-164 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_comparison_em.py:14-69 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_comparison_em.py:163-216 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_comparison_em.py:220-267 — These 6 members share a duplicated core: a run of at least 50 identical tokens appears in every one of them. That run is NOT broken out as duplicated-block rows below — it is what admitted this row, and the blocks below cover only the part of it that clears the block floor, so they understate the correspondence. Read the members as one construct written 6 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 6 times.
Members sharing a duplicated core (6 members, 50+ identical tokens) akshare/stock_feature/stock_ztb_em.py:25— akshare/stock_feature/stock_ztb_em.py:25-107 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_ztb_em.py:111-184 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_ztb_em.py:188-273 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_ztb_em.py:277-354 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_ztb_em.py:358-436 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_ztb_em.py:440-522 — These 6 members share a duplicated core: a run of at least 50 identical tokens appears in every one of them. That run is NOT broken out as duplicated-block rows below — it is what admitted this row, and the blocks below cover only the part of it that clears the block floor, so they understate the correspondence. Read the members as one construct written 6 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 6 times.
D4 · Code Duplication· Members sharing a duplicated core (5 members, 50+ identical tokens) · ×4
Members sharing a duplicated core (5 members, 50+ identical tokens) REDACTED:66— REDACTED:66-86 | akshare/bond/bond_zh_sina.py:119-143 | akshare/index/index_stock_hk.py:122-145 | akshare/index/index_stock_us_sina.py:19-40 | akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:294-316 — These 5 members share a duplicated core: a run of at least 50 identical tokens appears in every one of them. That run is NOT broken out as duplicated-block rows below — it is what admitted this row, and the blocks below cover only the part of it that clears the block floor, so they understate the correspondence. Read the members as one construct written 5 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 5 times.
Members sharing a duplicated core (5 members, 50+ identical tokens) REDACTED:1013— REDACTED:1013-1055 | REDACTED:1766-1820 | REDACTED:2044-2095 | REDACTED:14-45 | REDACTED:14-50 — These 5 members share a duplicated core: a run of at least 50 identical tokens appears in every one of them. That run is NOT broken out as duplicated-block rows below — it is what admitted this row, and the blocks below cover only the part of it that clears the block floor, so they understate the correspondence. Read the members as one construct written 5 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 5 times.
Members sharing a duplicated core (5 members, 50+ identical tokens) REDACTED:14— REDACTED:14-50 | REDACTED:324-394 | REDACTED:427-495 | REDACTED:502-569 | akshare/stock/stock_dividend_cninfo.py:31-108 — These 5 members share a duplicated core: a run of at least 50 identical tokens appears in every one of them. That run is NOT broken out as duplicated-block rows below — it is what admitted this row, and the blocks below cover only the part of it that clears the block floor, so they understate the correspondence. Read the members as one construct written 5 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 5 times.
Members sharing a duplicated core (5 members, 50+ identical tokens) akshare/stock_feature/stock_a_pe_and_pb.py:323— akshare/stock_feature/stock_a_pe_and_pb.py:323-395 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_a_pe_and_pb.py:399-458 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_a_pe_and_pb.py:462-504 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_a_pe_and_pb.py:508-561 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_all_pb.py:16-38 — These 5 members share a duplicated core: a run of at least 50 identical tokens appears in every one of them. That run is NOT broken out as duplicated-block rows below — it is what admitted this row, and the blocks below cover only the part of it that clears the block floor, so they understate the correspondence. Read the members as one construct written 5 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 5 times.
Duplicated block (35 lines × 2) REDACTED:1242— REDACTED:1242-1276 | REDACTED:1288-1322 — 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. 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 (35 lines × 2) akshare/movie/artist_yien.py:66— akshare/movie/artist_yien.py:66-100 | akshare/movie/artist_yien.py:104-138 — 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. 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 (35 lines × 2) akshare/stock_feature/stock_a_pe_and_pb.py:399— akshare/stock_feature/stock_a_pe_and_pb.py:399-433 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_a_pe_and_pb.py:508-542 — 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 `akshare/stock_feature/stock_a_pe_and_pb.py:399` 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. Note first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: the declarations holding them bind `symbol` to `str = "沪深300"` in one and `str = "上证50"` 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 (35 lines × 2) REDACTED:494— REDACTED:494-528 | REDACTED:595-629 — 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. 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 (22 lines × 2) REDACTED:274— REDACTED:274-295 | REDACTED:295-322 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `REDACTED` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 4 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 124 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (22 lines × 2) REDACTED:47— REDACTED:47-68 | REDACTED:138-159 — 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 (22 lines × 2) akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:475— akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:475-496 | REDACTED:526-547 — before extracting anything, compare `akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py` and `REDACTED` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 17 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 428 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:475` 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 (22 lines × 2) akshare/stock/stock_industry_cninfo.py:131— akshare/stock/stock_industry_cninfo.py:131-165 | akshare/stock/stock_share_changes_cninfo.py:57-78 — 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 `akshare/stock/stock_share_changes_cninfo.py:57` 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 (20 lines × 2) REDACTED:159— REDACTED:159-178 | REDACTED:221-240 — 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. 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 (20 lines × 2) akshare/stock/stock_info.py:356— akshare/stock/stock_info.py:356-375 | akshare/stock/stock_info.py:385-404 — 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. 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. Note first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: the declarations holding them bind `symbol` to `str = "终止上市公司"` in one and `str = "全称变更"` 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. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `akshare/stock/stock_info.py:377` calls `DataFrame` and `akshare/stock/stock_info.py:405` 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 (20 lines × 2) REDACTED:46— REDACTED:46-65 | REDACTED:45-64 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `REDACTED` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 7 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 178 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (20 lines × 2) akshare/stock/stock_hk_hot_rank_em.py:86— akshare/stock/stock_hk_hot_rank_em.py:86-105 | akshare/stock/stock_hot_rank_em.py:105-124 — before extracting anything, compare `akshare/stock/stock_hk_hot_rank_em.py` and `akshare/stock/stock_hot_rank_em.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 4 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 77 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. 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. Note first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: the declarations holding them bind `symbol` to `str = "00700"` in one and `str = "SZ000665"` 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 (19 lines × 2) akshare/futures/futures_zh_sina.py:172— akshare/futures/futures_zh_sina.py:172-190 | akshare/futures_derivative/futures_index_sina.py:55-73 — 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 `akshare/futures_derivative/futures_index_sina.py:55` 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. 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 `symbol` to `str = "cffex"` in one and `str = "shfe"` 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 (19 lines × 2) akshare/index/index_sw.py:131— akshare/index/index_sw.py:131-149 | akshare/index/index_sw.py:193-211 — 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 `akshare/index/index_sw.py:131` 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 (19 lines × 2) akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:159— akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:159-177 | REDACTED:238-256 — before extracting anything, compare `akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py` and `REDACTED` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 17 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 428 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Note first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: the declarations holding them bind `symbol` to `str = "可燃冰"` in one and `str = "小金属"` 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 (19 lines × 2) akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:423— akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:423-441 | REDACTED:474-492 — before extracting anything, compare `akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py` and `REDACTED` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 17 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 428 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:423` 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 first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: the declarations holding them bind `symbol` to `str = "融资融券"` in one and `str = "小金属"` 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 (18 lines × 2) REDACTED:659— REDACTED:659-676 | REDACTED:705-722 — 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. 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 (18 lines × 2) REDACTED:84— REDACTED:84-101 | REDACTED:772-789 — 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 `REDACTED:84` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
Duplicated block (18 lines × 2) akshare/stock/stock_hk_famous.py:20— akshare/stock/stock_hk_famous.py:20-39 | akshare/stock/stock_us_famous.py:30-47 — 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 `akshare/stock/stock_hk_famous.py:20` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
Duplicated block (18 lines × 2) akshare/utils/demjson.py:476— akshare/utils/demjson.py:476-493 | akshare/utils/demjson.py:607-624 — 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 (16 lines × 2) REDACTED:278— REDACTED:278-298 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_yzxdr_em.py:83-98 — 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) REDACTED:215— REDACTED:215-234 | akshare/index/index_zh_a_scope.py:25-40 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice.
Duplicated block (16 lines × 2) REDACTED:700— REDACTED:700-715 | akshare/fund/fund_manager.py:48-66 — 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 (16 lines × 2) REDACTED:257— REDACTED:257-272 | REDACTED:276-291 — 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 `REDACTED:257` 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. 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 (14 lines × 2) REDACTED:467— REDACTED:467-480 | REDACTED:962-975 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (14 lines × 2) REDACTED:1066— REDACTED:1066-1079 | REDACTED:1084-1098 — 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 `REDACTED:1066` 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 (14 lines × 2) akshare/futures_derivative/futures_hog.py:14— akshare/futures_derivative/futures_hog.py:14-27 | akshare/futures_derivative/futures_hog.py:58-71 — 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. 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. Note first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: the declarations holding them bind `symbol` to `str = "外三元"` in one and `str = "玉米"` 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 (14 lines × 2) REDACTED:243— REDACTED:243-256 | REDACTED:295-308 — 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) akshare/bond/bond_china.py:28— akshare/bond/bond_china.py:28-62 | akshare/bond/bond_china.py:91-100 — 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 `akshare/bond/bond_china.py:91` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `akshare/bond/bond_china.py:27` calls `bond_china_close_return_map` and `akshare/bond/bond_china.py:89` does not — after which the two agree again for 4 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) REDACTED:135— REDACTED:135-144 | REDACTED:167-176 — 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. 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) akshare/fund/fund_em.py:708— akshare/fund/fund_em.py:708-717 | akshare/fund/fund_em.py:1059-1068 — 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. 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) akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:163— akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:163-172 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:499-508 — 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) REDACTED:961— REDACTED:961-968 | REDACTED:1122-1129 — 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 (8 lines × 2) akshare/fund/fund_em.py:675— akshare/fund/fund_em.py:675-682 | akshare/fund/fund_em.py:689-696 — 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. 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 (8 lines × 2) akshare/futures_derivative/futures_cot_sina.py:36— akshare/futures_derivative/futures_cot_sina.py:36-43 | akshare/futures_derivative/futures_cot_sina.py:44-51 — 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. 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 (8 lines × 2) akshare/option/option_lhb_em.py:96— akshare/option/option_lhb_em.py:96-103 | akshare/option/option_lhb_em.py:151-158 — 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 `akshare/option/option_lhb_em.py:96` 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 (5 lines × 3) REDACTED:543— REDACTED:543-549 | akshare/futures_derivative/futures_contract_info_ine.py:60-64 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_analyst_em.py:221-227 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `akshare/futures_derivative/futures_contract_info_ine.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 3 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 81 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 `REDACTED:543` 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. The `return` at the foot of the matched lines is the enclosing body's own terminal exit, not an early one: it moves with them unchanged, and each site calls the extracted unit from the position that `return` occupied — no decision has to be handed back and re-acted on. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `REDACTED:541` calls `to_datetime` and `akshare/stock_feature/stock_analyst_em.py:219` 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 (5 lines × 3) akshare/futures/futures_zh_sina.py:326— akshare/futures/futures_zh_sina.py:326-334 | akshare/futures/futures_zh_sina.py:410-414 | akshare/futures/futures_zh_sina.py:528-536 — all 3 copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from every one of those sites — resolving only two of them leaves the rest to drift apart the first time one is edited. 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 (5 lines × 3) akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:349— akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:349-353 | REDACTED:398-402 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hsgt_min_em.py:40-44 — before extracting anything, compare `akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py` and `REDACTED` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 17 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 428 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. 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 (5 lines × 3) akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:83— akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:83-87 | akshare/fx/fx_quote_baidu.py:71-75 | REDACTED:265-269 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere all 3 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 3 times.
(anonymous) (cognitive 17) REDACTED:5481— (anonymous) has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 10 (16 pts), loops 1 (nesting depth added 6). None of this is in the body itself: all 17 points belong to 3 function items inside it that branch (incWord, processBlock, incCounter). Those helpers are already separate functions, so extracting the branching again is not available. To reduce it, move them out of the body to the enclosing scope, where each is measured, reviewed and tested on its own, and reduce whichever one then reads as the largest.
(anonymous) (cognitive 17) REDACTED:494— (anonymous) has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: boolean chains 5, if/else 5, ternaries 5, loops 2. None of this is in the body itself: all 17 points belong to 31 function items inside it that branch (reset, t, _9, …). Those helpers are already separate functions, so extracting the branching again is not available. To reduce it, move them out of the body to the enclosing scope, where each is measured, reviewed and tested on its own, and reduce whichever one then reads as the largest.
(anonymous) (cognitive 17) REDACTED:3834— (anonymous) has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: boolean chains 5, if/else 5, ternaries 5, loops 2. None of this is in the body itself: all 17 points belong to 31 function items inside it that branch (reset, t, _9, …). Those helpers are already separate functions, so extracting the branching again is not available. To reduce it, move them out of the body to the enclosing scope, where each is measured, reviewed and tested on its own, and reduce whichever one then reads as the largest.
FunctionTooLong: ths.v_cookie akshare/data/ths.js:2— FunctionTooLong — v_cookie runs 797 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 697 over it, 7.97× 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.
FunctionTooLong: ths.v_cookie akshare/stock_feature/ths.js:2— FunctionTooLong — v_cookie runs 797 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 697 over it, 7.97× 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.
FunctionTooLong: outcrypto.encode_param REDACTED:2299— FunctionTooLong — encode_param runs 646 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 546 over it, 6.46× 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.
D4 · Code Duplication· Edited copy of a member (83 corresponding lines) · ×3
Edited copy of a member (83 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_rank_em.py:247— akshare/fund/fund_rank_em.py:247-343 | akshare/fund/fund_rank_em.py:428-520 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 83 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (83 corresponding lines) akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:411— akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:411-509 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:449-558 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 83 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (83 corresponding lines) REDACTED:462— REDACTED:462-560 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:449-558 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 83 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
D4 · Code Duplication· Edited copy of a member (79 corresponding lines) · ×3
Edited copy of a member (79 corresponding lines) akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:449— akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:449-558 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_yjyg_em.py:18-132 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 79 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (79 corresponding lines) akshare/stock_feature/stock_fhps_em.py:16— akshare/stock_feature/stock_fhps_em.py:16-138 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:449-558 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 79 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (79 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:45— akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:45-217 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1224-1321 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 79 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Duplicated block (34 lines × 2) REDACTED:524— REDACTED:524-587 | REDACTED:616-649 — 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 (34 lines × 2) akshare/stock/stock_hot_rank_em.py:14— akshare/stock/stock_hot_rank_em.py:14-47 | akshare/stock/stock_hot_up_em.py:14-47 — 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. 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 (34 lines × 2) REDACTED:36— REDACTED:36-69 | REDACTED:112-145 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. 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. Note first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: the declarations holding them bind `symbol` to `str = "创月新高"` in one and `str = "创月新低"` 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 (30 lines × 3) REDACTED:482— REDACTED:482-511 | akshare/fund/fund_report_cninfo.py:162-191 | akshare/stock/stock_new_cninfo.py:31-60 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `akshare/fund/fund_report_cninfo.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 8 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 298 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. 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 (30 lines × 3) akshare/stock_feature/stock_hot_xq.py:112— akshare/stock_feature/stock_hot_xq.py:112-141 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hot_xq.py:175-204 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hot_xq.py:238-267 — 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. 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 (30 lines × 3) akshare/stock_feature/stock_three_report_em.py:475— akshare/stock_feature/stock_three_report_em.py:475-504 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_three_report_em.py:508-537 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_three_report_em.py:543-572 — 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. 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 (29 lines × 2) REDACTED:498— REDACTED:498-526 | REDACTED:759-787 — 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. The `return` at the foot of the matched lines is the enclosing body's own terminal exit, not an early one: it moves with them unchanged, and each site calls the extracted unit from the position that `return` occupied — no decision has to be handed back and re-acted on.
Duplicated block (29 lines × 2) akshare/request.py:34— akshare/request.py:34-62 | akshare/request.py:89-117 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. 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 (29 lines × 2) REDACTED:174— REDACTED:174-202 | REDACTED:239-267 — 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. The `return` at the foot of the matched lines is the enclosing body's own terminal exit, not an early one: it moves with them unchanged, and each site calls the extracted unit from the position that `return` occupied — no decision has to be handed back and re-acted on.
Duplicated block (24 lines × 2) REDACTED:591— REDACTED:591-614 | akshare/option/cons.py:107-130 — `REDACTED` and `akshare/option/cons.py` are one unit implemented once per sibling directory, so they are most likely parallel implementations of one contract rather than a copy of each other — this scan matched 4 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 66 lines. If both are selected at run time, neither can be retired in favour of the other, and the lines that DIFFER between them are the reason both exist. The move that pays here is to hoist the identical part into a shared location the whole family can reach and give what differs a parameter or a seam, so a change lands once instead of once per sibling; extracting one helper per block leaves every sibling to drift on its own. 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 (24 lines × 2) akshare/futures/futures_zh_sina.py:140— akshare/futures/futures_zh_sina.py:140-163 | akshare/futures_derivative/futures_index_sina.py:23-46 — 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. 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. Note first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: the declarations holding them bind `symbol` to `str = "cffex"` in one and `str = "dce"` 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) akshare/stock_feature/stock_ztb_em.py:358— akshare/stock_feature/stock_ztb_em.py:358-381 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_ztb_em.py:440-463 — 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. 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. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `akshare/stock_feature/stock_ztb_em.py:383` calls `DataFrame` and `akshare/stock_feature/stock_ztb_em.py:464` 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 (22 lines × 3) akshare/fund/fund_etf_sse.py:40— akshare/fund/fund_etf_sse.py:40-63 | REDACTED:27-54 | akshare/fx/fx_c_swap_cm.py:39-60 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere all 3 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 3 times.
Duplicated block (22 lines × 3) akshare/qhkc_web/qhkc_fund.py:97— akshare/qhkc_web/qhkc_fund.py:97-118 | akshare/qhkc_web/qhkc_fund.py:196-217 | akshare/qhkc_web/qhkc_fund.py:295-316 — 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. The `return` at the foot of the matched lines is the enclosing body's own terminal exit, not an early one: it moves with them unchanged, and each site calls the extracted unit from the position that `return` occupied — no decision has to be handed back and re-acted on.
Duplicated block (22 lines × 3) akshare/utils/demjson.py:330— akshare/utils/demjson.py:330-351 | akshare/utils/demjson.py:418-439 | akshare/utils/demjson.py:549-570 — all 3 copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from every one of those sites — resolving only two of them leaves the rest to drift apart the first time one is edited.
Duplicated block (21 lines × 8) akshare/bond/bond_convert.py:239— akshare/bond/bond_convert.py:239-266 | REDACTED:134-174 | REDACTED:2749-2786 | akshare/economic/macro_china_hk.py:40-63 | akshare/economic/macro_japan.py:40-63 | REDACTED:29-55 | akshare/index/index_research_fund_sw.py:36-56 | REDACTED:216-236 — there are 8 copies across 7 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 8 sites; resolving a subset leaves the remainder to drift apart. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `akshare/bond/bond_convert.py:239` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately.
Duplicated block (21 lines × 8) REDACTED:157— REDACTED:157-180 | REDACTED:202-231 | REDACTED:275-295 | akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:221-243 | akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:258-285 | akshare/index/index_zh_em.py:134-161 | akshare/index/index_zh_em.py:230-251 | akshare/index/index_zh_em.py:304-331 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 8 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 170 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (21 lines × 8) REDACTED:31— REDACTED:31-51 | akshare/stock/stock_cg_equity_mortgage.py:64-92 | akshare/stock/stock_hold_control_cninfo.py:76-100 | akshare/stock/stock_hold_control_cninfo.py:147-187 | akshare/stock/stock_hold_control_cninfo.py:240-268 | akshare/stock/stock_hold_num_cninfo.py:64-90 | akshare/stock/stock_new_cninfo.py:109-145 | REDACTED:57-82 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `akshare/stock/stock_cg_equity_mortgage.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 4 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 120 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. 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 `date` to `str = "202312"` in one and `str = "20210930"` 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. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `akshare/stock/stock_hold_control_cninfo.py:188` calls `to_datetime` and `REDACTED:52` 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 (20 lines × 3) akshare/fx/fx_c_swap_cm.py:41— akshare/fx/fx_c_swap_cm.py:41-62 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_concept_futu.py:142-167 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_margin_sse.py:46-65 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere all 3 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 3 times. The `return` at the foot of the matched lines is the enclosing body's own terminal exit, not an early one: it moves with them unchanged, and each site calls the extracted unit from the position that `return` occupied — no decision has to be handed back and re-acted on. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `akshare/stock_feature/stock_concept_futu.py:140` calls `concat` and `akshare/stock_feature/stock_margin_sse.py:45` 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 (20 lines × 3) akshare/stock_feature/stock_lh_yybpm.py:20— akshare/stock_feature/stock_lh_yybpm.py:20-39 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lh_yybpm.py:43-62 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lh_yybpm.py:66-85 — 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. 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 (20 lines × 3) akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_sina.py:92— akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_sina.py:92-111 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_sina.py:129-148 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_sina.py:167-186 — 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. 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 (17 lines × 10) REDACTED:65— REDACTED:65-87 | REDACTED:261-283 | REDACTED:315-347 | REDACTED:386-406 | REDACTED:497-525 | REDACTED:551-569 | REDACTED:598-618 | REDACTED:654-670 | REDACTED:758-786 | REDACTED:816-834 — all 10 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 (17 lines × 10) akshare/interest_rate/interbank_rate_em.py:106— akshare/interest_rate/interbank_rate_em.py:106-126 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_fhps_em.py:208-232 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gpzy_em.py:49-73 | REDACTED:418-434 | REDACTED:527-543 | REDACTED:634-650 | REDACTED:742-758 | REDACTED:887-919 | REDACTED:955-987 | REDACTED:1023-1055 — before extracting anything, compare `akshare/interest_rate/interbank_rate_em.py` and `akshare/stock_feature/stock_gpzy_em.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 7 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 162 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 `akshare/stock_feature/stock_fhps_em.py:208` 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 (17 lines × 10) REDACTED:63— REDACTED:63-79 | REDACTED:139-155 | REDACTED:204-220 | REDACTED:265-281 | REDACTED:326-342 | REDACTED:418-434 | REDACTED:522-538 | REDACTED:623-639 | REDACTED:711-727 | REDACTED:799-815 — all 10 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 (12 lines × 4) akshare/economic/macro_other.py:32— akshare/economic/macro_other.py:32-44 | akshare/reits/reits_basic.py:196-207 | akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:334-346 | REDACTED:382-395 — before extracting anything, compare `akshare/economic/macro_other.py` and `akshare/reits/reits_basic.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 3 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 61 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. 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 `akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:334` 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 (12 lines × 4) akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:25— akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:25-36 | akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:113-124 | akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:211-222 | akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:298-309 — 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 `akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:25` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
Duplicated block (12 lines × 4) REDACTED:168— REDACTED:168-179 | REDACTED:150-161 | REDACTED:191-202 | REDACTED:222-233 — 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.
Duplicated block (12 lines × 3) akshare/futures/futures_comm_qihuo.py:47— akshare/futures/futures_comm_qihuo.py:47-58 | akshare/futures/futures_comm_qihuo.py:64-75 | akshare/futures/futures_comm_qihuo.py:81-92 — 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 (12 lines × 3) akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_ths.py:37— akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_ths.py:37-48 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_ths.py:110-121 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_ths.py:148-159 — 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 `akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_ths.py:37` 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 (12 lines × 3) akshare/movie/artist_yien.py:51— akshare/movie/artist_yien.py:51-62 | akshare/movie/movie_yien.py:66-77 | akshare/movie/video_yien.py:51-62 — 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 all 3 call sites, so a change lands once. 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 (8 lines × 3) REDACTED:152— REDACTED:152-159 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_sina.py:543-553 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_sina.py:619-630 — 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.
Duplicated block (8 lines × 3) REDACTED:205— REDACTED:205-212 | REDACTED:225-232 | REDACTED:254-261 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `REDACTED` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 15 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 166 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (8 lines × 3) akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_sina.py:574— akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_sina.py:574-581 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_sina.py:647-654 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_sina.py:706-713 — all 3 copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from every one of those sites — resolving only two of them leaves the rest to drift apart the first time one is edited. Note first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: the declarations holding them bind `symbol` to `str = "600000"` in one and `str = "600004"` 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. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_sina.py:573` calls `set_option` and `akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_sina.py:645` does not — after which the two agree again for 4 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
Duplicated block (7 lines × 4) akshare/option/option_lhb_em.py:94— akshare/option/option_lhb_em.py:94-100 | akshare/option/option_lhb_em.py:149-155 | akshare/option/option_lhb_em.py:204-210 | akshare/option/option_lhb_em.py:247-253 — 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. The `return` at the foot of the matched lines is the enclosing body's own terminal exit, not an early one: it moves with them unchanged, and each site calls the extracted unit from the position that `return` occupied — no decision has to be handed back and re-acted on.
Duplicated block (7 lines × 4) akshare/qhkc_web/qhkc_fund.py:104— akshare/qhkc_web/qhkc_fund.py:104-110 | akshare/qhkc_web/qhkc_fund.py:203-209 | akshare/qhkc_web/qhkc_fund.py:302-308 | akshare/qhkc_web/qhkc_fund.py:398-404 — 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. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `akshare/qhkc_web/qhkc_fund.py:111` calls `DataFrame` and `akshare/qhkc_web/qhkc_fund.py:405` 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 (7 lines × 4) akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_ths.py:36— akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_ths.py:36-42 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_ths.py:75-81 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_ths.py:109-115 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_ths.py:147-153 — 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.
Duplicated block (6 lines × 4) akshare/bond/bond_convert.py:114— akshare/bond/bond_convert.py:114-119 | akshare/qdii/qdii_jsl.py:31-75 | akshare/qdii/qdii_jsl.py:103-147 | akshare/qdii/qdii_jsl.py:175-218 — 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 `akshare/bond/bond_convert.py:114` 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. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `akshare/qdii/qdii_jsl.py:77` calls `to_datetime` and `akshare/qdii/qdii_jsl.py:220` 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 (6 lines × 4) REDACTED:676— REDACTED:676-681 | REDACTED:699-704 | REDACTED:706-711 | REDACTED:713-718 — 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.
Duplicated block (6 lines × 4) REDACTED:225— REDACTED:225-230 | REDACTED:254-259 | REDACTED:186-193 | REDACTED:217-224 — 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 `REDACTED:186` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 9) REDACTED:207— REDACTED:207-219 | akshare/economic/macro_other.py:72-78 | REDACTED:83-90 | akshare/rate/repo_rate.py:59-63 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:28-43 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:240-252 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:447-459 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_restricted_em.py:38-53 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_restricted_em.py:120-134 — there are 9 copies across 6 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 9 sites; resolving a subset leaves the remainder to drift apart. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_restricted_em.py:38` 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 first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: the declarations holding them bind `end_date` to `str = "20231204"` in one and `str = "20221017"` 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. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `REDACTED:205` calls `bond_china_close_return_map` and `akshare/economic/macro_other.py:69` 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 (5 lines × 9) REDACTED:78— REDACTED:78-82 | REDACTED:186-192 | akshare/futures/futures_comm_qihuo.py:128-132 | REDACTED:64-68 | REDACTED:102-107 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:87-97 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:190-200 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:383-387 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_qsjy_em.py:71-77 — there are 9 copies across 7 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 9 sites; resolving a subset leaves the remainder to drift apart. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `REDACTED:78` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 9) REDACTED:3257— REDACTED:3257-3261 | REDACTED:3403-3407 | REDACTED:3437-3441 | REDACTED:3471-3475 | REDACTED:3548-3552 | REDACTED:3582-3586 | REDACTED:3616-3620 | REDACTED:3650-3654 | REDACTED:3685-3689 — all 9 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. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `REDACTED:3657` calls `sort_values` and `REDACTED:3444` 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 × 7) REDACTED:306— REDACTED:306-312 | REDACTED:1124-1132 | REDACTED:82-88 | REDACTED:48-52 | REDACTED:59-65 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_account_em.py:86-90 | REDACTED:73-79 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `REDACTED` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 4 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 39 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, `REDACTED:304` calls `to_numeric` and `REDACTED:1123` 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 (5 lines × 7) akshare/futures_derivative/futures_hog.py:30— akshare/futures_derivative/futures_hog.py:30-34 | akshare/futures_derivative/futures_hog.py:41-45 | akshare/futures_derivative/futures_hog.py:74-78 | akshare/futures_derivative/futures_hog.py:134-138 | akshare/futures_derivative/futures_hog.py:144-148 | akshare/futures_derivative/futures_hog.py:208-212 | akshare/futures_derivative/futures_hog.py:219-223 — all 7 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. 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. Note first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: the declarations holding them bind `symbol` to `str = "外三元"` in one and `str = "玉米"` 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 (5 lines × 7) akshare/stock_feature/stock_three_report_em.py:52— akshare/stock_feature/stock_three_report_em.py:52-56 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_three_report_em.py:159-163 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_three_report_em.py:208-212 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_three_report_em.py:259-263 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_three_report_em.py:310-314 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_three_report_em.py:361-365 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_three_report_em.py:412-416 — all 7 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 (5 lines × 5) REDACTED:3727— REDACTED:3727-3731 | akshare/fund/fund_em.py:1126-1130 | REDACTED:881-885 | REDACTED:949-953 | REDACTED:1017-1021 — there are 5 copies across 3 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 5 sites; resolving a subset leaves the remainder to drift apart.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 5) REDACTED:1051— REDACTED:1051-1055 | REDACTED:1816-1820 | REDACTED:2091-2095 | REDACTED:41-45 | REDACTED:46-50 — there are 5 copies across 3 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 5 sites; resolving a subset leaves the remainder to drift apart. The `return` at the foot of the matched lines is the enclosing body's own terminal exit, not an early one: it moves with them unchanged, and each site calls the extracted unit from the position that `return` occupied — no decision has to be handed back and re-acted on.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 5) REDACTED:854— REDACTED:854-858 | REDACTED:1011-1015 | REDACTED:1040-1044 | REDACTED:1069-1073 | REDACTED:1098-1102 — there are 5 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 5 sites; resolving a subset leaves the remainder to drift apart.
Duplicated block (13 lines × 3 locations) REDACTED:451— REDACTED:451 · REDACTED:2481 · REDACTED:3800 — all 3 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.
Duplicated block (13 lines × 3 locations) REDACTED:641— REDACTED:641 · REDACTED:2653 · REDACTED:3972 — all 3 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.
Duplicated block (13 lines × 3 locations) REDACTED:696— REDACTED:696 · REDACTED:2702 · REDACTED:4021 — all 3 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.
Duplicated block (11 lines × 2 locations) REDACTED:1841— REDACTED:1841 · REDACTED:2037 — all 2 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.
Duplicated block (11 lines × 2 locations) REDACTED:1931— REDACTED:1931 · REDACTED:1957 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (11 lines × 2 locations) REDACTED:171— REDACTED:171 · REDACTED:2502 — all 2 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.
v_cookie (cyclomatic 118) akshare/stock_feature/ths.js:2— v_cookie has cyclomatic complexity 118 (threshold 15). Most of this is not in the body itself: 9 of the 118 points are its own statements and the rest belongs to 106 function items inside it that branch ((anonymous)::p::v, (anonymous)::g, (anonymous)::U, …). The named helpers are already separate functions; the literals' work cannot be called, reviewed or tested from outside this body. To reduce it, move the named helpers out of the body to the enclosing scope and lift each literal's work into a named function there, so each is measured, reviewed and tested on its own, and reduce whichever one then reads as the largest.
v_cookie (cyclomatic 118) akshare/data/ths.js:2— v_cookie has cyclomatic complexity 118 (threshold 15). Most of this is not in the body itself: 9 of the 118 points are its own statements and the rest belongs to 106 function items inside it that branch ((anonymous)::p::v, (anonymous)::g, (anonymous)::U, …). The named helpers are already separate functions; the literals' work cannot be called, reviewed or tested from outside this body. To reduce it, move the named helpers out of the body to the enclosing scope and lift each literal's work into a named function there, so each is measured, reviewed and tested on its own, and reduce whichever one then reads as the largest.
(anonymous) (cyclomatic 24) REDACTED:266— (anonymous) has cyclomatic complexity 24 (threshold 15). Most of this is not in the body itself: 1 of the 24 points is its own statement and the rest belongs to 31 function items inside it that branch (concat, mixIn, _3, …). The named helpers are already separate functions; the literals' work cannot be called, reviewed or tested from outside this body. To reduce it, move the named helpers out of the body to the enclosing scope and lift each literal's work into a named function there, so each is measured, reviewed and tested on its own, and reduce whichever one then reads as the largest.
(anonymous) (cyclomatic 24) REDACTED:3625— (anonymous) has cyclomatic complexity 24 (threshold 15). Most of this is not in the body itself: 1 of the 24 points is its own statement and the rest belongs to 31 function items inside it that branch (concat, mixIn, _3, …). The named helpers are already separate functions; the literals' work cannot be called, reviewed or tested from outside this body. To reduce it, move the named helpers out of the body to the enclosing scope and lift each literal's work into a named function there, so each is measured, reviewed and tested on its own, and reduce whichever one then reads as the largest.
(anonymous) (cyclomatic 16) REDACTED:494— (anonymous) has cyclomatic complexity 16 (threshold 15). Most of this is not in the body itself: 1 of the 16 points is its own statement and the rest belongs to 31 function items inside it that branch (t, reset, parse, …). Those helpers are already separate functions, so extracting the branching again is not available. To reduce it, move them out of the body to the enclosing scope, where each is measured, reviewed and tested on its own, and reduce whichever one then reads as the largest.
(anonymous) (cyclomatic 16) REDACTED:3834— (anonymous) has cyclomatic complexity 16 (threshold 15). Most of this is not in the body itself: 1 of the 16 points is its own statement and the rest belongs to 31 function items inside it that branch (t, reset, parse, …). Those helpers are already separate functions, so extracting the branching again is not available. To reduce it, move them out of the body to the enclosing scope, where each is measured, reviewed and tested on its own, and reduce whichever one then reads as the largest.
TodoComment REDACTED:11— # 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 REDACTED:11— # 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.
v_cookie (cognitive 134) akshare/stock_feature/ths.js:2— v_cookie has cognitive complexity 134 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 31 (41 pts), boolean chains 34, loops 22 (28 pts), ternaries 11 (15 pts), error handling 13, match/switch 2 (3 pts) (nesting depth added 21). Most of this is not in the body itself: 8 of the 134 points are its own statements and the rest belongs to 106 function items inside it that branch ((anonymous)::p::v, (anonymous)::k, (anonymous)::L, …). The named helpers are already separate functions; the literals' work cannot be called, reviewed or tested from outside this body. To reduce it, move the named helpers out of the body to the enclosing scope and lift each literal's work into a named function there, so each is measured, reviewed and tested on its own, and reduce whichever one then reads as the largest.
v_cookie (cognitive 134) akshare/data/ths.js:2— v_cookie has cognitive complexity 134 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 31 (41 pts), boolean chains 34, loops 22 (28 pts), ternaries 11 (15 pts), error handling 13, match/switch 2 (3 pts) (nesting depth added 21). Most of this is not in the body itself: 8 of the 134 points are its own statements and the rest belongs to 106 function items inside it that branch ((anonymous)::p::v, (anonymous)::k, (anonymous)::L, …). The named helpers are already separate functions; the literals' work cannot be called, reviewed or tested from outside this body. To reduce it, move the named helpers out of the body to the enclosing scope and lift each literal's work into a named function there, so each is measured, reviewed and tested on its own, and reduce whichever one then reads as the largest.
(anonymous) (cognitive 27) REDACTED:266— (anonymous) has cognitive complexity 27 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: loops 9 (12 pts), boolean chains 8, if/else 4, ternaries 2, error handling 1 (nesting depth added 3). None of this is in the body itself: all 27 points belong to 31 function items inside it that branch (concat, _3, mixIn, …). The named helpers are already separate functions; the literals' work cannot be called, reviewed or tested from outside this body. To reduce it, move the named helpers out of the body to the enclosing scope and lift each literal's work into a named function there, so each is measured, reviewed and tested on its own, and reduce whichever one then reads as the largest.
(anonymous) (cognitive 27) REDACTED:3625— (anonymous) has cognitive complexity 27 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: loops 9 (12 pts), boolean chains 8, if/else 4, ternaries 2, error handling 1 (nesting depth added 3). None of this is in the body itself: all 27 points belong to 31 function items inside it that branch (concat, _3, mixIn, …). The named helpers are already separate functions; the literals' work cannot be called, reviewed or tested from outside this body. To reduce it, move the named helpers out of the body to the enclosing scope and lift each literal's work into a named function there, so each is measured, reviewed and tested on its own, and reduce whichever one then reads as the largest.
(anonymous)::_process (cognitive 19) akshare/movie/jm.js:584— (anonymous)::_process has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 3 (8 pts), loops 2 (6 pts), ternaries 1 (3 pts), match/switch 1 (2 pts) (nesting depth added 12). 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.
(anonymous)::(anonymous)::clone (cognitive 17) akshare/movie/jm.js:224— (anonymous)::(anonymous)::clone has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 4 (10 pts), match/switch 1 (3 pts), boolean chains 2, loops 1 (2 pts) (nesting depth added 9). 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.
Base64 (cognitive 19) REDACTED:1— Base64 has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: ternaries 5 (10 pts), boolean chains 5, loops 4 (nesting depth added 5). None of this is in the body itself: all 19 points belong to 4 function items inside it that branch (_utf8_encode, _utf8_decode, encode, …). Those helpers are already separate functions, so extracting the branching again is not available. To reduce it, move them out of the body to the enclosing scope, where each is measured, reviewed and tested on its own, and reduce whichever one then reads as the largest.
Base64 (cognitive 19) akshare/air/crypto.js:1— Base64 has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: ternaries 5 (10 pts), boolean chains 5, loops 4 (nesting depth added 5). None of this is in the body itself: all 19 points belong to 4 function items inside it that branch (_utf8_encode, _utf8_decode, encode, …). Those helpers are already separate functions, so extracting the branching again is not available. To reduce it, move them out of the body to the enclosing scope, where each is measured, reviewed and tested on its own, and reduce whichever one then reads as the largest.
Near-duplicate member pair (45 shared lines) REDACTED:174— REDACTED:174-333 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:303-435 — These two members are variants of one another: 45 of their lines are already reported as duplicated blocks below, spread through both bodies rather than gathered into one. Read them as a single construct written twice. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared pipeline into one implementation the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (sync against async, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves the two bodies in place and the next edit still has to be made twice.
Near-duplicate member pair (45 shared lines) REDACTED:174— REDACTED:174-333 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:439-572 — These two members are variants of one another: 45 of their lines are already reported as duplicated blocks below, spread through both bodies rather than gathered into one. Read them as a single construct written twice. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared pipeline into one implementation the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (sync against async, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves the two bodies in place and the next edit still has to be made twice.
Near-duplicate member pair (39 shared lines) REDACTED:33— REDACTED:33-118 | akshare/stock/stock_ipo_summary_cninfo.py:31-108 — These two members are variants of one another: 39 of their lines are already reported as duplicated blocks below, spread through both bodies rather than gathered into one. Read them as a single construct written twice. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared pipeline into one implementation the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (sync against async, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves the two bodies in place and the next edit still has to be made twice.
Near-duplicate member pair (39 shared lines) REDACTED:353— REDACTED:353-453 | REDACTED:284-365 — These two members are variants of one another: 39 of their lines are already reported as duplicated blocks below, spread through both bodies rather than gathered into one. Read them as a single construct written twice. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared pipeline into one implementation the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (sync against async, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves the two bodies in place and the next edit still has to be made twice.
D4 · Code Duplication· Edited copy of a member (105 corresponding lines) · ×2
Edited copy of a member (105 corresponding lines) akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:449— akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:449-558 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:562-667 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 105 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (105 corresponding lines) akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:449— akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:449-558 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:671-776 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 105 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
D4 · Code Duplication· Edited copy of a member (58 corresponding lines) · ×2
Edited copy of a member (58 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2257— REDACTED:2257-2339 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:449-558 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 58 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (58 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2257— REDACTED:2257-2339 | REDACTED:15-109 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 58 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
D4 · Code Duplication· Edited copy of a member (9 corresponding lines) · ×2
Edited copy of a member (9 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_etf_ths.py:16— akshare/fund/fund_etf_ths.py:16-107 | akshare/stock/stock_new_cninfo.py:77-162 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 9 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Edited copy of a member (9 corresponding lines) akshare/option/option_current_szse.py:15— akshare/option/option_current_szse.py:15-95 | akshare/stock/stock_dividend_cninfo.py:31-108 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 9 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
D4 · Code Duplication· Members sharing a duplicated core (9 members, 50+ identical tokens) · ×2
Members sharing a duplicated core (9 members, 50+ identical tokens) REDACTED:15— REDACTED:15-142 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_three_report_em.py:36-81 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_three_report_em.py:85-139 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_three_report_em.py:143-188 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_three_report_em.py:192-237 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_three_report_em.py:243-288 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_three_report_em.py:294-339 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_three_report_em.py:345-390 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_three_report_em.py:396-441 — These 9 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 9 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 9 times.
Members sharing a duplicated core (9 members, 50+ identical tokens) REDACTED:40— REDACTED:40-68 | REDACTED:236-270 | REDACTED:274-305 | REDACTED:39-65 | REDACTED:223-271 | REDACTED:275-328 | REDACTED:332-382 | REDACTED:42-134 | REDACTED:350-418 — These 9 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 9 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 9 times.
Duplicated block (65 lines × 2) REDACTED:875— REDACTED:875-939 | REDACTED:969-1033 — 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 (65 lines × 2) REDACTED:160— REDACTED:160-224 | REDACTED:148-212 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `REDACTED` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 7 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 178 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. 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. Note first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: the declarations holding them bind `end_date` to `str = "20250228"` in one and `str = "20240108"` 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 (57 lines × 2) akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:591— akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:591-647 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:650-706 — 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 `akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:591` 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 (57 lines × 2) akshare/stock_feature/stock_margin_sse.py:71— akshare/stock_feature/stock_margin_sse.py:71-127 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_margin_sse.py:138-196 — 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. 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 (37–38 lines × 3) REDACTED:16— REDACTED:16-53 | REDACTED:57-94 | REDACTED:98-134 — 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. 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 (37–38 lines × 3) akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:296— akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:296-332 | akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:403-439 | akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:485-522 — 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. 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. Note first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: the declarations holding them bind `symbol` to `str = "近三月"` in one and `str = "近3日"` 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 (33–37 lines × 2) akshare/bond/bond_gb_sina.py:14— akshare/bond/bond_gb_sina.py:14-46 | akshare/bond/bond_gb_sina.py:55-91 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. 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. Note first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: the declarations holding them bind `symbol` to `str = "中国10年期国债"` in one and `str = "美国10年期国债"` 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 (33–37 lines × 2) REDACTED:539— REDACTED:539-571 | REDACTED:70-106 — 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 `REDACTED:70` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. 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. 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 (37 lines × 2) REDACTED:204— REDACTED:204-240 | REDACTED:310-346 — 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. The `return` at the foot of the matched lines is the enclosing body's own terminal exit, not an early one: it moves with them unchanged, and each site calls the extracted unit from the position that `return` occupied — no decision has to be handed back and re-acted on.
Duplicated block (37 lines × 2) akshare/stock_feature/stock_hk_valuation_baidu.py:17— akshare/stock_feature/stock_hk_valuation_baidu.py:17-53 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_zh_valuation_baidu.py:16-52 — 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. 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. Note first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: the declarations holding them bind `symbol` to `str = "06969"` in one and `str = "002044"` 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 (34–35 lines × 3) REDACTED:90— REDACTED:90-123 | REDACTED:188-222 | REDACTED:294-328 — 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 (34–35 lines × 3) REDACTED:441— REDACTED:441-475 | REDACTED:550-583 | REDACTED:657-691 — 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 `REDACTED:441` 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 (33 lines × 3) akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:92— akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:92-124 | akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:190-222 | akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:277-309 — 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 `akshare/fund/fund_rating.py: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. 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. Note first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: the declarations holding them bind `date` to `str = "20230630"` in one and `str = "20230331"` 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 (33 lines × 3) REDACTED:297— REDACTED:297-329 | REDACTED:338-370 | REDACTED:381-413 — 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. 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. Note first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: the declarations holding them bind `symbol` to `str = "ho2303P2350"` in one and `str = "io2202P4350"` 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 (33 lines × 2) akshare/bond/bond_china.py:36— akshare/bond/bond_china.py:36-68 | akshare/fund/fund_manager.py:52-84 — 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 (33 lines × 2) REDACTED:138— REDACTED:138-170 | REDACTED:244-276 — 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. 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 (21–27 lines × 3) REDACTED:1212— REDACTED:1212-1238 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:146-168 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:785-805 — 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. Note first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: the declarations holding them bind `symbol` to `str = "北向资金增持行业板块排行"` in one and `str = "近一月"` 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 (21–27 lines × 3) REDACTED:145— REDACTED:145-171 | REDACTED:254-275 | REDACTED:355-375 — 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 `REDACTED:145` 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 `date` to `str = "20240630"` in one and `str = "20231231"` 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. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `REDACTED:277` calls `to_numeric` and `REDACTED:377` 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 (26 lines × 2) REDACTED:162— REDACTED:162-187 | REDACTED:225-250 — 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) akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_us_em.py:61— akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_us_em.py:61-86 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_us_em.py:129-154 — 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 `akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_us_em.py:129` 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 first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: the declarations holding them bind `symbol` to `str = "综合损益表"` in one and `str = "资产负债表"` 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 (25 lines × 8) akshare/stock/stock_hold_control_cninfo.py:149— akshare/stock/stock_hold_control_cninfo.py:149-188 | akshare/stock/stock_hold_control_cninfo.py:242-269 | akshare/stock/stock_new_cninfo.py:111-148 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_analyst_em.py:136-170 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_analyst_em.py:194-225 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_fhps_em.py:208-235 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_tfp_em.py:46-77 | REDACTED:59-83 — before extracting anything, compare `akshare/stock/stock_hold_control_cninfo.py` and `akshare/stock/stock_new_cninfo.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 7 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 282 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `akshare/stock_feature/stock_fhps_em.py:208` 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. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `akshare/stock_feature/stock_fhps_em.py:237` calls `to_datetime` and `akshare/stock/stock_new_cninfo.py:150` 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 (25 lines × 8) akshare/stock_feature/stock_three_report_em.py:57— akshare/stock_feature/stock_three_report_em.py:57-81 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_three_report_em.py:115-139 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_three_report_em.py:164-188 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_three_report_em.py:213-237 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_three_report_em.py:264-288 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_three_report_em.py:315-339 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_three_report_em.py:366-390 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_three_report_em.py:417-441 — all 8 copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from every one of those sites — resolving only two of them leaves the rest to drift apart the first time one is edited. 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. Note first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: the declarations holding them bind `symbol` to `str = "SH600519"` in one and `str = "SH600036"` 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 (25 lines × 4) akshare/fund/fund_rank_em.py:111— akshare/fund/fund_rank_em.py:111-135 | akshare/fund/fund_rank_em.py:302-326 | akshare/fund/fund_rank_em.py:481-505 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_analyst_em.py:52-94 — before extracting anything, compare `akshare/fund/fund_rank_em.py` and `akshare/stock_feature/stock_analyst_em.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 3 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 119 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 `akshare/fund/fund_rank_em.py:111` 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. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `akshare/stock_feature/stock_analyst_em.py:95` calls `to_numeric` and `akshare/fund/fund_rank_em.py:136` 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 (25 lines × 4) REDACTED:82— REDACTED:82-106 | REDACTED:180-204 | REDACTED:286-310 | REDACTED:379-403 — 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.
Duplicated block (25 lines × 3) akshare/stock/stock_hold_control_em.py:15— akshare/stock/stock_hold_control_em.py:15-40 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_jgdy_em.py:17-41 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_jgdy_em.py:109-135 — 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. 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. Note first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: the declarations holding them bind `date` to `str = "20220101"` in one and `str = "20241211"` 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 (25 lines × 3) akshare/stock_feature/stock_concept_futu.py:142— akshare/stock_feature/stock_concept_futu.py:142-166 | REDACTED:418-445 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_zf_pg.py:57-89 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `akshare/stock_feature/stock_zf_pg.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 3 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 96 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `REDACTED:417` calls `reset_index` and `akshare/stock_feature/stock_concept_futu.py:140` 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 (25 lines × 2) REDACTED:46— REDACTED:46-70 | REDACTED:17-41 — 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. 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 (25 lines × 2) REDACTED:68— REDACTED:68-94 | REDACTED:222-246 — 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 `REDACTED:68` 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 (24 lines × 5) akshare/forex/forex_em.py:23— akshare/forex/forex_em.py:23-67 | akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:51-74 | akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:52-105 | akshare/index/index_stock_hk.py:155-206 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1242-1293 — before extracting anything, compare `akshare/forex/forex_em.py` and `akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 3 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 144 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 `akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:51` 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 (24 lines × 5) akshare/index/index_cx.py:406— akshare/index/index_cx.py:406-429 | akshare/index/index_cx.py:438-461 | akshare/index/index_cx.py:470-493 | akshare/index/index_cx.py:502-525 | akshare/index/index_cx.py:534-557 — all 5 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 `akshare/index/index_cx.py:406` 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 (21–22 lines × 2) akshare/stock/stock_hk_hot_rank_em.py:61— akshare/stock/stock_hk_hot_rank_em.py:61-81 | akshare/stock/stock_hot_rank_em.py:68-89 — before extracting anything, compare `akshare/stock/stock_hk_hot_rank_em.py` and `akshare/stock/stock_hot_rank_em.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 4 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 77 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. 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. Note first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: the declarations holding them bind `symbol` to `str = "00700"` in one and `str = "SZ000665"` 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 (21–22 lines × 2) REDACTED:206— REDACTED:206-227 | REDACTED:190-210 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `REDACTED` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 15 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 166 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `REDACTED:206` 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 (21 lines × 5) REDACTED:95— REDACTED:95-115 | REDACTED:118-138 | REDACTED:141-161 | REDACTED:164-184 | REDACTED:187-207 — all 5 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 `REDACTED:95` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. 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 (21 lines × 5) akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:19— akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:19-41 | akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:20-42 | akshare/index/index_zh_em.py:18-39 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:714-735 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1113-1133 — before extracting anything, compare `akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py` and `akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 11 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 270 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. 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 (19 lines × 3) akshare/index/index_sw.py:39— akshare/index/index_sw.py:39-57 | akshare/index/index_sw.py:97-115 | akshare/index/index_sw.py:159-177 — 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. 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 (19 lines × 3) akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_ths.py:61— akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_ths.py:61-79 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_ths.py:95-113 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_ths.py:133-151 — 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 `akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_ths.py:61` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. 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 (17–18 lines × 2) REDACTED:38— REDACTED:38-54 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gpzy_em.py:203-220 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `akshare/stock_feature/stock_gpzy_em.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 7 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 91 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 (17–18 lines × 2) akshare/futures/futures_zh_sina.py:627— akshare/futures/futures_zh_sina.py:627-643 | akshare/futures/futures_zh_sina.py:665-682 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. Note first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: the declarations holding them bind `symbol` to `str = "IF2008"` in one and `str = "RB0"` 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 (17 lines × 9) REDACTED:241— REDACTED:241-257 | REDACTED:295-311 | REDACTED:366-382 | REDACTED:477-493 | REDACTED:531-547 | REDACTED:578-594 | REDACTED:679-695 | REDACTED:738-754 | REDACTED:793-812 — all 9 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. 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 (17 lines × 9) REDACTED:40— REDACTED:40-56 | REDACTED:236-253 | REDACTED:274-291 | REDACTED:39-55 | REDACTED:223-241 | REDACTED:275-293 | REDACTED:332-349 | REDACTED:42-70 | REDACTED:350-376 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `REDACTED` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 7 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 178 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. 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 (17 lines × 4) akshare/bond/bond_buy_back_em.py:21— akshare/bond/bond_buy_back_em.py:21-39 | akshare/bond/bond_buy_back_em.py:93-111 | akshare/stock/stock_gsrl_em.py:22-38 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_restricted_em.py:39-58 — before extracting anything, compare `akshare/bond/bond_buy_back_em.py` and `akshare/stock/stock_gsrl_em.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 3 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 `akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_restricted_em.py:39` 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 (17 lines × 4) akshare/stock_feature/stock_analyst_em.py:172— akshare/stock_feature/stock_analyst_em.py:172-188 | REDACTED:854-875 | REDACTED:923-943 | REDACTED:991-1011 — 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 `akshare/stock_feature/stock_analyst_em.py:172` 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. 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 (16 lines × 5) akshare/bond/bond_buy_back_em.py:58— akshare/bond/bond_buy_back_em.py:58-75 | akshare/bond/bond_buy_back_em.py:130-147 | akshare/stock/stock_hsgt_em.py:53-68 | akshare/stock/stock_hsgt_em.py:115-131 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:822-837 — there are 5 copies across 3 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 5 sites; resolving a subset leaves the remainder to drift apart.
Duplicated block (16 lines × 5) REDACTED:66— REDACTED:66-103 | akshare/futures/futures_zh_sina.py:494-516 | akshare/futures/futures_zh_sina.py:588-603 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:830-846 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:877-893 — there are 5 copies across 3 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 5 sites; resolving a subset leaves the remainder to drift apart. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `akshare/futures/futures_zh_sina.py:494` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately.
Duplicated block (12–14 lines × 2) REDACTED:59— REDACTED:59-70 | REDACTED:71-84 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately.
Duplicated block (12–14 lines × 2) akshare/stock_feature/stock_irm_cninfo.py:117— akshare/stock_feature/stock_irm_cninfo.py:117-128 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_irm_cninfo.py:177-190 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `akshare/stock_feature/stock_irm_cninfo.py:177` 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 (12–13 lines × 2) REDACTED:138— REDACTED:138-149 | REDACTED:186-198 — 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. 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 (12–13 lines × 2) akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_profit_forecast_ths.py:39— akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_profit_forecast_ths.py:39-51 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_profit_forecast_ths.py:72-83 — 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 `akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_profit_forecast_ths.py:39` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately.
Duplicated block (8–10 lines × 3) akshare/fund/fund_em.py:527— akshare/fund/fund_em.py:527-536 | akshare/fund/fund_em.py:554-563 | akshare/fund/fund_em.py:615-622 — 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. 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. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `akshare/fund/fund_em.py:538` calls `DataFrame` and `akshare/fund/fund_em.py:623` does not — after which the two agree again for 2 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
Duplicated block (8–10 lines × 3) REDACTED:152— REDACTED:152-161 | REDACTED:201-209 | REDACTED:154-161 — 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.
Duplicated block (9 lines × 4) REDACTED:3723— REDACTED:3723-3731 | REDACTED:877-885 | REDACTED:945-953 | REDACTED:1013-1021 — 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.
Duplicated block (9 lines × 4) akshare/stock/stock_hold_control_em.py:38— akshare/stock/stock_hold_control_em.py:38-49 | akshare/stock/stock_share_hold.py:53-63 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_yjyg_em.py:290-298 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_restricted_em.py:136-144 — 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 (9 lines × 3) akshare/economic/macro_china_nbs.py:553— akshare/economic/macro_china_nbs.py:553-561 | akshare/economic/macro_china_nbs.py:637-645 | akshare/economic/macro_china_nbs.py:682-690 — 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 (9 lines × 3) akshare/index/index_sw.py:60— akshare/index/index_sw.py:60-68 | akshare/index/index_sw.py:121-129 | akshare/index/index_sw.py:183-191 — 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 `akshare/index/index_sw.py:60` 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 (6–7 lines × 4) REDACTED:274— REDACTED:274-280 | REDACTED:352-357 | REDACTED:452-457 | REDACTED:527-532 — 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 `REDACTED:274` 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 (6–7 lines × 4) REDACTED:46— REDACTED:46-51 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:147-153 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:535-541 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:54-60 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 18 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 244 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:54` 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 (7 lines × 3) REDACTED:183— REDACTED:183-189 | REDACTED:330-336 | REDACTED:174-180 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `REDACTED` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 15 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 166 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (7 lines × 3) akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_sina.py:596— akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_sina.py:596-602 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_sina.py:666-672 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_sina.py:736-742 — 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. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_sina.py:743` calls `fillna` and `akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_sina.py:603` 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 (6 lines × 5) REDACTED:129— REDACTED:129-136 | REDACTED:1409-1418 | REDACTED:1502-1507 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:844-850 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:891-897 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `REDACTED` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 9 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 `REDACTED:129` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately.
Duplicated block (6 lines × 5) REDACTED:3514— REDACTED:3514-3522 | REDACTED:188-193 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:103-115 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:206-218 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_qsjy_em.py:84-91 — there are 5 copies across 4 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 5 sites; resolving a subset leaves the remainder to drift apart. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `REDACTED:3514` 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. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `akshare/stock_feature/stock_qsjy_em.py:84` calls `to_numeric` and `REDACTED:188` 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 × 14) REDACTED:339— REDACTED:339-344 | akshare/interest_rate/interbank_rate_em.py:102-118 | akshare/stock/stock_us_pink.py:46-50 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_fhps_em.py:50-55 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_fhps_em.py:172-177 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdhs.py:64-86 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdhs.py:164-188 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdzjc_em.py:53-59 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gpzy_em.py:46-60 | REDACTED:383-388 | REDACTED:478-483 | REDACTED:586-590 | REDACTED:694-698 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_zf_pg.py:132-137 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `akshare/interest_rate/interbank_rate_em.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 4 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 61 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. 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 `REDACTED:339` 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 × 14) REDACTED:1280— REDACTED:1280-1284 | REDACTED:1326-1330 | REDACTED:1373-1377 | REDACTED:1428-1432 | REDACTED:1483-1487 | REDACTED:1538-1542 | REDACTED:1593-1597 | REDACTED:1648-1652 | REDACTED:1703-1707 | REDACTED:1758-1762 | REDACTED:1871-1875 | REDACTED:1926-1930 | REDACTED:1981-1985 | REDACTED:2036-2040 — all 14 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. The `return` at the foot of the matched lines is the enclosing body's own terminal exit, not an early one: it moves with them unchanged, and each site calls the extracted unit from the position that `return` occupied — no decision has to be handed back and re-acted on.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 11) REDACTED:180— REDACTED:180-184 | REDACTED:231-235 | akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:384-388 | akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:426-430 | akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:243-247 | akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:285-289 | akshare/futures/futures_hist_em.py:170-174 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1095-1099 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1137-1141 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1518-1522 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1560-1564 — there are 11 copies across 5 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 11 sites; resolving a subset leaves the remainder to drift apart. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `REDACTED:180` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 11) REDACTED:3514— REDACTED:3514-3523 | REDACTED:188-194 | akshare/hf/hf_sp500.py:27-31 | akshare/option/option_commodity_sina.py:158-162 | REDACTED:70-74 | akshare/stock/stock_repurchase_em.py:117-121 | REDACTED:116-120 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:103-116 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:206-219 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:386-390 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_qsjy_em.py:84-92 — there are 11 copies across 9 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 11 sites; resolving a subset leaves the remainder to drift apart. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `REDACTED:3514` 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. The `return` at the foot of the matched lines is the enclosing body's own terminal exit, not an early one: it moves with them unchanged, and each site calls the extracted unit from the position that `return` occupied — no decision has to be handed back and re-acted on. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `akshare/stock/stock_repurchase_em.py:115` calls `to_numeric` and `REDACTED:3514` 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 (4–5 lines × 3) REDACTED:259— REDACTED:259-263 | REDACTED:236-240 | REDACTED:205-208 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `REDACTED` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 15 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 166 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `REDACTED:259` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately.
Duplicated block (4–5 lines × 3) REDACTED:295— REDACTED:295-299 | REDACTED:265-269 | REDACTED:236-239 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `REDACTED` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 15 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 166 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `REDACTED:295` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately.
Duplicated block (43 lines × 2 locations) REDACTED:3539— REDACTED:3539 · REDACTED:4858 — all 2 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.
Duplicated block (43 lines × 2 locations) REDACTED:5590— REDACTED:5590 · REDACTED:5802 — all 2 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.
Duplicated block (20 lines × 2 locations) REDACTED:1719— REDACTED:1719 · REDACTED:1740 — 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 (20 lines × 2 locations) REDACTED:5548— REDACTED:5548 · REDACTED:5762 — all 2 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.
Duplicated block (19 lines × 3 locations) REDACTED:565— REDACTED:565 · REDACTED:2586 · REDACTED:3905 — all 3 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.
Duplicated block (19 lines × 3 locations) REDACTED:1723— REDACTED:1723 · REDACTED:3494 · REDACTED:4813 — all 3 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.
Duplicated block (17 lines × 2 locations) REDACTED:2008— REDACTED:2008 · REDACTED:2134 — all 2 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.
Duplicated block (17 lines × 2 locations) REDACTED:2100— REDACTED:2100 · REDACTED:2214 — all 2 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.
Duplicated block (15 lines × 2 locations) REDACTED:1888— REDACTED:1888 · REDACTED:1980 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (15 lines × 2 locations) REDACTED:1205— REDACTED:1205 · REDACTED:1386 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (14 lines × 3 locations) REDACTED:394— REDACTED:394 · REDACTED:2424 · REDACTED:3743 — all 3 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.
Duplicated block (14 lines × 3 locations) REDACTED:604— REDACTED:604 · REDACTED:2616 · REDACTED:3935 — all 3 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.
Complex function nextState (cyclomatic 11, cognitive 10) REDACTED:5674— nextState has cyclomatic complexity 11 and cognitive complexity 10; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive sits below cyclomatic here, so much of the count is breadth — arms side by side rather than stacked — and splitting per arm would leave a function per arm; group the work between the checks into named steps instead. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
Complex function nextState (cyclomatic 11, cognitive 10) REDACTED:5886— nextState has cyclomatic complexity 11 and cognitive complexity 10; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive sits below cyclomatic here, so much of the count is breadth — arms side by side rather than stacked — and splitting per arm would leave a function per arm; group the work between the checks into named steps instead. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
outcrypto.encode_param (cyclomatic 74) REDACTED:2299— outcrypto.encode_param has cyclomatic complexity 74 (threshold 15). Of this number, 16 points are the body's own statements and 58 belong to 30 function literals inside it that branch. To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function so the top-level body reads as a short sequence of named decisions.
JSON.decode_number (cyclomatic 70) akshare/utils/demjson.py:4075— JSON.decode_number has cyclomatic complexity 70 (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.
(anonymous) (cyclomatic 61) akshare/movie/jm.js:796— (anonymous) has cyclomatic complexity 61 (threshold 15). Most of this is not in the body itself: 1 of the 61 points is its own statement and the rest belongs to 90 function items inside it that branch (reset, _doFinalize, encrypt, …). The named helpers are already separate functions; the literals' work cannot be called, reviewed or tested from outside this body. To reduce it, move the named helpers out of the body to the enclosing scope and lift each literal's work into a named function there, so each is measured, reviewed and tested on its own, and reduce whichever one then reads as the largest.
JSON.encode_composite (cyclomatic 52) akshare/utils/demjson.py:5855— JSON.encode_composite has cyclomatic complexity 52 (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.
jsonlint.main (cyclomatic 52) akshare/utils/demjson.py:6697— jsonlint.main has cyclomatic complexity 52 (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.
JSON.decode_string (cyclomatic 48) akshare/utils/demjson.py:4474— JSON.decode_string has cyclomatic complexity 48 (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.
JSON.decode_composite (cyclomatic 46) akshare/utils/demjson.py:5146— JSON.decode_composite has cyclomatic complexity 46 (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.
json_options.__init__ (cyclomatic 40) akshare/utils/demjson.py:3265— json_options.__init__ has cyclomatic complexity 40 (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.
helpers.auto_detect_encoding (cyclomatic 36) akshare/utils/demjson.py:1270— helpers.auto_detect_encoding has cyclomatic complexity 36 (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.
JSON.encode_string (cyclomatic 35) akshare/utils/demjson.py:4844— JSON.encode_string has cyclomatic complexity 35 (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.
json_options.make_int (cyclomatic 31) akshare/utils/demjson.py:3521— json_options.make_int has cyclomatic complexity 31 (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.
JSON._classify_for_encoding (cyclomatic 30) akshare/utils/demjson.py:5582— JSON._classify_for_encoding has cyclomatic complexity 30 (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.
cot.get_rank_sum (cyclomatic 28) REDACTED:110— cot.get_rank_sum 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.
futures_daily_bar.get_czce_daily (cyclomatic 27) REDACTED:341— futures_daily_bar.get_czce_daily 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.
demjson.determine_float_limits (cyclomatic 27) akshare/utils/demjson.py:79— demjson.determine_float_limits 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.
(anonymous) (cyclomatic 27) REDACTED:19— (anonymous) has cyclomatic complexity 27 (threshold 15). Most of this is not in the body itself: 2 of the 27 points are its own statements and the rest belongs to 36 function items inside it that branch ((anonymous)::extend, (anonymous)::mixIn, concat, …). The named helpers are already separate functions; the literals' work cannot be called, reviewed or tested from outside this body. To reduce it, move the named helpers out of the body to the enclosing scope and lift each literal's work into a named function there, so each is measured, reviewed and tested on its own, and reduce whichever one then reads as the largest.
option_commodity.option_hist_czce (cyclomatic 26) REDACTED:187— option_commodity.option_hist_czce has cyclomatic complexity 26 (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.
receipt.get_receipt (cyclomatic 24) REDACTED:571— receipt.get_receipt has cyclomatic complexity 24 (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.
macro_china_nbs._build_nbs_dts (cyclomatic 23) akshare/economic/macro_china_nbs.py:385— macro_china_nbs._build_nbs_dts 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.
JSON.encode_number (cyclomatic 23) akshare/utils/demjson.py:4406— JSON.encode_number 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.
_doProcessBlock (cyclomatic 21) REDACTED:2978— _doProcessBlock has cyclomatic complexity 21 (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.
air_hebei.air_quality_hebei (cyclomatic 20) REDACTED:23— air_hebei.air_quality_hebei has cyclomatic complexity 20 (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.
receipt.get_czce_receipt_3 (cyclomatic 20) REDACTED:386— receipt.get_czce_receipt_3 has cyclomatic complexity 20 (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.
other_taptap.game_hot_rank_taptap (cyclomatic 20) akshare/other/other_taptap.py:72— other_taptap.game_hot_rank_taptap has cyclomatic complexity 20 (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.
JSONError.pretty_description (cyclomatic 20) akshare/utils/demjson.py:2282— JSONError.pretty_description has cyclomatic complexity 20 (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.
JSON._do_encode (cyclomatic 20) akshare/utils/demjson.py:5743— JSON._do_encode has cyclomatic complexity 20 (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.
utf32.decode (cyclomatic 19) akshare/utils/demjson.py:943— utf32.decode has cyclomatic complexity 19 (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.
fortune_hurun.hurun_rank (cyclomatic 18) akshare/fortune/fortune_hurun.py:16— fortune_hurun.hurun_rank 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.
fund_em.fund_open_fund_info_em (cyclomatic 18) akshare/fund/fund_em.py:452— fund_em.fund_open_fund_info_em 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.
check_punctuation.warnings_for (cyclomatic 18) scripts/check_punctuation.py:326— check_punctuation.warnings_for 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.
webDES (cyclomatic 18) akshare/movie/jm.js:2161— webDES has cyclomatic complexity 18 (threshold 15). Most of this is not in the body itself: 1 of the 18 points is its own statement and the rest belongs to 11 function items inside it that branch (a function literal at line 2174, _0x9843d3, _0x2a2af9, …). The named helpers are already separate functions; the literals' work cannot be called, reviewed or tested from outside this body. To reduce it, move the named helpers out of the body to the enclosing scope and lift each literal's work into a named function there, so each is measured, reviewed and tested on its own, and reduce whichever one then reads as the largest.
(anonymous) (cyclomatic 18) REDACTED:3272— (anonymous) has cyclomatic complexity 18 (threshold 15). Most of this is not in the body itself: 1 of the 18 points is its own statement and the rest belongs to 34 function items inside it that branch (reset, (anonymous)::xorBlock, parse, …). The named helpers are already separate functions; the literals' work cannot be called, reviewed or tested from outside this body. To reduce it, move the named helpers out of the body to the enclosing scope and lift each literal's work into a named function there, so each is measured, reviewed and tested on its own, and reduce whichever one then reads as the largest.
registry._score (cyclomatic 17) akshare/registry.py:75— registry._score 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.
stock_finance_ths.stock_financial_abstract_new_ths (cyclomatic 17) akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_ths.py:194— stock_finance_ths.stock_financial_abstract_new_ths 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. This shape REPEATS in the file: 3 other methods here (stock_finance_ths.stock_financial_debt_new_ths, stock_finance_ths.stock_financial_benefit_new_ths, stock_finance_ths.stock_financial_cash_new_ths) have the same decision points, in the same order, at the same nesting depths — so this is one pattern written 4 times rather than 4 independent problems. Splitting this body alone leaves the other 3 exactly as they are. Where these are variations on one operation, the change that clears all 4 is the shared one: lift the common shape into a single routine the variants call, parameterised by whatever genuinely differs between them, and keep in each method only the part that is not shared.
stock_finance_ths.stock_financial_debt_new_ths (cyclomatic 17) akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_ths.py:291— stock_finance_ths.stock_financial_debt_new_ths 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. This shape REPEATS in the file: 3 other methods here (stock_finance_ths.stock_financial_abstract_new_ths, stock_finance_ths.stock_financial_benefit_new_ths, stock_finance_ths.stock_financial_cash_new_ths) have the same decision points, in the same order, at the same nesting depths — so this is one pattern written 4 times rather than 4 independent problems. Splitting this body alone leaves the other 3 exactly as they are. Where these are variations on one operation, the change that clears all 4 is the shared one: lift the common shape into a single routine the variants call, parameterised by whatever genuinely differs between them, and keep in each method only the part that is not shared.
stock_finance_ths.stock_financial_benefit_new_ths (cyclomatic 17) akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_ths.py:388— stock_finance_ths.stock_financial_benefit_new_ths 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. This shape REPEATS in the file: 3 other methods here (stock_finance_ths.stock_financial_abstract_new_ths, stock_finance_ths.stock_financial_debt_new_ths, stock_finance_ths.stock_financial_cash_new_ths) have the same decision points, in the same order, at the same nesting depths — so this is one pattern written 4 times rather than 4 independent problems. Splitting this body alone leaves the other 3 exactly as they are. Where these are variations on one operation, the change that clears all 4 is the shared one: lift the common shape into a single routine the variants call, parameterised by whatever genuinely differs between them, and keep in each method only the part that is not shared.
stock_finance_ths.stock_financial_cash_new_ths (cyclomatic 17) akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_ths.py:485— stock_finance_ths.stock_financial_cash_new_ths 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. This shape REPEATS in the file: 3 other methods here (stock_finance_ths.stock_financial_abstract_new_ths, stock_finance_ths.stock_financial_debt_new_ths, stock_finance_ths.stock_financial_benefit_new_ths) have the same decision points, in the same order, at the same nesting depths — so this is one pattern written 4 times rather than 4 independent problems. Splitting this body alone leaves the other 3 exactly as they are. Where these are variations on one operation, the change that clears all 4 is the shared one: lift the common shape into a single routine the variants call, parameterised by whatever genuinely differs between them, and keep in each method only the part that is not shared.
JSON.decode_identifier (cyclomatic 17) akshare/utils/demjson.py:4989— JSON.decode_identifier has cyclomatic complexity 17 (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.
jm._0x2246 (cyclomatic 17) akshare/movie/jm.js:12— jm._0x2246 has cyclomatic complexity 17 (threshold 15). Most of this is not in the body itself: 4 of the 17 points are its own statements and the rest belongs to 3 function items inside it that branch (a function literal at line 16, _0x9bf5c5, a function literal at line 19). The named helpers are already separate functions; the literals' work cannot be called, reviewed or tested from outside this body. To reduce it, move the named helpers out of the body to the enclosing scope and lift each literal's work into a named function there, so each is measured, reviewed and tested on its own, and reduce whichever one then reads as the largest. This is NOT this file's highest cyclomatic complexity: jm.webDES (cyclomatic 18) is higher and carries no row of its own — it was excluded as a flat dispatcher (a long switch/match over independent cases: many branches, almost no nesting), which this dimension does not treat as a refactor obligation. It is named here so the ranking you see in this file is not mistaken for the whole of it; the excluded method is counted neither in this dimension's figures nor in its score.
(anonymous)::(anonymous)::clone (cyclomatic 17) akshare/movie/jm.js:224— (anonymous)::(anonymous)::clone has cyclomatic complexity 17 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function so the top-level body reads as a short sequence of named decisions.
macro_china_nbs.macro_china_nbs_region (cyclomatic 16) akshare/economic/macro_china_nbs.py:566— macro_china_nbs.macro_china_nbs_region 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.
fund_fee_em.fund_fee_em (cyclomatic 16) akshare/fund/fund_fee_em.py:17— fund_fee_em.fund_fee_em 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.
fund_init_ths.fund_new_found_ths (cyclomatic 16) akshare/fund/fund_init_ths.py:15— fund_init_ths.fund_new_found_ths 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.
futures_warehouse_receipt.__futures_shfe_warehouse_receipt_html (cyclomatic 16) REDACTED:115— futures_warehouse_receipt.__futures_shfe_warehouse_receipt_html 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.
JSON.encode (cyclomatic 16) akshare/utils/demjson.py:5637— JSON.encode 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.
jsonlint._lintcheck (cyclomatic 16) akshare/utils/demjson.py:6629— jsonlint._lintcheck 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.
demjson.decode (cyclomatic 16) akshare/utils/demjson.py:6182— demjson.decode 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.
check_punctuation.main (cyclomatic 16) scripts/check_punctuation.py:419— check_punctuation.main 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.
JSON.decode_composite (cognitive 134) akshare/utils/demjson.py:5146— JSON.decode_composite has cognitive complexity 134 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 48 (118 pts), error handling 4 (12 pts), boolean chains 2, loops 1 (2 pts) (nesting depth added 79). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: this score is depth rather than breadth — most of its points come from checks stacked inside one another, so the work sits several levels in. Invert each enclosing check into an early exit (a return, or the language's equivalent) so the happy path stays at one level, and where a level cannot be exited early, lift the block it encloses into its own named function. This file is where this pass's cognitive complexity CONCENTRATES: akshare/utils/demjson.py holds 23 of the 101 methods over the threshold — including the worst — and 764 of the 1800 points over it (42%), 6.4× the next-largest file (akshare/data/ths.js at 119). No single row can show this, because each is measured only against the threshold: reducing this one file moves this dimension further than any other file in the repository.
JSON.decode_number (cognitive 115) akshare/utils/demjson.py:4075— JSON.decode_number has cognitive complexity 115 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 37 (77 pts), boolean chains 18, error handling 5 (17 pts), loops 2 (3 pts) (nesting depth added 53). 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. This file is where this pass's cognitive complexity CONCENTRATES: akshare/utils/demjson.py holds 23 of the 101 methods over the threshold — including the worst — and 764 of the 1800 points over it (42%), 6.4× the next-largest file (akshare/data/ths.js at 119). No single row can show this, because each is measured only against the threshold: reducing this one file moves this dimension further than any other file in the repository.
JSON.encode_composite (cognitive 115) akshare/utils/demjson.py:5855— JSON.encode_composite has cognitive complexity 115 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 38 (86 pts), error handling 7 (20 pts), boolean chains 5, loops 2 (4 pts) (nesting depth added 63). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: this score is depth rather than breadth — most of its points come from checks stacked inside one another, so the work sits several levels in. Invert each enclosing check into an early exit (a return, or the language's equivalent) so the happy path stays at one level, and where a level cannot be exited early, lift the block it encloses into its own named function. This file is where this pass's cognitive complexity CONCENTRATES: akshare/utils/demjson.py holds 23 of the 101 methods over the threshold — including the worst — and 764 of the 1800 points over it (42%), 6.4× the next-largest file (akshare/data/ths.js at 119). No single row can show this, because each is measured only against the threshold: reducing this one file moves this dimension further than any other file in the repository.
JSON.decode_string (cognitive 114) akshare/utils/demjson.py:4474— JSON.decode_string has cognitive complexity 114 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 41 (97 pts), error handling 4 (13 pts), boolean chains 3, loops 1 (nesting depth added 65). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: this score is depth rather than breadth — most of its points come from checks stacked inside one another, so the work sits several levels in. Invert each enclosing check into an early exit (a return, or the language's equivalent) so the happy path stays at one level, and where a level cannot be exited early, lift the block it encloses into its own named function. This file is where this pass's cognitive complexity CONCENTRATES: akshare/utils/demjson.py holds 23 of the 101 methods over the threshold — including the worst — and 764 of the 1800 points over it (42%), 6.4× the next-largest file (akshare/data/ths.js at 119). No single row can show this, because each is measured only against the threshold: reducing this one file moves this dimension further than any other file in the repository.
encode_param (cognitive 91) REDACTED:2299— encode_param has cognitive complexity 91 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: loops 30 (38 pts), boolean chains 20, ternaries 12 (17 pts), if/else 13 (15 pts), error handling 1 (nesting depth added 15). Most of this is not in the body itself: 2 of the 91 points are its own statements and the rest belongs to 95 function items inside it that branch ((anonymous)::_5, (anonymous)::concat, (anonymous)::stringify, …). The named helpers are already separate functions; the literals' work cannot be called, reviewed or tested from outside this body. To reduce it, move the named helpers out of the body to the enclosing scope and lift each literal's work into a named function there, so each is measured, reviewed and tested on its own, and reduce whichever one then reads as the largest.
(anonymous) (cognitive 85) akshare/movie/jm.js:796— (anonymous) has cognitive complexity 85 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 28 (33 pts), ternaries 9 (17 pts), loops 8 (16 pts), boolean chains 11, match/switch 3 (8 pts) (nesting depth added 26). None of this is in the body itself: all 85 points belong to 90 function items inside it that branch (parse, reset, _doFinalize, …). The named helpers are already separate functions; the literals' work cannot be called, reviewed or tested from outside this body. To reduce it, move the named helpers out of the body to the enclosing scope and lift each literal's work into a named function there, so each is measured, reviewed and tested on its own, and reduce whichever one then reads as the largest.
JSON.encode_string (cognitive 70) akshare/utils/demjson.py:4844— JSON.encode_string has cognitive complexity 70 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 25 (54 pts), boolean chains 8, loops 3 (8 pts) (nesting depth added 34). 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. This file is where this pass's cognitive complexity CONCENTRATES: akshare/utils/demjson.py holds 23 of the 101 methods over the threshold — including the worst — and 764 of the 1800 points over it (42%), 6.4× the next-largest file (akshare/data/ths.js at 119). No single row can show this, because each is measured only against the threshold: reducing this one file moves this dimension further than any other file in the repository.
json_options.__init__ (cognitive 65) akshare/utils/demjson.py:3265— json_options.__init__ has cognitive complexity 65 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 23 (56 pts), boolean chains 5, loops 2 (4 pts) (nesting depth added 35). 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. This file is where this pass's cognitive complexity CONCENTRATES: akshare/utils/demjson.py holds 23 of the 101 methods over the threshold — including the worst — and 764 of the 1800 points over it (42%), 6.4× the next-largest file (akshare/data/ths.js at 119). No single row can show this, because each is measured only against the threshold: reducing this one file moves this dimension further than any other file in the repository.
jsonlint.main (cognitive 62) akshare/utils/demjson.py:6697— jsonlint.main has cognitive complexity 62 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 19 (40 pts), error handling 6 (16 pts), loops 4 (6 pts) (nesting depth added 33). 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. This file is where this pass's cognitive complexity CONCENTRATES: akshare/utils/demjson.py holds 23 of the 101 methods over the threshold — including the worst — and 764 of the 1800 points over it (42%), 6.4× the next-largest file (akshare/data/ths.js at 119). No single row can show this, because each is measured only against the threshold: reducing this one file moves this dimension further than any other file in the repository.
json_options.make_int (cognitive 61) akshare/utils/demjson.py:3521— json_options.make_int has cognitive complexity 61 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 23 (49 pts), boolean chains 7, ternaries 1 (3 pts), error handling 1 (2 pts) (nesting depth added 29). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: this score is depth rather than breadth — most of its points come from checks stacked inside one another, so the work sits several levels in. Invert each enclosing check into an early exit (a return, or the language's equivalent) so the happy path stays at one level, and where a level cannot be exited early, lift the block it encloses into its own named function. This file is where this pass's cognitive complexity CONCENTRATES: akshare/utils/demjson.py holds 23 of the 101 methods over the threshold — including the worst — and 764 of the 1800 points over it (42%), 6.4× the next-largest file (akshare/data/ths.js at 119). No single row can show this, because each is measured only against the threshold: reducing this one file moves this dimension further than any other file in the repository.
futures_daily_bar.get_czce_daily (cognitive 59) REDACTED:341— futures_daily_bar.get_czce_daily has cognitive complexity 59 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 17 (40 pts), loops 4 (14 pts), boolean chains 2, error handling 1 (2 pts), ternaries 1 (nesting depth added 34). 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.
cot.get_rank_sum (cognitive 53) REDACTED:110— cot.get_rank_sum has cognitive complexity 53 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 21 (36 pts), loops 4 (10 pts), ternaries 2 (7 pts) (nesting depth added 26). 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.
receipt.get_receipt (cognitive 53) REDACTED:571— receipt.get_receipt has cognitive complexity 53 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 16 (46 pts), loops 2 (4 pts), ternaries 2, boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 32). 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.
demjson.determine_float_limits (cognitive 53) akshare/utils/demjson.py:79— demjson.determine_float_limits has cognitive complexity 53 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 17 (34 pts), loops 5 (8 pts), error handling 2 (6 pts), boolean chains 5 (nesting depth added 24). 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. This file is where this pass's cognitive complexity CONCENTRATES: akshare/utils/demjson.py holds 23 of the 101 methods over the threshold — including the worst — and 764 of the 1800 points over it (42%), 6.4× the next-largest file (akshare/data/ths.js at 119). No single row can show this, because each is measured only against the threshold: reducing this one file moves this dimension further than any other file in the repository.
air_hebei.air_quality_hebei (cognitive 49) REDACTED:23— air_hebei.air_quality_hebei has cognitive complexity 49 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: ternaries 12 (39 pts), loops 4 (7 pts), if/else 2, boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 30). 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.
check_punctuation.warnings_for (cognitive 40) scripts/check_punctuation.py:326— check_punctuation.warnings_for has cognitive complexity 40 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 8 (19 pts), loops 7 (17 pts), boolean chains 2, error handling 1 (2 pts) (nesting depth added 22). 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.
JSONError.pretty_description (cognitive 36) akshare/utils/demjson.py:2282— JSONError.pretty_description has cognitive complexity 36 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 18 (30 pts), boolean chains 3, loops 2 (3 pts) (nesting depth added 13). 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. This file is where this pass's cognitive complexity CONCENTRATES: akshare/utils/demjson.py holds 23 of the 101 methods over the threshold — including the worst — and 764 of the 1800 points over it (42%), 6.4× the next-largest file (akshare/data/ths.js at 119). No single row can show this, because each is measured only against the threshold: reducing this one file moves this dimension further than any other file in the repository.
futures_warehouse_receipt.__futures_shfe_warehouse_receipt_html (cognitive 35) REDACTED:115— futures_warehouse_receipt.__futures_shfe_warehouse_receipt_html has cognitive complexity 35 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (26 pts), loops 3 (6 pts), boolean chains 3 (nesting depth added 20). 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.
_doProcessBlock (cognitive 35) REDACTED:2978— _doProcessBlock has cognitive complexity 35 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: ternaries 18 (31 pts), if/else 2 (3 pts), loops 1 (nesting depth added 14). 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.
utf32.decode (cognitive 34) akshare/utils/demjson.py:943— utf32.decode has cognitive complexity 34 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 14 (22 pts), loops 3 (9 pts), boolean chains 2, ternaries 1 (nesting depth added 14). 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. This file is where this pass's cognitive complexity CONCENTRATES: akshare/utils/demjson.py holds 23 of the 101 methods over the threshold — including the worst — and 764 of the 1800 points over it (42%), 6.4× the next-largest file (akshare/data/ths.js at 119). No single row can show this, because each is measured only against the threshold: reducing this one file moves this dimension further than any other file in the repository.
receipt.get_czce_receipt_3 (cognitive 33) REDACTED:386— receipt.get_czce_receipt_3 has cognitive complexity 33 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: error handling 5 (14 pts), if/else 10 (13 pts), ternaries 5, loops 1 (nesting depth added 12). 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.
(anonymous) (cognitive 33) REDACTED:19— (anonymous) has cognitive complexity 33 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 13 (14 pts), loops 9 (12 pts), boolean chains 5, error handling 1, ternaries 1 (nesting depth added 4). Most of this is not in the body itself: 1 of the 33 points is its own statement and the rest belongs to 36 function items inside it that branch (concat, _process, (anonymous)::mixIn, …). The named helpers are already separate functions; the literals' work cannot be called, reviewed or tested from outside this body. To reduce it, move the named helpers out of the body to the enclosing scope and lift each literal's work into a named function there, so each is measured, reviewed and tested on its own, and reduce whichever one then reads as the largest.
macro_china_nbs._build_nbs_dts (cognitive 31) akshare/economic/macro_china_nbs.py:385— macro_china_nbs._build_nbs_dts has cognitive complexity 31 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 13 (20 pts), boolean chains 7, ternaries 1 (3 pts), loops 1 (nesting depth added 9). 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.
fund_em.fund_open_fund_info_em (cognitive 29) akshare/fund/fund_em.py:452— fund_em.fund_open_fund_info_em has cognitive complexity 29 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 21 (29 pts) (nesting depth added 8). 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.
stock_finance_ths.stock_financial_abstract_new_ths (cognitive 29) akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_ths.py:194— stock_finance_ths.stock_financial_abstract_new_ths has cognitive complexity 29 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 8 (18 pts), loops 6 (11 pts) (nesting depth added 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. This shape REPEATS in the file: 3 other methods here (stock_finance_ths.stock_financial_debt_new_ths, stock_finance_ths.stock_financial_benefit_new_ths, stock_finance_ths.stock_financial_cash_new_ths) have the same decision points, in the same order, at the same nesting depths — so this is one pattern written 4 times rather than 4 independent problems. Splitting this body alone leaves the other 3 exactly as they are. Where these are variations on one operation, the change that clears all 4 is the shared one: lift the common shape into a single routine the variants call, parameterised by whatever genuinely differs between them, and keep in each method only the part that is not shared.
stock_finance_ths.stock_financial_debt_new_ths (cognitive 29) akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_ths.py:291— stock_finance_ths.stock_financial_debt_new_ths has cognitive complexity 29 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 8 (18 pts), loops 6 (11 pts) (nesting depth added 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. This shape REPEATS in the file: 3 other methods here (stock_finance_ths.stock_financial_abstract_new_ths, stock_finance_ths.stock_financial_benefit_new_ths, stock_finance_ths.stock_financial_cash_new_ths) have the same decision points, in the same order, at the same nesting depths — so this is one pattern written 4 times rather than 4 independent problems. Splitting this body alone leaves the other 3 exactly as they are. Where these are variations on one operation, the change that clears all 4 is the shared one: lift the common shape into a single routine the variants call, parameterised by whatever genuinely differs between them, and keep in each method only the part that is not shared.
stock_finance_ths.stock_financial_benefit_new_ths (cognitive 29) akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_ths.py:388— stock_finance_ths.stock_financial_benefit_new_ths has cognitive complexity 29 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 8 (18 pts), loops 6 (11 pts) (nesting depth added 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. This shape REPEATS in the file: 3 other methods here (stock_finance_ths.stock_financial_abstract_new_ths, stock_finance_ths.stock_financial_debt_new_ths, stock_finance_ths.stock_financial_cash_new_ths) have the same decision points, in the same order, at the same nesting depths — so this is one pattern written 4 times rather than 4 independent problems. Splitting this body alone leaves the other 3 exactly as they are. Where these are variations on one operation, the change that clears all 4 is the shared one: lift the common shape into a single routine the variants call, parameterised by whatever genuinely differs between them, and keep in each method only the part that is not shared.
stock_finance_ths.stock_financial_cash_new_ths (cognitive 29) akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_ths.py:485— stock_finance_ths.stock_financial_cash_new_ths has cognitive complexity 29 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 8 (18 pts), loops 6 (11 pts) (nesting depth added 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. This shape REPEATS in the file: 3 other methods here (stock_finance_ths.stock_financial_abstract_new_ths, stock_finance_ths.stock_financial_debt_new_ths, stock_finance_ths.stock_financial_benefit_new_ths) have the same decision points, in the same order, at the same nesting depths — so this is one pattern written 4 times rather than 4 independent problems. Splitting this body alone leaves the other 3 exactly as they are. Where these are variations on one operation, the change that clears all 4 is the shared one: lift the common shape into a single routine the variants call, parameterised by whatever genuinely differs between them, and keep in each method only the part that is not shared.
_0x2246 (cognitive 29) akshare/movie/jm.js:12— _0x2246 has cognitive complexity 29 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: loops 5 (10 pts), ternaries 4 (10 pts), if/else 4 (5 pts), boolean chains 4 (nesting depth added 12). Most of this is not in the body itself: 5 of the 29 points are its own statements and the rest belongs to 3 function items inside it that branch (a function literal at line 19, a function literal at line 16, _0x9bf5c5). The named helpers are already separate functions; the literals' work cannot be called, reviewed or tested from outside this body. To reduce it, move the named helpers out of the body to the enclosing scope and lift each literal's work into a named function there, so each is measured, reviewed and tested on its own, and reduce whichever one then reads as the largest.
stock_technology_ths.stock_rank_xzjp_ths (cognitive 28) REDACTED:870— stock_technology_ths.stock_rank_xzjp_ths has cognitive complexity 28 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: ternaries 8 (24 pts), if/else 2 (3 pts), loops 1 (nesting depth added 17). 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.
helpers.auto_detect_encoding (cognitive 28) akshare/utils/demjson.py:1270— helpers.auto_detect_encoding has cognitive complexity 28 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: boolean chains 14, if/else 12 (13 pts), loops 1 (nesting depth added 1). 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. This file is where this pass's cognitive complexity CONCENTRATES: akshare/utils/demjson.py holds 23 of the 101 methods over the threshold — including the worst — and 764 of the 1800 points over it (42%), 6.4× the next-largest file (akshare/data/ths.js at 119). No single row can show this, because each is measured only against the threshold: reducing this one file moves this dimension further than any other file in the repository.
demjson._nonnumber_float_constants (cognitive 28) akshare/utils/demjson.py:275— demjson._nonnumber_float_constants has cognitive complexity 28 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (22 pts), error handling 3 (6 pts) (nesting depth added 16). 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. This file is where this pass's cognitive complexity CONCENTRATES: akshare/utils/demjson.py holds 23 of the 101 methods over the threshold — including the worst — and 764 of the 1800 points over it (42%), 6.4× the next-largest file (akshare/data/ths.js at 119). No single row can show this, because each is measured only against the threshold: reducing this one file moves this dimension further than any other file in the repository.
JSON.encode_number (cognitive 27) akshare/utils/demjson.py:4406— JSON.encode_number has cognitive complexity 27 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 14 (21 pts), boolean chains 6 (nesting depth added 7). 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. This file is where this pass's cognitive complexity CONCENTRATES: akshare/utils/demjson.py holds 23 of the 101 methods over the threshold — including the worst — and 764 of the 1800 points over it (42%), 6.4× the next-largest file (akshare/data/ths.js at 119). No single row can show this, because each is measured only against the threshold: reducing this one file moves this dimension further than any other file in the repository.
futures_roll_yield.get_roll_yield_bar (cognitive 26) akshare/futures/futures_roll_yield.py:74— futures_roll_yield.get_roll_yield_bar has cognitive complexity 26 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 6 (12 pts), loops 4 (8 pts), error handling 1 (3 pts), ternaries 3 (nesting depth added 12). 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.
check_punctuation.selftest (cognitive 26) scripts/check_punctuation.py:697— check_punctuation.selftest has cognitive complexity 26 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (18 pts), loops 4 (7 pts), ternaries 1 (nesting depth added 12). 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.
macro_china_nbs.macro_china_nbs_region (cognitive 25) akshare/economic/macro_china_nbs.py:566— macro_china_nbs.macro_china_nbs_region has cognitive complexity 25 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 10 (16 pts), loops 4 (8 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 10). 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.
news_baidu._baidu_finance_calendar (cognitive 25) akshare/news/news_baidu.py:82— news_baidu._baidu_finance_calendar has cognitive complexity 25 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 6 (13 pts), loops 3 (6 pts), boolean chains 3, error handling 1 (2 pts), ternaries 1 (nesting depth added 11). 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.
other_taptap.game_hot_rank_taptap (cognitive 25) akshare/other/other_taptap.py:72— other_taptap.game_hot_rank_taptap has cognitive complexity 25 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 12 (18 pts), boolean chains 4, loops 3 (nesting depth added 6). 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.
news_cctv.news_cctv (cognitive 24) akshare/news/news_cctv.py:17— news_cctv.news_cctv has cognitive complexity 24 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: error handling 3 (9 pts), if/else 5 (9 pts), loops 3 (6 pts) (nesting depth added 13). 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.
check_punctuation.main (cognitive 24) scripts/check_punctuation.py:419— check_punctuation.main has cognitive complexity 24 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (13 pts), loops 3 (5 pts), ternaries 2 (3 pts), error handling 1 (2 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 10). 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.
(anonymous) (cognitive 24) REDACTED:3272— (anonymous) has cognitive complexity 24 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 17, boolean chains 5, loops 2. None of this is in the body itself: all 24 points belong to 34 function items inside it that branch (reset, (anonymous)::xorBlock, (anonymous)::selectCipherStrategy, …). The named helpers are already separate functions; the literals' work cannot be called, reviewed or tested from outside this body. To reduce it, move the named helpers out of the body to the enclosing scope and lift each literal's work into a named function there, so each is measured, reviewed and tested on its own, and reduce whichever one then reads as the largest.
_doProcessBlock (cognitive 23) REDACTED:2690— _doProcessBlock has cognitive complexity 23 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: loops 9 (19 pts), if/else 2 (4 pts) (nesting depth added 12). 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.
JSON.decode_identifier (cognitive 22) akshare/utils/demjson.py:4989— JSON.decode_identifier has cognitive complexity 22 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: error handling 4 (12 pts), if/else 6 (9 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 11). 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. This file is where this pass's cognitive complexity CONCENTRATES: akshare/utils/demjson.py holds 23 of the 101 methods over the threshold — including the worst — and 764 of the 1800 points over it (42%), 6.4× the next-largest file (akshare/data/ths.js at 119). No single row can show this, because each is measured only against the threshold: reducing this one file moves this dimension further than any other file in the repository.
futures_basis.futures_spot_price (cognitive 21) akshare/futures/futures_basis.py:79— futures_basis.futures_spot_price has cognitive complexity 21 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 6 (14 pts), error handling 1 (3 pts), loops 2 (3 pts), ternaries 1 (nesting depth added 11). 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.
other_car_cpca.__car_market_man_rank_cpca_pifa (cognitive 21) REDACTED:163— other_car_cpca.__car_market_man_rank_cpca_pifa has cognitive complexity 21 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: error handling 4 (12 pts), loops 4 (8 pts), if/else 1 (nesting depth added 12). 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. This shape REPEATS in the file: 3 other methods here (other_car_cpca.__car_market_man_rank_cpca_lingshou, other_car_cpca.__car_market_cate_cpca_pifa, other_car_cpca.__car_market_cate_cpca_lingshou) have the same decision points, in the same order, at the same nesting depths — so this is one pattern written 4 times rather than 4 independent problems. Splitting this body alone leaves the other 3 exactly as they are. Where these are variations on one operation, the change that clears all 4 is the shared one: lift the common shape into a single routine the variants call, parameterised by whatever genuinely differs between them, and keep in each method only the part that is not shared.
other_car_cpca.__car_market_man_rank_cpca_lingshou (cognitive 21) REDACTED:276— other_car_cpca.__car_market_man_rank_cpca_lingshou has cognitive complexity 21 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: error handling 4 (12 pts), loops 4 (8 pts), if/else 1 (nesting depth added 12). 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. This shape REPEATS in the file: 3 other methods here (other_car_cpca.__car_market_man_rank_cpca_pifa, other_car_cpca.__car_market_cate_cpca_pifa, other_car_cpca.__car_market_cate_cpca_lingshou) have the same decision points, in the same order, at the same nesting depths — so this is one pattern written 4 times rather than 4 independent problems. Splitting this body alone leaves the other 3 exactly as they are. Where these are variations on one operation, the change that clears all 4 is the shared one: lift the common shape into a single routine the variants call, parameterised by whatever genuinely differs between them, and keep in each method only the part that is not shared.
other_car_cpca.__car_market_cate_cpca_pifa (cognitive 21) REDACTED:412— other_car_cpca.__car_market_cate_cpca_pifa has cognitive complexity 21 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: error handling 4 (12 pts), loops 4 (8 pts), if/else 1 (nesting depth added 12). 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. This shape REPEATS in the file: 3 other methods here (other_car_cpca.__car_market_man_rank_cpca_pifa, other_car_cpca.__car_market_man_rank_cpca_lingshou, other_car_cpca.__car_market_cate_cpca_lingshou) have the same decision points, in the same order, at the same nesting depths — so this is one pattern written 4 times rather than 4 independent problems. Splitting this body alone leaves the other 3 exactly as they are. Where these are variations on one operation, the change that clears all 4 is the shared one: lift the common shape into a single routine the variants call, parameterised by whatever genuinely differs between them, and keep in each method only the part that is not shared.
other_car_cpca.__car_market_cate_cpca_lingshou (cognitive 21) REDACTED:528— other_car_cpca.__car_market_cate_cpca_lingshou has cognitive complexity 21 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: error handling 4 (12 pts), loops 4 (8 pts), if/else 1 (nesting depth added 12). 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. This shape REPEATS in the file: 3 other methods here (other_car_cpca.__car_market_man_rank_cpca_pifa, other_car_cpca.__car_market_man_rank_cpca_lingshou, other_car_cpca.__car_market_cate_cpca_pifa) have the same decision points, in the same order, at the same nesting depths — so this is one pattern written 4 times rather than 4 independent problems. Splitting this body alone leaves the other 3 exactly as they are. Where these are variations on one operation, the change that clears all 4 is the shared one: lift the common shape into a single routine the variants call, parameterised by whatever genuinely differs between them, and keep in each method only the part that is not shared.
registry._score (cognitive 21) akshare/registry.py:75— registry._score has cognitive complexity 21 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (14 pts), boolean chains 6, loops 1 (nesting depth added 5). 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.
request.make_request_with_retry_json (cognitive 21) akshare/request.py:10— request.make_request_with_retry_json has cognitive complexity 21 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (15 pts), error handling 2 (5 pts), loops 1 (nesting depth added 11). 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. This shape REPEATS in the file: one other method here (request.make_request_with_retry_text) has the same decision points, in the same order, at the same nesting depths — so this is one pattern written twice rather than two separate problems. Splitting this body alone leaves the other exactly as it is. Where these are variations on one operation, the change that clears both is the shared one: lift the common shape into a single routine the variants call, parameterised by whatever genuinely differs between them, and keep in each method only the part that is not shared.
request.make_request_with_retry_text (cognitive 21) akshare/request.py:65— request.make_request_with_retry_text has cognitive complexity 21 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (15 pts), error handling 2 (5 pts), loops 1 (nesting depth added 11). 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. This shape REPEATS in the file: one other method here (request.make_request_with_retry_json) has the same decision points, in the same order, at the same nesting depths — so this is one pattern written twice rather than two separate problems. Splitting this body alone leaves the other exactly as it is. Where these are variations on one operation, the change that clears both is the shared one: lift the common shape into a single routine the variants call, parameterised by whatever genuinely differs between them, and keep in each method only the part that is not shared.
stock_technology_ths.stock_rank_cxfl_ths (cognitive 21) REDACTED:309— stock_technology_ths.stock_rank_cxfl_ths has cognitive complexity 21 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: ternaries 3 (12 pts), if/else 2 (5 pts), loops 2 (3 pts), error handling 1 (nesting depth added 13). 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. This shape REPEATS in the file: 3 other methods here (stock_technology_ths.stock_rank_cxsl_ths, stock_technology_ths.stock_rank_ljqs_ths, stock_technology_ths.stock_rank_ljqd_ths) have the same decision points, in the same order, at the same nesting depths — so this is one pattern written 4 times rather than 4 independent problems. Splitting this body alone leaves the other 3 exactly as they are. Where these are variations on one operation, the change that clears all 4 is the shared one: lift the common shape into a single routine the variants call, parameterised by whatever genuinely differs between them, and keep in each method only the part that is not shared.
stock_technology_ths.stock_rank_cxsl_ths (cognitive 21) REDACTED:401— stock_technology_ths.stock_rank_cxsl_ths has cognitive complexity 21 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: ternaries 3 (12 pts), if/else 2 (5 pts), loops 2 (3 pts), error handling 1 (nesting depth added 13). 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. This shape REPEATS in the file: 3 other methods here (stock_technology_ths.stock_rank_cxfl_ths, stock_technology_ths.stock_rank_ljqs_ths, stock_technology_ths.stock_rank_ljqd_ths) have the same decision points, in the same order, at the same nesting depths — so this is one pattern written 4 times rather than 4 independent problems. Splitting this body alone leaves the other 3 exactly as they are. Where these are variations on one operation, the change that clears all 4 is the shared one: lift the common shape into a single routine the variants call, parameterised by whatever genuinely differs between them, and keep in each method only the part that is not shared.
stock_technology_ths.stock_rank_ljqs_ths (cognitive 21) REDACTED:694— stock_technology_ths.stock_rank_ljqs_ths has cognitive complexity 21 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: ternaries 3 (12 pts), if/else 2 (5 pts), loops 2 (3 pts), error handling 1 (nesting depth added 13). 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. This shape REPEATS in the file: 3 other methods here (stock_technology_ths.stock_rank_cxfl_ths, stock_technology_ths.stock_rank_cxsl_ths, stock_technology_ths.stock_rank_ljqd_ths) have the same decision points, in the same order, at the same nesting depths — so this is one pattern written 4 times rather than 4 independent problems. Splitting this body alone leaves the other 3 exactly as they are. Where these are variations on one operation, the change that clears all 4 is the shared one: lift the common shape into a single routine the variants call, parameterised by whatever genuinely differs between them, and keep in each method only the part that is not shared.
stock_technology_ths.stock_rank_ljqd_ths (cognitive 21) REDACTED:782— stock_technology_ths.stock_rank_ljqd_ths has cognitive complexity 21 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: ternaries 3 (12 pts), if/else 2 (5 pts), loops 2 (3 pts), error handling 1 (nesting depth added 13). 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. This shape REPEATS in the file: 3 other methods here (stock_technology_ths.stock_rank_cxfl_ths, stock_technology_ths.stock_rank_cxsl_ths, stock_technology_ths.stock_rank_ljqs_ths) have the same decision points, in the same order, at the same nesting depths — so this is one pattern written 4 times rather than 4 independent problems. Splitting this body alone leaves the other 3 exactly as they are. Where these are variations on one operation, the change that clears all 4 is the shared one: lift the common shape into a single routine the variants call, parameterised by whatever genuinely differs between them, and keep in each method only the part that is not shared.
stock_notice._stock_notice_report (cognitive 21) akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_notice.py:17— stock_notice._stock_notice_report has cognitive complexity 21 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 6 (12 pts), loops 3 (7 pts), error handling 1 (2 pts) (nesting depth added 11). 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.
JSON._do_encode (cognitive 21) akshare/utils/demjson.py:5743— JSON._do_encode has cognitive complexity 21 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (14 pts), error handling 3 (7 pts) (nesting depth added 9). 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. This file is where this pass's cognitive complexity CONCENTRATES: akshare/utils/demjson.py holds 23 of the 101 methods over the threshold — including the worst — and 764 of the 1800 points over it (42%), 6.4× the next-largest file (akshare/data/ths.js at 119). No single row can show this, because each is measured only against the threshold: reducing this one file moves this dimension further than any other file in the repository.
cot.futures_dce_position_rank (cognitive 20) REDACTED:818— cot.futures_dce_position_rank has cognitive complexity 20 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (12 pts), error handling 2 (5 pts), loops 2, ternaries 1 (nesting depth added 8). 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.
index_zh_em.index_zh_a_hist_min_em (cognitive 20) akshare/index/index_zh_em.py:178— index_zh_em.index_zh_a_hist_min_em has cognitive complexity 20 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 6 (16 pts), error handling 2 (4 pts) (nesting depth added 12). 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.
stock_sns_sseinfo.stock_sns_sseinfo (cognitive 20) akshare/stock_feature/stock_sns_sseinfo.py:56— stock_sns_sseinfo.stock_sns_sseinfo has cognitive complexity 20 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 10 (19 pts), loops 1 (nesting depth added 9). 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.
JSON.decode (cognitive 20) akshare/utils/demjson.py:5442— JSON.decode has cognitive complexity 20 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 11 (15 pts), error handling 2 (4 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 6). 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. This file is where this pass's cognitive complexity CONCENTRATES: akshare/utils/demjson.py holds 23 of the 101 methods over the threshold — including the worst — and 764 of the 1800 points over it (42%), 6.4× the next-largest file (akshare/data/ths.js at 119). No single row can show this, because each is measured only against the threshold: reducing this one file moves this dimension further than any other file in the repository.
futures_settle._normalize_settle_columns (cognitive 19) REDACTED:59— futures_settle._normalize_settle_columns has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 6 (13 pts), loops 3 (5 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 9). 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.
receipt.get_czce_receipt_2 (cognitive 19) REDACTED:328— receipt.get_czce_receipt_2 has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (17 pts), loops 1, ternaries 1 (nesting depth added 8). 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.
fx_quote_baidu.fx_quote_baidu (cognitive 19) akshare/fx/fx_quote_baidu.py:13— fx_quote_baidu.fx_quote_baidu has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 6 (13 pts), loops 3 (5 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 9). 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.
utf32.encode (cognitive 19) akshare/utils/demjson.py:853— utf32.encode has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 11 (15 pts), error handling 1 (2 pts), loops 1, ternaries 1 (nesting depth added 5). 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. This file is where this pass's cognitive complexity CONCENTRATES: akshare/utils/demjson.py holds 23 of the 101 methods over the threshold — including the worst — and 764 of the 1800 points over it (42%), 6.4× the next-largest file (akshare/data/ths.js at 119). No single row can show this, because each is measured only against the threshold: reducing this one file moves this dimension further than any other file in the repository.
jsonlint._lintcheck (cognitive 19) akshare/utils/demjson.py:6629— jsonlint._lintcheck has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (10 pts), error handling 2 (5 pts), boolean chains 4 (nesting depth added 6). 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. This file is where this pass's cognitive complexity CONCENTRATES: akshare/utils/demjson.py holds 23 of the 101 methods over the threshold — including the worst — and 764 of the 1800 points over it (42%), 6.4× the next-largest file (akshare/data/ths.js at 119). No single row can show this, because each is measured only against the threshold: reducing this one file moves this dimension further than any other file in the repository.
(anonymous) (cognitive 19) REDACTED:2609— (anonymous) has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 5 (12 pts), loops 5 (7 pts) (nesting depth added 9). 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.
_doReset (cognitive 19) REDACTED:4466— _doReset has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (14 pts), boolean chains 3, loops 2 (nesting depth added 5). 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.
fund_fee_em.fund_fee_em (cognitive 18) akshare/fund/fund_fee_em.py:17— fund_fee_em.fund_fee_em has cognitive complexity 18 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (14 pts), error handling 1 (3 pts), loops 1 (nesting depth added 7). 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.
receipt.get_shfe_receipt_1 (cognitive 18) REDACTED:82— receipt.get_shfe_receipt_1 has cognitive complexity 18 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 10 (15 pts), loops 1 (2 pts), ternaries 1 (nesting depth added 6). 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.
receipt.get_czce_receipt_1 (cognitive 18) REDACTED:269— receipt.get_czce_receipt_1 has cognitive complexity 18 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 12 (16 pts), loops 1, ternaries 1 (nesting depth added 4). 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.
stock_zh_ah_tx.stock_zh_ah_daily (cognitive 18) akshare/stock/stock_zh_ah_tx.py:157— stock_zh_ah_tx.stock_zh_ah_daily has cognitive complexity 18 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (11 pts), error handling 2 (5 pts), boolean chains 1, loops 1 (nesting depth added 7). 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.
stock_zh_kcb_sina.stock_zh_kcb_daily (cognitive 18) REDACTED:123— stock_zh_kcb_sina.stock_zh_kcb_daily has cognitive complexity 18 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: error handling 6 (13 pts), if/else 5 (nesting depth added 7). 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.
stock_finance_sina.stock_financial_analysis_indicator (cognitive 18) akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_sina.py:228— stock_finance_sina.stock_financial_analysis_indicator has cognitive complexity 18 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (12 pts), loops 3 (4 pts), boolean chains 2 (nesting depth added 4). 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.
webDES (cognitive 18) akshare/movie/jm.js:2161— webDES has cognitive complexity 18 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 5 (11 pts), match/switch 1 (3 pts), boolean chains 2, loops 1 (2 pts) (nesting depth added 9). None of this is in the body itself: all 18 points belong to 11 function items inside it that branch (a function literal at line 2174, _0x9843d3, _0x2a2af9, …). The named helpers are already separate functions; the literals' work cannot be called, reviewed or tested from outside this body. To reduce it, move the named helpers out of the body to the enclosing scope and lift each literal's work into a named function there, so each is measured, reviewed and tested on its own, and reduce whichever one then reads as the largest.
macro_china_nbs._encode_nbs_period_token (cognitive 17) akshare/economic/macro_china_nbs.py:300— macro_china_nbs._encode_nbs_period_token has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (13 pts), ternaries 1 (3 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 8). 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.
cot.get_cffex_rank_table (cognitive 17) REDACTED:716— cot.get_cffex_rank_table has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (10 pts), error handling 1 (3 pts), loops 2 (3 pts), ternaries 1 (nesting depth added 6). 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.
other_car_cpca.car_market_segment_cpca (cognitive 17) REDACTED:685— other_car_cpca.car_market_segment_cpca has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: loops 6 (15 pts), if/else 2 (nesting depth added 9). 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.
other_car_cpca.car_market_fuel_cpca (cognitive 17) REDACTED:722— other_car_cpca.car_market_fuel_cpca has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: error handling 3 (9 pts), loops 3 (6 pts), if/else 2 (nesting depth added 9). 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.
stock_us_sina.stock_us_daily (cognitive 17) REDACTED:117— stock_us_sina.stock_us_daily has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: error handling 4 (10 pts), if/else 5 (7 pts) (nesting depth added 8). 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.
stock_hsgt_em.stock_hsgt_stock_statistics_em (cognitive 17) REDACTED:336— stock_hsgt_em.stock_hsgt_stock_statistics_em has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 5 (9 pts), loops 4 (8 pts) (nesting depth added 8). 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.
stock_technology_ths.stock_rank_xstp_ths (cognitive 17) REDACTED:493— stock_technology_ths.stock_rank_xstp_ths has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: ternaries 2 (8 pts), if/else 2 (5 pts), loops 2 (3 pts), error handling 1 (nesting depth added 10). 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. This shape REPEATS in the file: one other method here (stock_technology_ths.stock_rank_xxtp_ths) has the same decision points, in the same order, at the same nesting depths — so this is one pattern written twice rather than two separate problems. Splitting this body alone leaves the other exactly as it is. Where these are variations on one operation, the change that clears both is the shared one: lift the common shape into a single routine the variants call, parameterised by whatever genuinely differs between them, and keep in each method only the part that is not shared.
stock_technology_ths.stock_rank_xxtp_ths (cognitive 17) REDACTED:594— stock_technology_ths.stock_rank_xxtp_ths has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: ternaries 2 (8 pts), if/else 2 (5 pts), loops 2 (3 pts), error handling 1 (nesting depth added 10). 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. This shape REPEATS in the file: one other method here (stock_technology_ths.stock_rank_xstp_ths) has the same decision points, in the same order, at the same nesting depths — so this is one pattern written twice rather than two separate problems. Splitting this body alone leaves the other exactly as it is. Where these are variations on one operation, the change that clears both is the shared one: lift the common shape into a single routine the variants call, parameterised by whatever genuinely differs between them, and keep in each method only the part that is not shared.
JSON._classify_for_encoding (cognitive 17) akshare/utils/demjson.py:5582— JSON._classify_for_encoding has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: boolean chains 12, if/else 4 (5 pts) (nesting depth added 1). 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. This file is where this pass's cognitive complexity CONCENTRATES: akshare/utils/demjson.py holds 23 of the 101 methods over the threshold — including the worst — and 764 of the 1800 points over it (42%), 6.4× the next-largest file (akshare/data/ths.js at 119). No single row can show this, because each is measured only against the threshold: reducing this one file moves this dimension further than any other file in the repository.
JSON.encode (cognitive 17) akshare/utils/demjson.py:5637— JSON.encode has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (10 pts), error handling 2 (4 pts), boolean chains 3 (nesting depth added 3). 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. This file is where this pass's cognitive complexity CONCENTRATES: akshare/utils/demjson.py holds 23 of the 101 methods over the threshold — including the worst — and 764 of the 1800 points over it (42%), 6.4× the next-largest file (akshare/data/ths.js at 119). No single row can show this, because each is measured only against the threshold: reducing this one file moves this dimension further than any other file in the repository.
fund_init_ths.fund_new_found_ths (cognitive 16) akshare/fund/fund_init_ths.py:15— fund_init_ths.fund_new_found_ths has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 12 (15 pts), loops 1 (nesting depth added 3). 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.
futures_warehouse_receipt.futures_shfe_warehouse_receipt (cognitive 16) REDACTED:206— futures_warehouse_receipt.futures_shfe_warehouse_receipt has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (12 pts), loops 2 (4 pts) (nesting depth added 7). 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.
other_car_cpca.car_market_total_cpca (cognitive 16) REDACTED:13— other_car_cpca.car_market_total_cpca has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: error handling 2 (6 pts), if/else 4 (6 pts), loops 2 (4 pts) (nesting depth added 8). 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.
jsonlint._lintcheck_data (cognitive 16) akshare/utils/demjson.py:6565— jsonlint._lintcheck_data has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 11 (14 pts), error handling 2 (nesting depth added 3). 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. This file is where this pass's cognitive complexity CONCENTRATES: akshare/utils/demjson.py holds 23 of the 101 methods over the threshold — including the worst — and 764 of the 1800 points over it (42%), 6.4× the next-largest file (akshare/data/ths.js at 119). No single row can show this, because each is measured only against the threshold: reducing this one file moves this dimension further than any other file in the repository.
demjson.decode (cognitive 16) akshare/utils/demjson.py:6182— demjson.decode has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 6 (10 pts), loops 3 (4 pts), boolean chains 2 (nesting depth added 5). 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. This file is where this pass's cognitive complexity CONCENTRATES: akshare/utils/demjson.py holds 23 of the 101 methods over the threshold — including the worst — and 764 of the 1800 points over it (42%), 6.4× the next-largest file (akshare/data/ths.js at 119). No single row can show this, because each is measured only against the threshold: reducing this one file moves this dimension further than any other file in the repository.
TooManyMethods: JSON akshare/utils/demjson.py:3711— TooManyMethods — 39 methods. The bar is 30 methods; this is 9 over it, 1.30× the bar. To reduce it, group the members that share the same data into a smaller type of their own and delegate to it, so no single type carries every responsibility.
D4 · Code Duplication· Near-duplicate member family (14 members, 18 shared lines) · ×1
Near-duplicate member family (14 members, 18 shared lines) REDACTED:1242— REDACTED:1242-1284 | REDACTED:1288-1330 | REDACTED:1334-1377 | REDACTED:1381-1432 | REDACTED:1436-1487 | REDACTED:1491-1542 | REDACTED:1546-1597 | REDACTED:1601-1652 | REDACTED:1656-1707 | REDACTED:1711-1762 | REDACTED:1824-1875 | REDACTED:1879-1930 | REDACTED:1934-1985 | REDACTED:1989-2040 — These 14 members are variants of one another: a block of 18 lines reported below appears in every one of them, and the pairwise near-duplicate rows they would otherwise produce are collapsed into this row. Read them as one construct written 14 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 14 times.
D4 · Code Duplication· Near-duplicate member family (12 members, 24 shared lines) · ×1
Near-duplicate member family (12 members, 24 shared lines) akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:598— akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:598-688 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:692-786 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:336-430 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:513-645 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:649-720 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_ipo_declare.py:17-93 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_register_em.py:17-86 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_register_em.py:90-160 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_register_em.py:164-234 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_register_em.py:238-308 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_register_em.py:312-382 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_register_em.py:386-456 — These 12 members are variants of one another: a block of 24 lines reported below appears in every one of them, and the pairwise near-duplicate rows they would otherwise produce are collapsed into this row. Read them as one construct written 12 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 12 times.
D4 · Code Duplication· Near-duplicate member family (10 members, 21 shared lines) · ×1
Near-duplicate member family (10 members, 21 shared lines) akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:485— akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:485-600 | REDACTED:20-117 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:223-310 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gpzy_em.py:89-167 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gpzy_em.py:196-301 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:336-430 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:513-645 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:649-720 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:303-435 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:439-572 — These 10 members are variants of one another: a block of 21 lines reported below appears in every one of them, and the pairwise near-duplicate rows they would otherwise produce are collapsed into this row. Read them as one construct written 10 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 10 times.
D4 · Code Duplication· Near-duplicate member family (9 members, 51 shared lines) · ×1
Near-duplicate member family (9 members, 51 shared lines) akshare/crypto/crypto_hold.py:14— akshare/crypto/crypto_hold.py:14-74 | REDACTED:1062-1134 | REDACTED:1139-1202 | REDACTED:2343-2422 | REDACTED:2501-2574 | REDACTED:2967-3048 | REDACTED:3097-3177 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_account_em.py:15-92 | REDACTED:20-81 — These 9 members are variants of one another: a block of 51 lines reported below appears in every one of them, and the pairwise near-duplicate rows they would otherwise produce are collapsed into this row. Read them as one construct written 9 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 9 times.
D4 · Code Duplication· Near-duplicate member family (9 members, 27 shared lines) · ×1
Near-duplicate member family (9 members, 27 shared lines) akshare/stock_feature/stock_analyst_em.py:16— akshare/stock_feature/stock_analyst_em.py:16-102 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_ipo_declare.py:17-93 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_register_em.py:17-86 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_register_em.py:90-160 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_register_em.py:164-234 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_register_em.py:238-308 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_register_em.py:312-382 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_register_em.py:386-456 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_register_em.py:460-506 — These 9 members are variants of one another: a block of 27 lines reported below appears in every one of them, and the pairwise near-duplicate rows they would otherwise produce are collapsed into this row. Read them as one construct written 9 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 9 times.
D4 · Code Duplication· Near-duplicate member family (9 members, 23 shared lines) · ×1
Near-duplicate member family (9 members, 23 shared lines) REDACTED:3237— REDACTED:3237-3286 | REDACTED:3382-3412 | REDACTED:3416-3446 | REDACTED:3450-3478 | REDACTED:3527-3557 | REDACTED:3561-3591 | REDACTED:3595-3625 | REDACTED:3629-3660 | REDACTED:3664-3696 — These 9 members are variants of one another: a block of 23 lines reported below appears in every one of them, and the pairwise near-duplicate rows they would otherwise produce are collapsed into this row. Read them as one construct written 9 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 9 times.
D4 · Code Duplication· Near-duplicate member family (8 members, 29 shared lines) · ×1
Near-duplicate member family (8 members, 29 shared lines) akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdhs.py:16— akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdhs.py:16-127 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdhs.py:131-227 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:21-158 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:162-299 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:303-435 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:439-572 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_zf_pg.py:19-96 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_zf_pg.py:100-193 — These 8 members are variants of one another: a block of 29 lines reported below appears in every one of them, and the pairwise near-duplicate rows they would otherwise produce are collapsed into this row. Read them as one construct written 8 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 8 times.
D4 · Code Duplication· Near-duplicate member family (8 members, 25 shared lines) · ×1
Near-duplicate member family (8 members, 25 shared lines) REDACTED:20— REDACTED:20-112 | REDACTED:116-208 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:125-229 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:233-337 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:341-445 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:562-667 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:671-776 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:845-949 — These 8 members are variants of one another: a block of 25 lines reported below appears in every one of them, and the pairwise near-duplicate rows they would otherwise produce are collapsed into this row. Read them as one construct written 8 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 8 times.
D4 · Code Duplication· Near-duplicate member family (8 members, 16 shared lines) · ×1
Near-duplicate member family (8 members, 16 shared lines) akshare/index/index_option_qvix.py:69— akshare/index/index_option_qvix.py:69-88 | akshare/index/index_option_qvix.py:109-128 | akshare/index/index_option_qvix.py:149-168 | akshare/index/index_option_qvix.py:189-208 | akshare/index/index_option_qvix.py:229-248 | akshare/index/index_option_qvix.py:269-288 | akshare/index/index_option_qvix.py:309-328 | akshare/index/index_option_qvix.py:349-368 — These 8 members are variants of one another: a block of 16 lines reported below appears in every one of them, and the pairwise near-duplicate rows they would otherwise produce are collapsed into this row. Read them as one construct written 8 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 8 times.
D4 · Code Duplication· Near-duplicate member family (7 members, 41 shared lines) · ×1
Near-duplicate member family (7 members, 41 shared lines) REDACTED:20— REDACTED:20-117 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:223-310 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gpzy_em.py:89-167 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:21-158 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:162-299 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:303-435 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:439-572 — These 7 members are variants of one another: a block of 41 lines reported below appears in every one of them, and the pairwise near-duplicate rows they would otherwise produce are collapsed into this row. Read them as one construct written 7 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 7 times.
D4 · Code Duplication· Near-duplicate member family (7 members, 32 shared lines) · ×1
Near-duplicate member family (7 members, 32 shared lines) REDACTED:20— REDACTED:20-117 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:223-310 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:893-952 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:956-1015 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gpzy_em.py:89-167 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:303-435 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:439-572 — These 7 members are variants of one another: a block of 32 lines reported below appears in every one of them, and the pairwise near-duplicate rows they would otherwise produce are collapsed into this row. Read them as one construct written 7 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 7 times.
D4 · Code Duplication· Near-duplicate member family (6 members, 37 shared lines) · ×1
Near-duplicate member family (6 members, 37 shared lines) REDACTED:188— REDACTED:188-245 | REDACTED:249-306 | REDACTED:310-398 | REDACTED:402-490 | REDACTED:695-779 | REDACTED:783-867 — These 6 members are variants of one another: a block of 37 lines reported below appears in every one of them, and the pairwise near-duplicate rows they would otherwise produce are collapsed into this row. Read them as one construct written 6 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 6 times.
D4 · Code Duplication· Near-duplicate member family (6 members, 31 shared lines) · ×1
Near-duplicate member family (6 members, 31 shared lines) REDACTED:15— REDACTED:15-142 | REDACTED:19-125 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:223-310 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:506-592 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:692-786 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:790-889 — These 6 members are variants of one another: a block of 31 lines reported below appears in every one of them, and the pairwise near-duplicate rows they would otherwise produce are collapsed into this row. Read them as one construct written 6 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 6 times.
D4 · Code Duplication· Near-duplicate member family (6 members, 5 shared lines) · ×1
Near-duplicate member family (6 members, 5 shared lines) REDACTED:138— REDACTED:138-261 | akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:327-456 | akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:197-315 | akshare/index/index_zh_em.py:184-361 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1049-1167 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1474-1590 — These 6 members are variants of one another: a block of 5 lines reported below appears in every one of them, and the pairwise near-duplicate rows they would otherwise produce are collapsed into this row. Read them as one construct written 6 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 6 times.
D4 · Code Duplication· Near-duplicate member family (5 members, 63 shared lines) · ×1
Near-duplicate member family (5 members, 63 shared lines) REDACTED:138— REDACTED:138-261 | akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:327-456 | akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:197-315 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1049-1167 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1474-1590 — These 5 members are variants of one another: a block of 63 lines reported below appears in every one of them, and the pairwise near-duplicate rows they would otherwise produce are collapsed into this row. Read them as one construct written 5 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 5 times.
D4 · Code Duplication· Near-duplicate member family (5 members, 46 shared lines) · ×1
Near-duplicate member family (5 members, 46 shared lines) REDACTED:310— REDACTED:310-462 | REDACTED:20-117 | REDACTED:19-125 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:223-310 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdhs.py:131-227 — These 5 members are variants of one another: a block of 46 lines reported below appears in every one of them, and the pairwise near-duplicate rows they would otherwise produce are collapsed into this row. Read them as one construct written 5 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 5 times.
D4 · Code Duplication· Near-duplicate member family (5 members, 45 shared lines) · ×1
Near-duplicate member family (5 members, 45 shared lines) REDACTED:33— REDACTED:33-123 | REDACTED:129-219 | REDACTED:225-319 | REDACTED:325-478 | akshare/stock/stock_new_cninfo.py:77-162 — These 5 members are variants of one another: a block of 45 lines reported below appears in every one of them, and the pairwise near-duplicate rows they would otherwise produce are collapsed into this row. Read them as one construct written 5 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 5 times.
D4 · Code Duplication· Near-duplicate member family (5 members, 43 shared lines) · ×1
Near-duplicate member family (5 members, 43 shared lines) akshare/stock_feature/stock_gddh_em.py:15— akshare/stock_feature/stock_gddh_em.py:15-95 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:506-592 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:598-688 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:692-786 | REDACTED:17-120 — These 5 members are variants of one another: a block of 43 lines reported below appears in every one of them, and the pairwise near-duplicate rows they would otherwise produce are collapsed into this row. Read them as one construct written 5 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 5 times.
D4 · Code Duplication· Near-duplicate member family (5 members, 24 shared lines) · ×1
Near-duplicate member family (5 members, 24 shared lines) akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:296— akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:296-399 | akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:403-481 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:229-332 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:436-509 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_yjyg_em.py:136-220 — These 5 members are variants of one another: a block of 24 lines reported below appears in every one of them, and the pairwise near-duplicate rows they would otherwise produce are collapsed into this row. Read them as one construct written 5 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 5 times.
D4 · Code Duplication· Near-duplicate member family (4 members, 52 shared lines) · ×1
Near-duplicate member family (4 members, 52 shared lines) REDACTED:310— REDACTED:310-462 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdhs.py:16-127 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdhs.py:131-227 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdzjc_em.py:16-128 — These 4 members are variants of one another: a block of 52 lines reported below appears in every one of them, and the pairwise near-duplicate rows they would otherwise produce are collapsed into this row. Read them as one construct written 4 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 4 times.
D4 · Code Duplication· Near-duplicate member family (4 members, 51 shared lines) · ×1
Near-duplicate member family (4 members, 51 shared lines) REDACTED:19— REDACTED:19-125 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:336-430 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:513-645 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:649-720 — These 4 members are variants of one another: a block of 51 lines reported below appears in every one of them, and the pairwise near-duplicate rows they would otherwise produce are collapsed into this row. Read them as one construct written 4 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 4 times.
D4 · Code Duplication· Near-duplicate member family (4 members, 46 shared lines) · ×1
Near-duplicate member family (4 members, 46 shared lines) akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:216— akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:216-292 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gpzy_em.py:313-378 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gpzy_em.py:382-447 | REDACTED:1193-1327 — These 4 members are variants of one another: a block of 46 lines reported below appears in every one of them, and the pairwise near-duplicate rows they would otherwise produce are collapsed into this row. Read them as one construct written 4 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 4 times.
D4 · Code Duplication· Near-duplicate member family (4 members, 33 shared lines) · ×1
Near-duplicate member family (4 members, 33 shared lines) REDACTED:85— REDACTED:85-190 | REDACTED:194-291 | REDACTED:295-383 | REDACTED:387-451 — These 4 members are variants of one another: a block of 33 lines reported below appears in every one of them, and the pairwise near-duplicate rows they would otherwise produce are collapsed into this row. Read them as one construct written 4 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 4 times.
D4 · Code Duplication· Near-duplicate member family (4 members, 31 shared lines) · ×1
Near-duplicate member family (4 members, 31 shared lines) akshare/bond/bond_buy_back_em.py:15— akshare/bond/bond_buy_back_em.py:15-83 | akshare/bond/bond_buy_back_em.py:87-155 | akshare/stock/stock_hsgt_em.py:15-73 | akshare/stock/stock_hsgt_em.py:77-143 — These 4 members are variants of one another: a block of 31 lines reported below appears in every one of them, and the pairwise near-duplicate rows they would otherwise produce are collapsed into this row. Read them as one construct written 4 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 4 times.
D4 · Code Duplication· Near-duplicate member family (4 members, 29 shared lines) · ×1
Near-duplicate member family (4 members, 29 shared lines) REDACTED:325— REDACTED:325-478 | akshare/stock/stock_cg_equity_mortgage.py:31-99 | akshare/stock/stock_cg_guarantee.py:33-109 | akshare/stock/stock_hold_num_cninfo.py:31-103 — These 4 members are variants of one another: a block of 29 lines reported below appears in every one of them, and the pairwise near-duplicate rows they would otherwise produce are collapsed into this row. Read them as one construct written 4 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 4 times.
D4 · Code Duplication· Near-duplicate member family (4 members, 24 shared lines) · ×1
Near-duplicate member family (4 members, 24 shared lines) REDACTED:19— REDACTED:19-125 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:120-219 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:506-592 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:17-134 — These 4 members are variants of one another: a block of 24 lines reported below appears in every one of them, and the pairwise near-duplicate rows they would otherwise produce are collapsed into this row. Read them as one construct written 4 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 4 times.
D4 · Code Duplication· Near-duplicate member family (4 members, 23 shared lines) · ×1
Near-duplicate member family (4 members, 23 shared lines) REDACTED:3290— REDACTED:3290-3344 | REDACTED:3348-3378 | REDACTED:3629-3660 | REDACTED:3664-3696 — These 4 members are variants of one another: a block of 23 lines reported below appears in every one of them, and the pairwise near-duplicate rows they would otherwise produce are collapsed into this row. Read them as one construct written 4 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 4 times.
D4 · Code Duplication· Near-duplicate member family (4 members, 22 shared lines) · ×1
Near-duplicate member family (4 members, 22 shared lines) akshare/stock_feature/stock_gpzy_em.py:89— akshare/stock_feature/stock_gpzy_em.py:89-167 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:229-332 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:436-509 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_restricted_em.py:109-206 — These 4 members are variants of one another: a block of 22 lines reported below appears in every one of them, and the pairwise near-duplicate rows they would otherwise produce are collapsed into this row. Read them as one construct written 4 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 4 times.
D4 · Code Duplication· Near-duplicate member family (4 members, 9 shared lines) · ×1
Near-duplicate member family (4 members, 9 shared lines) akshare/qhkc_web/qhkc_fund.py:26— akshare/qhkc_web/qhkc_fund.py:26-118 | akshare/qhkc_web/qhkc_fund.py:124-217 | akshare/qhkc_web/qhkc_fund.py:224-316 | akshare/qhkc_web/qhkc_fund.py:322-408 — These 4 members are variants of one another: a block of 9 lines reported below appears in every one of them, and the pairwise near-duplicate rows they would otherwise produce are collapsed into this row. Read them as one construct written 4 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 4 times.
D4 · Code Duplication· Near-duplicate member family (3 members, 57 shared lines) · ×1
Near-duplicate member family (3 members, 57 shared lines) REDACTED:78— REDACTED:78-147 | REDACTED:151-220 | REDACTED:224-293 — These 3 members are variants of one another: a block of 57 lines reported below appears in every one of them, and the pairwise near-duplicate rows they would otherwise produce are collapsed into this row. Read them as one construct written 3 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 3 times.
D4 · Code Duplication· Near-duplicate member family (3 members, 50 shared lines) · ×1
Near-duplicate member family (3 members, 50 shared lines) akshare/index/index_sw.py:39— akshare/index/index_sw.py:39-93 | akshare/index/index_sw.py:97-155 | akshare/index/index_sw.py:159-217 — These 3 members are variants of one another: a block of 50 lines reported below appears in every one of them, and the pairwise near-duplicate rows they would otherwise produce are collapsed into this row. Read them as one construct written 3 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 3 times.
Near-duplicate member pair (95 shared lines) akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:18— akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:18-116 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:120-219 — These two members are variants of one another: 95 of their lines are already reported as duplicated blocks below, spread through both bodies rather than gathered into one. Read them as a single construct written twice. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared pipeline into one implementation the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (sync against async, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves the two bodies in place and the next edit still has to be made twice.
Near-duplicate member pair (57 shared lines) akshare/option/option_lhb_em.py:18— akshare/option/option_lhb_em.py:18-253 | REDACTED:783-1067 — These two members are variants of one another: 57 of their lines are already reported as duplicated blocks below, spread through both bodies rather than gathered into one. Read them as a single construct written twice. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared pipeline into one implementation the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (sync against async, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves the two bodies in place and the next edit still has to be made twice.
Near-duplicate member pair (30 shared lines) REDACTED:783— REDACTED:783-1067 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:513-645 — These two members are variants of one another: 30 of their lines are already reported as duplicated blocks below, spread through both bodies rather than gathered into one. Read them as a single construct written twice. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared pipeline into one implementation the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (sync against async, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves the two bodies in place and the next edit still has to be made twice.
D4 · Code Duplication· Edited copy of a member (104 corresponding lines) · ×1
Edited copy of a member (104 corresponding lines) akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:449— akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:449-558 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:845-949 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 104 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
D4 · Code Duplication· Edited copy of a member (93 corresponding lines) · ×1
Edited copy of a member (93 corresponding lines) akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:45— akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:45-217 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:513-645 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 93 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
D4 · Code Duplication· Edited copy of a member (88 corresponding lines) · ×1
Edited copy of a member (88 corresponding lines) REDACTED:109— REDACTED:109-199 | REDACTED:2724-2811 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 88 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
D4 · Code Duplication· Edited copy of a member (70 corresponding lines) · ×1
Edited copy of a member (70 corresponding lines) REDACTED:2426— REDACTED:2426-2497 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_account_em.py:15-92 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 70 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
D4 · Code Duplication· Edited copy of a member (10 corresponding lines) · ×1
Edited copy of a member (10 corresponding lines) akshare/futures/futures_comm_qihuo.py:17— akshare/futures/futures_comm_qihuo.py:17-169 | REDACTED:20-74 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 10 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
D4 · Code Duplication· Members sharing a duplicated core (19 members, 50+ identical tokens) · ×1
Members sharing a duplicated core (19 members, 50+ identical tokens) akshare/index/index_cx.py:14— akshare/index/index_cx.py:14-38 | akshare/index/index_cx.py:42-66 | akshare/index/index_cx.py:70-94 | akshare/index/index_cx.py:98-122 | akshare/index/index_cx.py:126-150 | akshare/index/index_cx.py:154-178 | akshare/index/index_cx.py:182-206 | akshare/index/index_cx.py:210-234 | akshare/index/index_cx.py:238-262 | akshare/index/index_cx.py:266-290 | akshare/index/index_cx.py:294-318 | akshare/index/index_cx.py:322-346 | akshare/index/index_cx.py:350-374 | akshare/index/index_cx.py:378-402 | akshare/index/index_cx.py:406-434 | akshare/index/index_cx.py:438-466 | akshare/index/index_cx.py:470-498 | akshare/index/index_cx.py:502-530 | akshare/index/index_cx.py:534-562 — These 19 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 19 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 19 times.
D4 · Code Duplication· Members sharing a duplicated core (15 members, 50+ identical tokens) · ×1
Members sharing a duplicated core (15 members, 50+ identical tokens) REDACTED:16— REDACTED:16-47 | REDACTED:25-77 | REDACTED:82-133 | REDACTED:138-192 | REDACTED:197-250 | REDACTED:255-309 | REDACTED:314-365 | REDACTED:370-424 | REDACTED:429-483 | REDACTED:488-542 | REDACTED:547-601 | REDACTED:606-660 | REDACTED:665-719 | REDACTED:724-777 | REDACTED:782-835 — These 15 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 15 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 15 times.
D4 · Code Duplication· Members sharing a duplicated core (12 members, 50+ identical tokens) · ×1
Members sharing a duplicated core (12 members, 50+ identical tokens) REDACTED:45— REDACTED:45-91 | REDACTED:97-194 | REDACTED:241-290 | REDACTED:295-361 | REDACTED:366-410 | REDACTED:477-526 | REDACTED:531-573 | REDACTED:578-625 | REDACTED:630-674 | REDACTED:679-733 | REDACTED:738-787 | REDACTED:793-842 — These 12 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 12 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 12 times.
D4 · Code Duplication· Members sharing a duplicated core (10 members, 50+ identical tokens) · ×1
Members sharing a duplicated core (10 members, 50+ identical tokens) akshare/bond/bond_china.py:145— akshare/bond/bond_china.py:145-179 | REDACTED:14-45 | REDACTED:49-104 | REDACTED:14-60 | REDACTED:64-109 | akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:359-425 | REDACTED:19-85 | REDACTED:777-813 | akshare/rate/repo_rate.py:13-42 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_a_high_low.py:16-38 — These 10 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 10 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 10 times.
D4 · Code Duplication· Members sharing a duplicated core (8 members, 50+ identical tokens) · ×1
Members sharing a duplicated core (8 members, 50+ identical tokens) akshare/spot/spot_hog_soozhu.py:15— akshare/spot/spot_hog_soozhu.py:15-38 | akshare/spot/spot_hog_soozhu.py:42-62 | akshare/spot/spot_hog_soozhu.py:66-86 | akshare/spot/spot_hog_soozhu.py:90-110 | akshare/spot/spot_hog_soozhu.py:114-134 | akshare/spot/spot_hog_soozhu.py:138-158 | akshare/spot/spot_hog_soozhu.py:162-182 | akshare/spot/spot_hog_soozhu.py:186-206 — These 8 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 8 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 8 times.
D4 · Code Duplication· Members sharing a duplicated core (7 members, 50+ identical tokens) · ×1
Members sharing a duplicated core (7 members, 50+ identical tokens) REDACTED:310— REDACTED:310-398 | REDACTED:402-490 | REDACTED:494-591 | REDACTED:595-691 | REDACTED:695-779 | REDACTED:783-867 | REDACTED:871-966 — These 7 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 7 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 7 times.
Duplicated block (92 lines × 4) akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_ths.py:197— akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_ths.py:197-288 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_ths.py:294-385 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_ths.py:391-482 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_ths.py:488-579 — 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. 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 (81–89 lines × 2) akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_ipo_review.py:19— akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_ipo_review.py:19-107 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_ipo_tutor.py:19-99 — 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 (77–81 lines × 3) akshare/qhkc_web/qhkc_fund.py:124— akshare/qhkc_web/qhkc_fund.py:124-201 | akshare/qhkc_web/qhkc_fund.py:224-300 | akshare/qhkc_web/qhkc_fund.py:322-402 — 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. 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. Note first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: the declarations holding them bind `url` to `AnyStr = QHKC_FUND_POSITION_URL` in one and `AnyStr = QHKC_FUND_POSITION_CHANGE_URL` 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 (72 lines × 2) REDACTED:1331— REDACTED:1331-1402 | REDACTED:1424-1495 — 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. 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. Note first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: the declarations holding them bind `symbol` to `str = "00700"` in one and `str = "002008"` 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 (46–71 lines × 9) REDACTED:109— REDACTED:109-170 | REDACTED:2724-2780 | akshare/economic/macro_china_hk.py:14-61 | akshare/economic/macro_germany.py:13-60 | akshare/economic/macro_japan.py:14-61 | akshare/economic/macro_swiss.py:14-61 | akshare/economic/macro_uk.py:14-61 | REDACTED:86-131 | akshare/stock/stock_hold_control_em.py:114-184 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `akshare/economic/macro_china_hk.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 5 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 213 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. 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. Note first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: the declarations holding them bind `symbol` to `str = "EMG00341602"` in one and `str = "EMG00179154"` 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. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `REDACTED:171` calls `to_numeric` and `REDACTED:2781` does not — after which the two agree again for 4 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
Duplicated block (67–71 lines × 2) akshare/bond/bond_cbond.py:133— akshare/bond/bond_cbond.py:133-203 | akshare/bond/bond_cbond.py:217-283 — 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. 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 (25–70 lines × 4) akshare/stock/stock_profile_em.py:14— akshare/stock/stock_profile_em.py:14-75 | akshare/stock/stock_profile_em.py:80-149 | akshare/stock/stock_profile_em.py:154-184 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_comparison_em.py:73-97 — 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 `akshare/stock/stock_profile_em.py:154` 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. 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 `symbol` to `str = "03900"` in one and `str = "SZ000895"` 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 (64–69 lines × 2) akshare/stock/stock_hold_control_cninfo.py:36— akshare/stock/stock_hold_control_cninfo.py:36-99 | akshare/stock/stock_hold_control_cninfo.py:199-267 — 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. 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. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `akshare/stock/stock_hold_control_cninfo.py:269` calls `to_datetime` and `akshare/stock/stock_hold_control_cninfo.py:101` 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 (27–68 lines × 6) REDACTED:46— REDACTED:46-109 | REDACTED:142-205 | REDACTED:238-305 | REDACTED:338-364 | akshare/fund/fund_report_cninfo.py:42-88 | akshare/fund/fund_report_cninfo.py:109-153 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `akshare/fund/fund_report_cninfo.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 8 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 298 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 `REDACTED:338` 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. Note first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: the declarations holding them bind `end_date` to `str = "20211109"` in one and `str = "20211110"` 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. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `REDACTED:306` calls `to_datetime` and `REDACTED:110` does not — after which the two agree again for 4 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
Duplicated block (46–64 lines × 5) akshare/stock/stock_cg_equity_mortgage.py:42— akshare/stock/stock_cg_equity_mortgage.py:42-91 | akshare/stock/stock_cg_guarantee.py:55-100 | akshare/stock/stock_hold_control_cninfo.py:123-186 | akshare/stock/stock_hold_num_cninfo.py:42-89 | akshare/stock/stock_new_cninfo.py:86-142 — before extracting anything, compare `akshare/stock/stock_cg_equity_mortgage.py` and `akshare/stock/stock_cg_guarantee.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 3 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 101 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Note first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: the declarations holding them bind `date` to `str = "20210930"` in one and `str = "20210630"` 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. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `akshare/stock/stock_cg_equity_mortgage.py:92` calls `to_datetime` and `akshare/stock/stock_cg_guarantee.py:101` 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 (58–59 lines × 2) akshare/qdii/qdii_jsl.py:89— akshare/qdii/qdii_jsl.py:89-147 | akshare/qdii/qdii_jsl.py:161-218 — 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. 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. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `akshare/qdii/qdii_jsl.py:149` calls `to_datetime` and `akshare/qdii/qdii_jsl.py:220` 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 (47–58 lines × 4) REDACTED:2191— REDACTED:2191-2239 | REDACTED:2257-2314 | REDACTED:3181-3227 | akshare/stock/stock_us_js.py:14-71 — 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. 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. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `akshare/stock/stock_us_js.py:72` calls `to_datetime` and `REDACTED:3228` 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 (58 lines × 2) REDACTED:360— REDACTED:360-417 | REDACTED:421-478 — 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. 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 (57 lines × 3) REDACTED:31— REDACTED:31-87 | REDACTED:102-158 | REDACTED:173-229 — 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 (54–57 lines × 2) akshare/movie/movie_yien.py:274— akshare/movie/movie_yien.py:274-327 | akshare/movie/movie_yien.py:370-426 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. Note first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: the declarations holding them bind `date` to `str = "20240219"` in one and `str = "20240218"` 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. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `akshare/movie/movie_yien.py:328` calls `to_numeric` and `akshare/movie/movie_yien.py:427` 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 (56–57 lines × 2) akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:34— akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:34-89 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:354-410 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately.
Duplicated block (56 lines × 3) akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:753— akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:753-808 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:842-897 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:931-986 — 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 (38–53 lines × 5) akshare/fund/fund_etf_sse.py:23— akshare/fund/fund_etf_sse.py:23-61 | REDACTED:24-76 | akshare/stock/stock_info.py:300-346 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hsgt_exchange_rate.py:84-121 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hsgt_exchange_rate.py:142-179 — there are 5 copies across 4 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 5 sites; resolving a subset leaves the remainder to drift apart. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `akshare/fund/fund_etf_sse.py:23` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `akshare/fund/fund_etf_sse.py:22` calls `join` and `REDACTED:22` 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 (30–52 lines × 4) REDACTED:50— REDACTED:50-96 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:373-418 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:550-601 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:686-715 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 18 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 332 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `REDACTED:96` calls `to_numeric` and `akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:601` 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 (30–51 lines × 36) REDACTED:637— REDACTED:637-675 | akshare/crypto/crypto_hold.py:21-63 | akshare/economic/macro_australia.py:22-56 | akshare/economic/macro_australia.py:73-107 | akshare/economic/macro_australia.py:124-158 | akshare/economic/macro_australia.py:175-209 | akshare/economic/macro_australia.py:226-260 | akshare/economic/macro_australia.py:277-311 | akshare/economic/macro_australia.py:328-362 | akshare/economic/macro_canada.py:22-57 | akshare/economic/macro_canada.py:73-108 | akshare/economic/macro_canada.py:124-159 | akshare/economic/macro_canada.py:175-210 | akshare/economic/macro_canada.py:226-261 | akshare/economic/macro_canada.py:277-312 | akshare/economic/macro_canada.py:328-363 | akshare/economic/macro_canada.py:379-414 | akshare/economic/macro_canada.py:430-465 | akshare/economic/macro_canada.py:481-516 | REDACTED:211-247 | REDACTED:1146-1184 | REDACTED:2350-2395 | REDACTED:2433-2483 | REDACTED:2508-2550 | REDACTED:2585-2615 | REDACTED:2630-2662 | REDACTED:2682-2715 | REDACTED:2822-2857 | REDACTED:2875-2908 | REDACTED:2925-2958 | REDACTED:2974-3021 | REDACTED:3059-3088 | REDACTED:3104-3150 | REDACTED:87-121 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_account_em.py:22-67 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_qsjy_em.py:23-71 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `akshare/crypto/crypto_hold.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 6 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 264 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 `REDACTED:1146` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `akshare/crypto/crypto_hold.py:64` calls `to_numeric` and `REDACTED:1184` 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 (51 lines × 3) REDACTED:78— REDACTED:78-128 | REDACTED:151-201 | REDACTED:224-274 — 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. 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. Note first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: the declarations holding them bind `symbol` to `str = "ho2303"` in one and `str = "io2204"` 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 (28–51 lines × 3) akshare/qhkc_web/qhkc_index.py:22— akshare/qhkc_web/qhkc_index.py:22-49 | akshare/qhkc_web/qhkc_index.py:78-128 | akshare/qhkc_web/qhkc_index.py:155-186 — 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. 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. Note first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: the declarations holding them bind `url` to `AnyStr = QHKC_INDEX_URL` in one and `AnyStr = QHKC_INDEX_TREND_URL` 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 (43–51 lines × 2) REDACTED:490— REDACTED:490-540 | akshare/fund/fund_report_cninfo.py:170-212 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `akshare/fund/fund_report_cninfo.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 8 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 298 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (49–51 lines × 2) REDACTED:51— REDACTED:51-101 | REDACTED:43-91 — 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 (48–51 lines × 2) akshare/stock_feature/stock_analyst_em.py:120— akshare/stock_feature/stock_analyst_em.py:120-170 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_analyst_em.py:178-225 — 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 (48–50 lines × 5) akshare/stock_feature/stock_ztb_em.py:47— akshare/stock_feature/stock_ztb_em.py:47-94 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_ztb_em.py:133-180 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_ztb_em.py:210-258 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_ztb_em.py:297-346 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_ztb_em.py:385-432 — all 5 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. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `akshare/stock_feature/stock_ztb_em.py:45` calls `DataFrame` and `akshare/stock_feature/stock_ztb_em.py:295` 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 (5–49 lines × 7) akshare/bond/bond_info_cm.py:148— akshare/bond/bond_info_cm.py:148-178 | akshare/stock/stock_hold_control_em.py:51-99 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_concept_futu.py:138-164 | REDACTED:301-305 | REDACTED:1578-1616 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_margin_em.py:52-90 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_zf_pg.py:53-87 — before extracting anything, compare `akshare/stock/stock_hold_control_em.py` and `akshare/stock_feature/stock_zf_pg.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 3 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 `REDACTED:301` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `akshare/stock/stock_hold_control_em.py:100` calls `to_datetime` and `akshare/stock_feature/stock_concept_futu.py:165` 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 (24–48 lines × 4) akshare/bond/bond_cb_ths.py:25— akshare/bond/bond_cb_ths.py:25-72 | akshare/futures_derivative/futures_contract_info_shfe.py:29-54 | REDACTED:43-66 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_zygc.py:24-59 — 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. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `akshare/bond/bond_cb_ths.py:25` 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 (20–48 lines × 3) akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:327— akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:327-374 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1066-1085 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1474-1508 — before extracting anything, compare `akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py` and `akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 10 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 211 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. 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 (7–48 lines × 3) REDACTED:47— REDACTED:47-94 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:536-579 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:56-62 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 18 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 244 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:56` 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 (24–48 lines × 2) akshare/index/index_global_sina.py:45— akshare/index/index_global_sina.py:45-68 | akshare/stock/stock_hold_control_em.py:138-185 — 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 (32–48 lines × 2) REDACTED:395— REDACTED:395-442 | REDACTED:470-501 — 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 `REDACTED:395` 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. 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 (48 lines × 2) REDACTED:139— REDACTED:139-186 | REDACTED:130-177 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `REDACTED` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 15 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 166 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `REDACTED:139` 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 (6–47 lines × 21) REDACTED:71— REDACTED:71-115 | REDACTED:167-211 | REDACTED:263-309 | REDACTED:432-437 | REDACTED:512-544 | REDACTED:50-88 | REDACTED:121-159 | REDACTED:192-230 | akshare/futures_derivative/futures_contract_info_ine.py:31-55 | akshare/futures_derivative/futures_contract_info_shfe.py:32-56 | akshare/qdii/qdii_jsl.py:31-77 | akshare/qdii/qdii_jsl.py:103-149 | akshare/stock/stock_info.py:331-351 | akshare/stock/stock_share_hold.py:68-105 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_esg_sina.py:114-154 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gddh_em.py:50-84 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:542-581 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:639-676 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:726-766 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_yjyg_em.py:306-335 | REDACTED:88-111 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `akshare/futures_derivative/futures_contract_info_ine.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 3 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 81 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 `REDACTED:432` 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 `date` to `str = "20241129"` in one and `str = "20240513"` 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. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `REDACTED:116` calls `to_datetime` and `REDACTED:88` does not — after which the two agree again for 4 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
Duplicated block (18–46 lines × 5) REDACTED:140— REDACTED:140-176 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:49-94 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:152-197 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:369-386 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:473-501 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 3 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 119 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 `akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:369` 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. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:48` calls `concat` and `REDACTED:139` 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 (21–45 lines × 14) akshare/fund/fund_portfolio_em.py:255— akshare/fund/fund_portfolio_em.py:255-286 | akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:525-569 | REDACTED:86-107 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:279-299 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:416-447 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gpzy_em.py:123-160 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gpzy_em.py:267-289 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gpzy_em.py:335-367 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gpzy_em.py:404-436 | REDACTED:1276-1301 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:120-142 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:261-283 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:391-413 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:529-552 — before extracting anything, compare `akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py` and `REDACTED` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 6 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 155 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 `REDACTED:86` 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. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:523` calls `concat` and `akshare/stock_feature/stock_gpzy_em.py:334` 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 (18–45 lines × 6) REDACTED:142— REDACTED:142-176 | REDACTED:79-106 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:51-95 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:154-198 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:369-386 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_qsjy_em.py:37-75 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 3 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 119 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 `REDACTED:79` 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. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:48` calls `concat` and `REDACTED:139` 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 (45 lines × 3) akshare/qdii/qdii_jsl.py:30— akshare/qdii/qdii_jsl.py:30-75 | akshare/qdii/qdii_jsl.py:102-147 | akshare/qdii/qdii_jsl.py:174-218 — 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. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `akshare/qdii/qdii_jsl.py:77` calls `to_datetime` and `akshare/qdii/qdii_jsl.py:220` 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 (43–45 lines × 2) akshare/qhkc_web/qhkc_tool.py:18— akshare/qhkc_web/qhkc_tool.py:18-62 | akshare/qhkc_web/qhkc_tool.py:66-108 — 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. 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 (45 lines × 2) akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_ths.py:583— akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_ths.py:583-627 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_ths.py:631-675 — 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. 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 (41–44 lines × 6) akshare/bond/bond_buy_back_em.py:172— akshare/bond/bond_buy_back_em.py:172-212 | akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:355-396 | REDACTED:296-337 | REDACTED:404-447 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1035-1076 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1147-1188 — before extracting anything, compare `akshare/bond/bond_buy_back_em.py` and `akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 4 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 144 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. Note first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: the declarations holding them bind `symbol` to `str = "204001"` in one and `str = "汽车服务"` 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. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `akshare/bond/bond_buy_back_em.py:213` calls `to_datetime` and `akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:397` does not — after which the two agree again for 4 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
Duplicated block (23–44 lines × 6) akshare/fund/fund_em.py:169— akshare/fund/fund_em.py:169-208 | akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:334-377 | akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:441-470 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gpzy_em.py:472-498 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:297-319 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:471-504 — there are 6 copies across 4 file(s) — more copies than files, so at least one file holds the block twice. Extract it once into a single shared function every call site can reach and call it from all 6 sites; resolving a subset leaves the remainder to drift apart. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:297` 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. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:333` calls `concat` and `akshare/stock_feature/stock_gpzy_em.py:471` 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 (44 lines × 4) akshare/stock/stock_hold_control_cninfo.py:56— akshare/stock/stock_hold_control_cninfo.py:56-99 | akshare/stock/stock_hold_control_cninfo.py:220-267 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_margin_sse.py:82-127 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_margin_sse.py:147-196 — 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. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `akshare/stock/stock_hold_control_cninfo.py:269` calls `to_datetime` and `akshare/stock/stock_hold_control_cninfo.py:101` 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 (39–44 lines × 3) akshare/bond/bond_buy_back_em.py:15— akshare/bond/bond_buy_back_em.py:15-58 | akshare/bond/bond_buy_back_em.py:87-130 | akshare/stock/stock_gsrl_em.py:14-52 — before extracting anything, compare `akshare/bond/bond_buy_back_em.py` and `akshare/stock/stock_gsrl_em.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 3 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 `akshare/bond/bond_buy_back_em.py:15` 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 (43–44 lines × 2) REDACTED:116— REDACTED:116-158 | REDACTED:127-170 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `REDACTED` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 3 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 124 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, `REDACTED:115` calls `concat` and `REDACTED:126` 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 (2–44 lines × 11) akshare/bond/bond_china.py:168— akshare/bond/bond_china.py:168-170 | REDACTED:38-40 | REDACTED:91-93 | REDACTED:14-57 | REDACTED:64-106 | akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:415-417 | REDACTED:46-47 | REDACTED:807-809 | akshare/rate/repo_rate.py:25-27 | akshare/rate/repo_rate.py:36-38 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_a_high_low.py:29-31 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `REDACTED` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 6 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 97 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. 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. Note first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: the declarations holding them bind `symbol` to `str = "周指数"` in one and `str = "月指数"` 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 (37–44 lines × 2) akshare/movie/movie_yien.py:215— akshare/movie/movie_yien.py:215-251 | akshare/movie/movie_yien.py:447-490 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately.
Duplicated block (41–44 lines × 2) akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_restricted_em.py:56— akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_restricted_em.py:56-96 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_restricted_em.py:236-279 — 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 `akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_restricted_em.py:56` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_restricted_em.py:235` calls `DataFrame` and `akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_restricted_em.py:55` 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 (37–43 lines × 4) akshare/index/index_global_em.py:43— akshare/index/index_global_em.py:43-79 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:766-808 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:855-897 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:944-986 — before extracting anything, compare `akshare/index/index_global_em.py` and `akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 3 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 111 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 (36–43 lines × 3) akshare/bond/bond_buy_back_em.py:38— akshare/bond/bond_buy_back_em.py:38-73 | akshare/bond/bond_buy_back_em.py:110-145 | REDACTED:127-169 — 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. 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 (43 lines × 2) akshare/article/ff_factor.py:26— akshare/article/ff_factor.py:26-68 | akshare/article/ff_factor.py:71-113 — 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 (17–42 lines × 45) akshare/bond/bond_buy_back_em.py:186— akshare/bond/bond_buy_back_em.py:186-214 | REDACTED:168-185 | REDACTED:1091-1118 | REDACTED:51-70 | akshare/forex/forex_em.py:105-136 | akshare/fund/fund_em.py:171-208 | akshare/fund/fund_em.py:486-502 | akshare/fund/fund_em.py:627-645 | akshare/fund/fund_rank_em.py:111-135 | akshare/fund/fund_rank_em.py:302-326 | akshare/fund/fund_rank_em.py:481-505 | akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:147-172 | akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:243-265 | akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:330-353 | REDACTED:199-233 | REDACTED:33-52 | akshare/index/index_global_em.py:123-154 | akshare/interest_rate/interbank_rate_em.py:107-127 | akshare/option/option_lhb_em.py:74-92 | akshare/option/option_lhb_em.py:129-147 | akshare/option/option_lhb_em.py:184-202 | akshare/stock/stock_cg_equity_mortgage.py:66-93 | akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:336-377 | akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:443-470 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:52-90 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:373-410 | akshare/stock/stock_hold_control_cninfo.py:78-101 | akshare/stock/stock_hold_num_cninfo.py:66-93 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gpzy_em.py:51-74 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gpzy_em.py:474-498 | REDACTED:44-81 | REDACTED:418-435 | REDACTED:527-544 | REDACTED:634-651 | REDACTED:742-759 | REDACTED:817-851 | REDACTED:888-920 | REDACTED:956-988 | REDACTED:1024-1056 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:297-319 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:473-504 | REDACTED:41-67 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_yjyg_em.py:200-217 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_restricted_em.py:59-91 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_restricted_em.py:239-274 — before extracting anything, compare `akshare/bond/bond_buy_back_em.py` and `akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 4 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 144 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 `REDACTED:1091` 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. Note first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: the declarations holding them bind `date` to `str = "20230630"` in one and `str = "20230331"` 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. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:265` calls `to_numeric` and `akshare/bond/bond_buy_back_em.py:214` 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 (18–42 lines × 38) REDACTED:649— REDACTED:649-677 | akshare/crypto/crypto_hold.py:26-67 | akshare/economic/macro_australia.py:37-58 | akshare/economic/macro_australia.py:88-109 | akshare/economic/macro_australia.py:139-160 | akshare/economic/macro_australia.py:190-211 | akshare/economic/macro_australia.py:241-262 | akshare/economic/macro_australia.py:292-313 | akshare/economic/macro_australia.py:343-364 | akshare/economic/macro_canada.py:37-59 | akshare/economic/macro_canada.py:88-110 | akshare/economic/macro_canada.py:139-161 | akshare/economic/macro_canada.py:190-212 | akshare/economic/macro_canada.py:241-263 | akshare/economic/macro_canada.py:292-314 | akshare/economic/macro_canada.py:343-365 | akshare/economic/macro_canada.py:394-416 | akshare/economic/macro_canada.py:445-467 | akshare/economic/macro_canada.py:496-518 | REDACTED:226-249 | REDACTED:1161-1189 | REDACTED:2217-2245 | REDACTED:2280-2320 | REDACTED:2365-2400 | REDACTED:2449-2485 | REDACTED:2523-2555 | REDACTED:2599-2617 | REDACTED:2644-2666 | REDACTED:2696-2717 | REDACTED:2836-2859 | REDACTED:2889-2910 | REDACTED:2939-2960 | REDACTED:2990-3026 | REDACTED:3073-3090 | REDACTED:3119-3155 | REDACTED:3207-3229 | REDACTED:102-123 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_account_em.py:36-72 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `akshare/crypto/crypto_hold.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 6 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 264 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. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `REDACTED:678` calls `to_numeric` and `REDACTED:124` 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 (20–42 lines × 9) REDACTED:345— REDACTED:345-374 | REDACTED:417-443 | akshare/bond/bond_zh_sina.py:90-109 | REDACTED:284-310 | REDACTED:74-96 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_fhps_em.py:86-114 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdhs.py:68-108 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdhs.py:168-209 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdzjc_em.py:84-107 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `akshare/bond/bond_zh_sina.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 5 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 129 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `REDACTED:417` 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. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdhs.py:111` calls `to_numeric` and `akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdhs.py:212` 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 (42 lines × 6) akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_register_em.py:45— akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_register_em.py:45-86 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_register_em.py:119-160 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_register_em.py:193-234 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_register_em.py:267-308 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_register_em.py:341-382 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_register_em.py:415-456 — all 6 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. The `return` at the foot of the matched lines is the enclosing body's own terminal exit, not an early one: it moves with them unchanged, and each site calls the extracted unit from the position that `return` occupied — no decision has to be handed back and re-acted on.
Duplicated block (5–42 lines × 5) REDACTED:115— REDACTED:115-156 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:820-825 | REDACTED:114-118 | REDACTED:223-227 | REDACTED:324-328 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `REDACTED` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 4 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 140 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 `akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:820` 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 (31–42 lines × 5) akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:155— akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:155-194 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:768-809 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:857-898 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:946-987 | akshare/stock/stock_hsgt_em.py:36-66 — there are 5 copies across 3 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 5 sites; resolving a subset leaves the remainder to drift apart. 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 (41–42 lines × 2) akshare/stock/stock_allotment_cninfo.py:33— akshare/stock/stock_allotment_cninfo.py:33-74 | akshare/stock/stock_share_changes_cninfo.py:36-76 — 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. 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. Note first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: the declarations holding them bind `end_date` to `str = "22220222"` in one and `str = "20241021"` 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 (42 lines × 2) akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_ipo_ths.py:37— akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_ipo_ths.py:37-78 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_ipo_ths.py:89-130 — 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. The `return` at the foot of the matched lines is the enclosing body's own terminal exit, not an early one: it moves with them unchanged, and each site calls the extracted unit from the position that `return` occupied — no decision has to be handed back and re-acted on.
Duplicated block (20–41 lines × 9) REDACTED:417— REDACTED:417-443 | akshare/bond/bond_zh_sina.py:90-109 | REDACTED:285-310 | REDACTED:74-96 | REDACTED:92-111 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_fhps_em.py:86-115 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdhs.py:69-108 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdhs.py:169-209 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdzjc_em.py:84-107 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `akshare/bond/bond_zh_sina.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 5 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 129 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `REDACTED:417` 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. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdhs.py:209` calls `to_numeric` and `akshare/stock_feature/stock_fhps_em.py:115` 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 (26–41 lines × 4) akshare/stock/stock_hold_control_cninfo.py:148— akshare/stock/stock_hold_control_cninfo.py:148-188 | akshare/stock/stock_hold_control_cninfo.py:241-269 | akshare/stock/stock_new_cninfo.py:110-148 | REDACTED:58-83 — before extracting anything, compare `akshare/stock/stock_hold_control_cninfo.py` and `akshare/stock/stock_new_cninfo.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 7 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 282 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately.
Duplicated block (32–41 lines × 2) akshare/index/index_zh_em.py:220— akshare/index/index_zh_em.py:220-251 | akshare/index/index_zh_em.py:291-331 — 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 (31–41 lines × 2) akshare/reits/reits_basic.py:117— akshare/reits/reits_basic.py:117-157 | akshare/reits/reits_basic.py:174-204 — 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. 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 (19–40 lines × 7) REDACTED:133— REDACTED:133-172 | REDACTED:2748-2784 | akshare/economic/macro_china_hk.py:39-62 | akshare/economic/macro_japan.py:39-62 | akshare/index/index_research_fund_sw.py:35-55 | REDACTED:214-235 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_margin_sse.py:45-63 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `akshare/economic/macro_china_hk.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 5 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 213 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `REDACTED:133` 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 (4–39 lines × 15) REDACTED:43— REDACTED:43-46 | REDACTED:34-72 | REDACTED:92-128 | REDACTED:151-187 | REDACTED:210-245 | REDACTED:268-304 | REDACTED:324-360 | REDACTED:383-419 | REDACTED:442-478 | REDACTED:501-537 | REDACTED:560-596 | REDACTED:619-655 | REDACTED:678-714 | REDACTED:737-772 | REDACTED:795-830 — there are 15 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 15 sites; resolving a subset leaves the remainder to drift apart. 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 (18–39 lines × 8) akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:226— akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:226-264 | REDACTED:124-162 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gpzy_em.py:319-353 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gpzy_em.py:388-422 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gpzy_em.py:456-484 | REDACTED:1221-1239 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:152-169 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:732-754 — before extracting anything, compare `akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py` and `akshare/stock_feature/stock_gpzy_em.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 16 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 367 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 `REDACTED:1221` 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. Note first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: the declarations holding them bind `symbol` to `str = "008286"` in one and `str = "北向资金增持行业板块排行"` 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. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:265` calls `to_datetime` and `REDACTED:163` does not — after which the two agree again for 4 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
Duplicated block (24–39 lines × 3) REDACTED:543— REDACTED:543-572 | REDACTED:624-647 | REDACTED:687-725 — 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 `REDACTED:543` 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. 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 `symbol` to `str = "10003720"` in one and `str = "sh510300"` 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 (39 lines × 2) REDACTED:618— REDACTED:618-656 | REDACTED:674-712 — 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 (38–39 lines × 2) akshare/stock_feature/stock_margin_em.py:56— akshare/stock_feature/stock_margin_em.py:56-94 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_value_em.py:39-76 — 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 (21–38 lines × 7) REDACTED:354— REDACTED:354-391 | REDACTED:446-483 | REDACTED:554-585 | REDACTED:654-685 | REDACTED:739-772 | REDACTED:827-860 | REDACTED:931-951 — all 7 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 `REDACTED:931` 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 (23–38 lines × 4) akshare/bond/bond_buy_back_em.py:36— akshare/bond/bond_buy_back_em.py:36-73 | akshare/bond/bond_buy_back_em.py:108-145 | REDACTED:155-177 | akshare/stock/stock_gsrl_em.py:35-61 — before extracting anything, compare `akshare/bond/bond_buy_back_em.py` and `akshare/stock/stock_gsrl_em.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 3 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.
Duplicated block (35–38 lines × 4) akshare/stock/stock_share_hold.py:67— akshare/stock/stock_share_hold.py:67-104 | akshare/stock/stock_share_hold.py:153-187 | akshare/stock/stock_share_hold.py:238-272 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gddh_em.py:49-83 — 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.
Duplicated block (29–38 lines × 3) akshare/index/index_zh_em.py:77— akshare/index/index_zh_em.py:77-114 | akshare/index/index_zh_em.py:210-238 | akshare/index/index_zh_em.py:278-315 — 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 (19–38 lines × 3) akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:138— akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:138-160 | akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:190-208 | akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:246-283 — 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 `akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:138` 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 (35–38 lines × 3) akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_restricted_em.py:57— akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_restricted_em.py:57-91 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_restricted_em.py:150-185 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_restricted_em.py:237-274 — all 3 copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from every one of those sites — resolving only two of them leaves the rest to drift apart the first time one is edited. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_restricted_em.py:148` calls `concat` and `akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_restricted_em.py:56` 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 (38 lines × 2) akshare/fund/fund_scale_em.py:16— akshare/fund/fund_scale_em.py:16-53 | akshare/fund/fund_scale_em.py:72-109 — 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. 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 (29–38 lines × 2) REDACTED:46— REDACTED:46-83 | REDACTED:105-133 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. Note first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: the declarations holding them bind `symbol` to `str = "801030"` in one and `str = "801001"` 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 (7–38 lines × 2) akshare/stock_feature/stock_esg_sina.py:36— akshare/stock_feature/stock_esg_sina.py:36-42 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_esg_sina.py:283-320 — 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 `akshare/stock_feature/stock_esg_sina.py:36` 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 (37 lines × 39) REDACTED:628— REDACTED:628-675 | akshare/crypto/crypto_hold.py:14-63 | akshare/economic/macro_australia.py:15-56 | akshare/economic/macro_australia.py:66-107 | akshare/economic/macro_australia.py:117-158 | akshare/economic/macro_australia.py:168-209 | akshare/economic/macro_australia.py:219-260 | akshare/economic/macro_australia.py:270-311 | akshare/economic/macro_australia.py:321-362 | akshare/economic/macro_canada.py:15-57 | akshare/economic/macro_canada.py:66-108 | akshare/economic/macro_canada.py:117-159 | akshare/economic/macro_canada.py:168-210 | akshare/economic/macro_canada.py:219-261 | akshare/economic/macro_canada.py:270-312 | akshare/economic/macro_canada.py:321-363 | akshare/economic/macro_canada.py:372-414 | akshare/economic/macro_canada.py:423-465 | akshare/economic/macro_canada.py:474-516 | REDACTED:204-247 | REDACTED:1062-1113 | REDACTED:1139-1183 | REDACTED:2343-2393 | REDACTED:2426-2483 | REDACTED:2501-2549 | REDACTED:2578-2615 | REDACTED:2623-2662 | REDACTED:2675-2715 | REDACTED:2815-2857 | REDACTED:2868-2908 | REDACTED:2918-2958 | REDACTED:2967-3019 | REDACTED:3052-3088 | REDACTED:3097-3149 | REDACTED:80-121 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_account_em.py:15-66 | REDACTED:19-79 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_qsjy_em.py:14-71 | REDACTED:20-65 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `akshare/crypto/crypto_hold.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 6 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 264 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. 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. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `REDACTED:80` calls `to_datetime` and `REDACTED:676` does not — after which the two agree again for 4 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
Duplicated block (31–36 lines × 4) akshare/bond/bond_buy_back_em.py:40— akshare/bond/bond_buy_back_em.py:40-75 | akshare/bond/bond_buy_back_em.py:112-147 | akshare/stock/stock_hsgt_em.py:38-68 | akshare/stock/stock_hsgt_em.py:98-131 — 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. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `akshare/stock/stock_hsgt_em.py:36` calls `reset_index`, `astype` and `akshare/stock/stock_hsgt_em.py:97` 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 (22–36 lines × 4) REDACTED:264— REDACTED:264-289 | REDACTED:318-353 | REDACTED:601-624 | REDACTED:819-840 — 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.
Duplicated block (20–36 lines × 2) REDACTED:28— REDACTED:28-63 | REDACTED:32-51 — 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 `REDACTED:32` 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 (36 lines × 2) REDACTED:490— REDACTED:490-525 | REDACTED:608-643 — 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. 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. Note first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: the declarations holding them bind `symbol` to `str = "MPV"` in one and `str = "狭义乘用车-累计"` 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 (18–36 lines × 2) akshare/stock_feature/stock_jgdy_em.py:84— akshare/stock_feature/stock_jgdy_em.py:84-101 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_jgdy_em.py:143-178 — 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 `akshare/stock_feature/stock_jgdy_em.py:84` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `akshare/stock_feature/stock_jgdy_em.py:102` calls `to_numeric` and `akshare/stock_feature/stock_jgdy_em.py:179` 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 (28–36 lines × 2) akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_restricted_em.py:40— akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_restricted_em.py:40-75 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_restricted_em.py:316-343 — 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 `akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_restricted_em.py:40` 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 first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: the declarations holding them bind `symbol` to `str = "全部股票"` in one and `str = "600000"` 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 (19–35 lines × 8) REDACTED:66— REDACTED:66-90 | REDACTED:262-286 | REDACTED:316-350 | REDACTED:387-409 | REDACTED:552-572 | REDACTED:599-621 | REDACTED:655-673 | REDACTED:817-837 — all 8 copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from every one of those sites — resolving only two of them leaves the rest to drift apart the first time one is edited.
Duplicated block (35 lines × 6) REDACTED:188— REDACTED:188-222 | REDACTED:249-283 | REDACTED:310-344 | REDACTED:402-436 | REDACTED:695-729 | REDACTED:783-817 — all 6 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. 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 (33–35 lines × 2) akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:409— akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:409-443 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:466-498 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. Note first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: the declarations holding them bind `date` to `str = "20240930"` in one and `str = "20210630"` 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 (13–34 lines × 7) akshare/bond/bond_china.py:123— akshare/bond/bond_china.py:123-135 | REDACTED:286-307 | akshare/stock/stock_cg_guarantee.py:79-102 | REDACTED:70-103 | REDACTED:62-93 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_margin_sse.py:100-129 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_margin_sse.py:167-198 — before extracting anything, compare `akshare/bond/bond_china.py` and `REDACTED` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 4 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 144 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 `akshare/bond/bond_china.py:123` 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. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `REDACTED:104` calls `to_numeric` and `akshare/bond/bond_china.py:136` 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 (13–33 lines × 7) REDACTED:345— REDACTED:345-377 | REDACTED:437-469 | REDACTED:545-573 | REDACTED:645-673 | REDACTED:730-760 | REDACTED:818-848 | REDACTED:889-901 — all 7 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 `REDACTED:889` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `REDACTED:544` calls `read_html`, `StringIO` and `REDACTED:644` does not — after which the two agree again for 4 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
Duplicated block (31–33 lines × 3) akshare/fund/fund_position_lg.py:16— akshare/fund/fund_position_lg.py:16-46 | akshare/fund/fund_position_lg.py:52-84 | akshare/fund/fund_position_lg.py:90-122 — 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. 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 (23–33 lines × 3) akshare/fund/fund_rank_em.py:208— akshare/fund/fund_rank_em.py:208-230 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_analyst_em.py:136-168 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_analyst_em.py:194-223 — before extracting anything, compare `akshare/fund/fund_rank_em.py` and `akshare/stock_feature/stock_analyst_em.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 3 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 119 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 `akshare/fund/fund_rank_em.py:208` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately.
Duplicated block (30–33 lines × 3) REDACTED:324— REDACTED:324-356 | REDACTED:427-456 | REDACTED:502-531 — 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. 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. Note first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: the declarations holding them bind `date` to `str = "20221104"` in one and `str = "20221031"` 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 (27–32 lines × 10) REDACTED:1013— REDACTED:1013-1040 | REDACTED:1766-1792 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:598-629 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:21-47 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:162-188 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:303-329 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:439-465 | REDACTED:17-46 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_zf_pg.py:19-45 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_zf_pg.py:100-126 — there are 10 copies across 5 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 10 sites; resolving a subset leaves the remainder to drift apart. 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. Note first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: the declarations holding them bind `date` to `str = "20230331"` in one and `str = "20240331"` 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 (29–32 lines × 8) akshare/bond/bond_buy_back_em.py:171— akshare/bond/bond_buy_back_em.py:171-202 | akshare/futures/futures_settlement_price_sgx.py:27-58 | akshare/index/index_stock_hk.py:251-282 | akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:354-382 | REDACTED:295-323 | REDACTED:403-433 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1034-1062 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1146-1174 — before extracting anything, compare `akshare/bond/bond_buy_back_em.py` and `akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 4 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 144 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 `akshare/bond/bond_buy_back_em.py:171` 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. Note first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: the declarations holding them bind `symbol` to `str = "204001"` in one and `str = "汽车服务"` 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 (32 lines × 7) REDACTED:33— REDACTED:33-68 | REDACTED:129-164 | REDACTED:225-260 | REDACTED:325-360 | akshare/fund/fund_report_cninfo.py:31-63 | akshare/fund/fund_report_cninfo.py:98-130 | akshare/stock/stock_new_cninfo.py:77-108 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `akshare/fund/fund_report_cninfo.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 8 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 298 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. 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. Note first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: the declarations holding them bind `end_date` to `str = "20211109"` in one and `str = "20211110"` 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 (9–32 lines × 6) akshare/stock/stock_hk_comparison_em.py:39— akshare/stock/stock_hk_comparison_em.py:39-58 | akshare/stock/stock_hk_comparison_em.py:88-115 | akshare/stock/stock_hk_comparison_em.py:145-164 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_comparison_em.py:61-69 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_comparison_em.py:185-216 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_comparison_em.py:245-267 — there are 6 copies across 2 file(s) — more copies than files, so at least one file holds the block twice. Extract it once into a single shared function every call site can reach and call it from all 6 sites; resolving a subset leaves the remainder to drift apart. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `akshare/stock/stock_zh_comparison_em.py:61` 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. The `return` at the foot of the matched lines is the enclosing body's own terminal exit, not an early one: it moves with them unchanged, and each site calls the extracted unit from the position that `return` occupied — no decision has to be handed back and re-acted on. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `akshare/stock/stock_hk_comparison_em.py:39` calls `get` and `akshare/stock/stock_zh_comparison_em.py:61` does not — after which the two agree again for 5 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
Duplicated block (23–32 lines × 5) REDACTED:156— REDACTED:156-181 | REDACTED:201-232 | REDACTED:274-296 | akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:220-244 | akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:257-286 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 8 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 170 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 (31–32 lines × 3) akshare/fund/fund_em.py:742— akshare/fund/fund_em.py:742-773 | akshare/fund/fund_em.py:868-898 | akshare/fund/fund_em.py:1003-1033 — 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. 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. Note first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: the declarations holding them bind `symbol` to `str = "000009"` in one and `str = "000134"` 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 (30–32 lines × 3) akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:255— akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:255-285 | akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:352-381 | REDACTED:401-432 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere all 3 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 3 times. 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. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:254` calls `to_datetime`, `astype` and `akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:351` does not — after which the two agree again for 4 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
Duplicated block (27–32 lines × 2) akshare/economic/macro_finance_ths.py:51— akshare/economic/macro_finance_ths.py:51-77 | akshare/economic/macro_finance_ths.py:83-114 — 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. 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 (31–32 lines × 2) akshare/stock_feature/stock_yjyg_em.py:18— akshare/stock_feature/stock_yjyg_em.py:18-49 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_yjyg_em.py:136-166 — 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. 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. Note first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: the declarations holding them bind `date` to `str = "20211231"` in one and `str = "20200331"` 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 (32 lines × 2) akshare/utils/demjson.py:408— akshare/utils/demjson.py:408-439 | akshare/utils/demjson.py:539-570 — 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 (27–31 lines × 9) akshare/stock_feature/stock_analyst_em.py:16— akshare/stock_feature/stock_analyst_em.py:16-46 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_ipo_declare.py:17-44 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_register_em.py:17-43 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_register_em.py:90-117 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_register_em.py:164-191 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_register_em.py:238-265 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_register_em.py:312-339 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_register_em.py:386-413 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_register_em.py:460-486 — before extracting anything, compare `akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_ipo_declare.py` and `akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_register_em.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 4 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 70 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. 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 (31 lines × 3) akshare/stock/stock_industry_cninfo.py:110— akshare/stock/stock_industry_cninfo.py:110-149 | akshare/stock/stock_ipo_summary_cninfo.py:31-61 | akshare/stock/stock_profile_cninfo.py:31-62 — before extracting anything, compare `akshare/stock/stock_industry_cninfo.py` and `akshare/stock/stock_ipo_summary_cninfo.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 3 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 90 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. 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. Note first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: the declarations holding them bind `symbol` to `str = "002594"` in one and `str = "600030"` 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 (31 lines × 2) akshare/index/index_stock_hk.py:252— akshare/index/index_stock_hk.py:252-282 | akshare/reits/reits_basic.py:127-158 — 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 `akshare/reits/reits_basic.py:127` 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 (2–31 lines × 4) akshare/index/index_sugar.py:69— akshare/index/index_sugar.py:69-71 | akshare/movie/movie_yien.py:429-430 | REDACTED:74-104 | REDACTED:150-180 — there are 4 copies across 3 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. Note first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: the declarations holding them bind `symbol` to `str = "创月新高"` in one and `str = "创月新低"` 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 (23–30 lines × 7) akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:361— akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:361-385 | akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:398-427 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1072-1096 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1109-1138 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1188-1210 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1496-1519 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1532-1561 — before extracting anything, compare `akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py` and `akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 10 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 211 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 (30 lines × 5) akshare/futures/futures_comex_em.py:16— akshare/futures/futures_comex_em.py:16-45 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdzjc_em.py:16-47 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:336-366 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:513-543 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:649-679 — before extracting anything, compare `akshare/futures/futures_comex_em.py` and `akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdzjc_em.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 8 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 117 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. 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. Note first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: the declarations holding them bind `symbol` to `str = "黄金"` in one and `str = "全部"` 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 (30 lines × 4) akshare/forex/forex_em.py:17— akshare/forex/forex_em.py:17-67 | akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:45-74 | akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:46-105 | akshare/index/index_stock_hk.py:149-206 — before extracting anything, compare `akshare/forex/forex_em.py` and `akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 3 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 144 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 `akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:45` 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. 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 (24–30 lines × 3) akshare/index/index_zh_em.py:134— akshare/index/index_zh_em.py:134-163 | akshare/index/index_zh_em.py:230-253 | akshare/index/index_zh_em.py:304-333 — 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 (24–30 lines × 2) akshare/event/migration.py:19— akshare/event/migration.py:19-48 | akshare/event/migration.py:60-83 — 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. 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. Note first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: the declarations holding them bind `area` to `str = "重庆市"` in one and `str = "广州市"` 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 (29–30 lines × 2) akshare/index/index_cons.py:127— akshare/index/index_cons.py:127-155 | akshare/index/index_cons.py:161-190 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. 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 (30 lines × 2) akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1402— akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1402-1431 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1695-1724 — 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. 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 (27–29 lines × 8) REDACTED:43— REDACTED:43-70 | REDACTED:139-166 | REDACTED:235-262 | REDACTED:335-362 | akshare/fund/fund_report_cninfo.py:39-65 | akshare/fund/fund_report_cninfo.py:106-132 | akshare/stock/stock_hold_control_cninfo.py:120-148 | akshare/stock/stock_new_cninfo.py:83-110 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `akshare/fund/fund_report_cninfo.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 8 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 298 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. Note first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: the declarations holding them bind `end_date` to `str = "20211109"` in one and `str = "20211110"` 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 (20–29 lines × 5) akshare/stock_feature/stock_a_pe_and_pb.py:348— akshare/stock_feature/stock_a_pe_and_pb.py:348-367 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_a_pe_and_pb.py:375-395 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_a_pe_and_pb.py:430-458 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_a_pe_and_pb.py:483-504 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_a_pe_and_pb.py:539-561 — all 5 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 `akshare/stock_feature/stock_a_pe_and_pb.py:375` 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. The `return` at the foot of the matched lines is the enclosing body's own terminal exit, not an early one: it moves with them unchanged, and each site calls the extracted unit from the position that `return` occupied — no decision has to be handed back and re-acted on.
Duplicated block (28–29 lines × 3) akshare/index/index_global_sina.py:31— akshare/index/index_global_sina.py:31-59 | REDACTED:152-179 | REDACTED:189-217 — 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 `akshare/index/index_global_sina.py:31` 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. 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 `symbol` to `str = "OMX"` in one and `str = "600000"` 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 (29 lines × 3) akshare/stock_feature/stock_hot_xq.py:82— akshare/stock_feature/stock_hot_xq.py:82-110 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hot_xq.py:145-173 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hot_xq.py:208-236 — 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. 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 (9–29 lines × 2) akshare/futures/futures_comex_em.py:51— akshare/futures/futures_comex_em.py:51-79 | REDACTED:52-60 — before extracting anything, compare `akshare/futures/futures_comex_em.py` and `REDACTED` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 8 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 114 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 `akshare/futures/futures_comex_em.py:51` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately.
Duplicated block (28 lines × 10) REDACTED:118— REDACTED:118-158 | akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:157-195 | REDACTED:129-170 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:770-810 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:859-899 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:948-988 | REDACTED:52-96 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:375-418 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:552-601 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:688-715 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `REDACTED` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 3 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 124 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. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `REDACTED:115` calls `concat` and `REDACTED:126` 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 (15–28 lines × 7) akshare/futures/futures_comm_qihuo.py:106— akshare/futures/futures_comm_qihuo.py:106-132 | REDACTED:163-177 | REDACTED:80-107 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:70-97 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:173-200 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:370-387 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_qsjy_em.py:54-77 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 3 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 119 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. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately.
Duplicated block (28 lines × 5) akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:635— akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:635-674 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:722-764 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:372-415 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:549-594 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:685-712 — there are 5 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 5 sites; resolving a subset leaves the remainder to drift apart. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:675` calls `to_datetime`, `to_numeric` and `akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:596` 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 (24–28 lines × 4) akshare/stock/stock_industry_cninfo.py:123— akshare/stock/stock_industry_cninfo.py:123-150 | REDACTED:44-70 | akshare/stock/stock_ipo_summary_cninfo.py:39-62 | akshare/stock/stock_profile_cninfo.py:40-63 — before extracting anything, compare `akshare/stock/stock_industry_cninfo.py` and `REDACTED` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 3 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 73 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Note first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: the declarations holding them bind `symbol` to `str = "002594"` in one and `str = "证监会行业分类"` 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 (28 lines × 4) REDACTED:85— REDACTED:85-112 | REDACTED:194-221 | REDACTED:295-322 | REDACTED:387-414 — 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. 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. Note first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: the declarations holding them bind `date` to `str = "20240630"` in one and `str = "20231231"` 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 (27–28 lines × 3) REDACTED:854— REDACTED:854-881 | REDACTED:923-949 | REDACTED:991-1017 — 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 `REDACTED:854` 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. 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 (27–28 lines × 2) REDACTED:56— REDACTED:56-82 | REDACTED:87-114 — 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. 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. 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 (26–28 lines × 2) akshare/stock_feature/stock_gpzy_em.py:22— akshare/stock_feature/stock_gpzy_em.py:22-47 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_tfp_em.py:14-41 — before extracting anything, compare `akshare/stock_feature/stock_gpzy_em.py` and `akshare/stock_feature/stock_tfp_em.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 3 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 40 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. 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. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `akshare/stock_feature/stock_tfp_em.py:45` calls `reset_index` and `akshare/stock_feature/stock_gpzy_em.py:51` 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 (13–28 lines × 2) akshare/stock_feature/stock_jgdy_em.py:38— akshare/stock_feature/stock_jgdy_em.py:38-50 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_jgdy_em.py:132-159 — 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 `akshare/stock_feature/stock_jgdy_em.py:38` 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 (18–27 lines × 12) akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:633— akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:633-656 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:720-745 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:370-395 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:547-573 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:683-700 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_ipo_declare.py:44-64 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_register_em.py:43-64 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_register_em.py:117-138 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_register_em.py:191-212 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_register_em.py:265-286 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_register_em.py:339-360 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_register_em.py:413-434 — there are 12 copies across 4 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 12 sites; resolving a subset leaves the remainder to drift apart.
Duplicated block (27 lines × 6) akshare/fund/fund_etf_sse.py:34— akshare/fund/fund_etf_sse.py:34-62 | akshare/futures_derivative/futures_contract_info_ine.py:24-53 | REDACTED:30-77 | akshare/stock/stock_info.py:313-347 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hsgt_exchange_rate.py:96-122 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hsgt_exchange_rate.py:154-180 — there are 6 copies across 5 file(s) — more copies than files, so at least one file holds the block twice. Extract it once into a single shared function every call site can reach and call it from all 6 sites; resolving a subset leaves the remainder to drift apart. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `akshare/futures_derivative/futures_contract_info_ine.py:55` calls `to_datetime` and `akshare/stock/stock_info.py:349` does not — after which the two agree again for 3 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
Duplicated block (16–27 lines × 2) akshare/futures/futures_basis.py:82— akshare/futures/futures_basis.py:82-108 | akshare/futures/futures_basis.py:301-316 — 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. 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 (14–27 lines × 2) akshare/stock/stock_info.py:268— akshare/stock/stock_info.py:268-281 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_fhps_em.py:208-234 — 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 `akshare/stock/stock_info.py:268` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately.
Duplicated block (6–26 lines × 15) akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:331— akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:331-356 | akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:438-456 | akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:521-546 | REDACTED:47-53 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:46-70 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:251-257 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:342-348 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:922-940 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:985-1003 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gpzy_em.py:119-142 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gpzy_em.py:219-224 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:265-270 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:468-488 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:337-343 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:473-479 — before extracting anything, compare `akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py` and `REDACTED` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 6 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 155 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 `akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:331` 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 (26 lines × 6) akshare/stock/stock_hk_comparison_em.py:14— akshare/stock/stock_hk_comparison_em.py:14-54 | akshare/stock/stock_hk_comparison_em.py:62-111 | akshare/stock/stock_hk_comparison_em.py:119-160 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_comparison_em.py:14-39 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_comparison_em.py:163-211 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_comparison_em.py:220-262 — there are 6 copies across 2 file(s) — more copies than files, so at least one file holds the block twice. Extract it once into a single shared function every call site can reach and call it from all 6 sites; resolving a subset leaves the remainder to drift apart. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `akshare/stock/stock_zh_comparison_em.py:14` 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. 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 `symbol` to `str = "03900"` in one and `str = "SZ000895"` 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 (24–26 lines × 6) akshare/stock_feature/stock_ztb_em.py:46— akshare/stock_feature/stock_ztb_em.py:46-69 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_ztb_em.py:132-155 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_ztb_em.py:209-233 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_ztb_em.py:296-321 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_ztb_em.py:384-407 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_ztb_em.py:464-487 — all 6 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. 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. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `akshare/stock_feature/stock_ztb_em.py:45` calls `DataFrame` and `akshare/stock_feature/stock_ztb_em.py:295` 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 (24–26 lines × 4) REDACTED:155— REDACTED:155-180 | akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:219-243 | akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:321-344 | REDACTED:369-392 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 8 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 170 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 after the matched lines, `REDACTED:181` calls `to_datetime`, `reset_index` and `akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:345` 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 (19–26 lines × 2) akshare/futures/futures_zh_sina.py:289— akshare/futures/futures_zh_sina.py:289-314 | akshare/futures/futures_zh_sina.py:386-404 — 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 `akshare/futures/futures_zh_sina.py:289` 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 (25–26 lines × 2) akshare/news/news_baidu.py:300— akshare/news/news_baidu.py:300-325 | akshare/news/news_baidu.py:374-398 — 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. 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 (25 lines × 6) akshare/stock/stock_cg_equity_mortgage.py:64— akshare/stock/stock_cg_equity_mortgage.py:64-92 | akshare/stock/stock_hold_control_cninfo.py:76-100 | akshare/stock/stock_hold_control_cninfo.py:147-187 | akshare/stock/stock_hold_control_cninfo.py:240-268 | akshare/stock/stock_hold_num_cninfo.py:64-90 | akshare/stock/stock_new_cninfo.py:109-145 — before extracting anything, compare `akshare/stock/stock_cg_equity_mortgage.py` and `akshare/stock/stock_hold_control_cninfo.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 6 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 240 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. 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 `date` to `str = "20210930"` in one and `str = "20210630"` 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. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `akshare/stock/stock_hold_control_cninfo.py:188` calls `to_datetime` and `akshare/stock/stock_cg_equity_mortgage.py:93` 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 (6–25 lines × 5) akshare/interest_rate/interbank_rate_em.py:102— akshare/interest_rate/interbank_rate_em.py:102-118 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdhs.py:64-86 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdhs.py:164-188 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdzjc_em.py:53-59 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_zf_pg.py:132-137 — before extracting anything, compare `akshare/interest_rate/interbank_rate_em.py` and `akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdhs.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 10 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 147 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 `akshare/interest_rate/interbank_rate_em.py:102` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately.
Duplicated block (23–25 lines × 4) akshare/fund/fund_em.py:512— akshare/fund/fund_em.py:512-534 | akshare/fund/fund_em.py:539-561 | akshare/fund/fund_em.py:566-590 | akshare/fund/fund_em.py:654-678 — 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. 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. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `akshare/fund/fund_em.py:511` calls `DataFrame` and `akshare/fund/fund_em.py:653` 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 (24–25 lines × 3) akshare/reits/reits_basic.py:184— akshare/reits/reits_basic.py:184-207 | akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:323-346 | REDACTED:371-395 — before extracting anything, compare `akshare/reits/reits_basic.py` and `akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 5 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 116 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 (19–25 lines × 2) akshare/economic/macro_other.py:72— akshare/economic/macro_other.py:72-96 | akshare/fund/fund_etf_sse.py:22-40 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `akshare/economic/macro_other.py:71` calls `join` and `akshare/fund/fund_etf_sse.py:20` 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 (21–25 lines × 2) akshare/fund/fund_rank_em.py:253— akshare/fund/fund_rank_em.py:253-273 | akshare/fund/fund_rank_em.py:435-459 — 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 `akshare/fund/fund_rank_em.py:253` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `akshare/fund/fund_rank_em.py:434` calls `now`, `date`, `isoformat` and `akshare/fund/fund_rank_em.py:251` does not — after which the two agree again for 4 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
Duplicated block (22–25 lines × 2) akshare/option/option_commodity_sina.py:17— akshare/option/option_commodity_sina.py:17-38 | akshare/option/option_commodity_sina.py:58-82 — 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 `akshare/option/option_commodity_sina.py:17` 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. 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. 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 `symbol` to `str = "玉米期权"` in one and `str = "黄金期权"` 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 × 25) REDACTED:15— REDACTED:15-39 | REDACTED:310-336 | REDACTED:1381-1404 | REDACTED:1436-1459 | REDACTED:1491-1514 | REDACTED:1546-1569 | REDACTED:1601-1624 | REDACTED:1656-1679 | REDACTED:1711-1734 | REDACTED:1824-1847 | REDACTED:1879-1902 | REDACTED:1934-1957 | REDACTED:1989-2012 | REDACTED:20-43 | REDACTED:19-43 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gddh_em.py:15-39 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:18-42 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:120-144 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:223-247 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:314-338 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:506-532 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:692-716 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:790-814 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdhs.py:131-158 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:905-929 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `REDACTED` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 3 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 57 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. 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. Note first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: the declarations holding them bind `date` to `str = "20210630"` in one and `str = "20210930"` 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 × 11) REDACTED:46— REDACTED:46-70 | REDACTED:142-166 | REDACTED:238-262 | REDACTED:338-362 | akshare/fund/fund_report_cninfo.py:42-65 | akshare/fund/fund_report_cninfo.py:109-132 | akshare/stock/stock_cg_equity_mortgage.py:42-65 | akshare/stock/stock_cg_guarantee.py:55-80 | akshare/stock/stock_hold_control_cninfo.py:123-148 | akshare/stock/stock_hold_num_cninfo.py:42-65 | akshare/stock/stock_new_cninfo.py:86-110 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `akshare/fund/fund_report_cninfo.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 8 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 298 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. Note first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: the declarations holding them bind `end_date` to `str = "20211109"` in one and `str = "20211110"` 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 × 4) REDACTED:64— REDACTED:64-87 | akshare/economic/macro_constitute.py:39-62 | akshare/economic/macro_constitute.py:104-127 | REDACTED:35-58 — there are 4 copies across 3 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. 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 (24 lines × 3) REDACTED:359— REDACTED:359-382 | REDACTED:459-482 | REDACTED:534-557 — all 3 copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from every one of those sites — resolving only two of them leaves the rest to drift apart the first time one is edited. Note first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: the declarations holding them bind `date` to `str = "20221104"` in one and `str = "20221031"` 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 (3–24 lines × 3) akshare/index/index_eri.py:50— akshare/index/index_eri.py:50-52 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_sina.py:376-397 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_sina.py:423-446 — 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. 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 (16–23 lines × 49) REDACTED:24— REDACTED:24-40 | REDACTED:317-337 | REDACTED:1024-1041 | REDACTED:1388-1405 | REDACTED:1443-1460 | REDACTED:1498-1515 | REDACTED:1553-1570 | REDACTED:1608-1625 | REDACTED:1663-1680 | REDACTED:1718-1735 | REDACTED:1776-1793 | REDACTED:1831-1848 | REDACTED:1886-1903 | REDACTED:1941-1958 | REDACTED:1996-2013 | REDACTED:2051-2068 | akshare/futures/futures_comex_em.py:29-46 | akshare/interest_rate/interbank_rate_em.py:72-94 | REDACTED:27-44 | REDACTED:26-44 | REDACTED:282-298 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gddh_em.py:22-40 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:27-43 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:129-145 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:232-248 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:323-339 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:515-533 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:614-630 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:701-717 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:799-815 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdhs.py:40-59 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdhs.py:140-159 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdzjc_em.py:30-48 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gpzy_em.py:99-116 | REDACTED:216-232 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:30-49 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:242-258 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:351-367 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:449-465 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:528-544 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:664-680 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:914-930 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:33-48 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:174-189 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:315-330 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:451-466 | REDACTED:31-47 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_zf_pg.py:29-46 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_zf_pg.py:110-127 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `REDACTED` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 3 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 57 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Note first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: the declarations holding them bind `symbol` to `str = "黄金"` in one and `str = "Shibor人民币"` 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. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `REDACTED:1021` calls `filterwarnings` and `REDACTED:21` 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 (23 lines × 7) akshare/fund/fund_rank_em.py:111— akshare/fund/fund_rank_em.py:111-134 | akshare/fund/fund_rank_em.py:208-230 | akshare/fund/fund_rank_em.py:302-325 | akshare/fund/fund_rank_em.py:481-504 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_analyst_em.py:51-93 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_analyst_em.py:135-167 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_analyst_em.py:193-222 — before extracting anything, compare `akshare/fund/fund_rank_em.py` and `akshare/stock_feature/stock_analyst_em.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 3 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 119 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 `akshare/fund/fund_rank_em.py:111` 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. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `akshare/fund/fund_rank_em.py:231` calls `to_datetime` and `akshare/fund/fund_rank_em.py:135` does not — after which the two agree again for 4 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
Duplicated block (23 lines × 5) akshare/bond/bond_cb_ths.py:26— akshare/bond/bond_cb_ths.py:26-72 | REDACTED:510-540 | akshare/fund/fund_report_cninfo.py:190-212 | akshare/futures_derivative/futures_contract_info_shfe.py:30-54 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_zygc.py:25-59 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `akshare/fund/fund_report_cninfo.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 8 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 298 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 `akshare/bond/bond_cb_ths.py:26` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `akshare/futures_derivative/futures_contract_info_shfe.py:56` calls `to_datetime` and `REDACTED:542` 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 (23 lines × 4) akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:85— akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:85-118 | REDACTED:286-308 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_yjbb_em.py:96-121 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_yjyg_em.py:84-109 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `akshare/stock_feature/stock_yjbb_em.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 7 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 117 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `REDACTED:286` 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. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `REDACTED:308` calls `to_numeric` and `akshare/stock_feature/stock_yjbb_em.py:121` 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 (18–23 lines × 4) akshare/stock/stock_hold_control_em.py:21— akshare/stock/stock_hold_control_em.py:21-43 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_jgdy_em.py:25-42 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_jgdy_em.py:117-136 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_restricted_em.py:121-141 — before extracting anything, compare `akshare/stock/stock_hold_control_em.py` and `akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_restricted_em.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 5 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 74 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 `akshare/stock/stock_hold_control_em.py:21` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. 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 `date` to `str = "20220101"` in one and `str = "20241211"` 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. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_restricted_em.py:119` calls `join` and `akshare/stock/stock_hold_control_em.py:19` 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 (23 lines × 3) akshare/stock/stock_dividend_cninfo.py:41— akshare/stock/stock_dividend_cninfo.py:41-63 | akshare/stock/stock_industry_cninfo.py:129-151 | REDACTED:49-71 — before extracting anything, compare `akshare/stock/stock_dividend_cninfo.py` and `REDACTED` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 3 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 75 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `akshare/stock/stock_dividend_cninfo.py:64` calls `rename` and `akshare/stock/stock_industry_cninfo.py:152` does not — after which the two agree again for 4 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
Duplicated block (19–23 lines × 3) akshare/stock/stock_us_famous.py:85— akshare/stock/stock_us_famous.py:85-103 | akshare/stock/stock_us_pink.py:88-106 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1651-1673 — before extracting anything, compare `akshare/stock/stock_us_famous.py` and `akshare/stock/stock_us_pink.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 3 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 75 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `akshare/stock/stock_us_famous.py:82` calls `reset_index`, `rename` and `akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1650` 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 (18–23 lines × 2) REDACTED:73— REDACTED:73-95 | REDACTED:49-66 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `REDACTED` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 3 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 41 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `REDACTED:73` 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. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `REDACTED:96` calls `sort_values` and `REDACTED:67` 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 (20–23 lines × 2) akshare/stock_feature/stock_margin_bse.py:149— akshare/stock_feature/stock_margin_bse.py:149-171 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_margin_bse.py:210-229 — 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 `akshare/stock_feature/stock_margin_bse.py:149` 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. 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. 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 (18–22 lines × 6) akshare/fund/fund_em.py:482— akshare/fund/fund_em.py:482-502 | akshare/fund/fund_em.py:513-530 | akshare/fund/fund_em.py:540-557 | akshare/fund/fund_em.py:567-586 | akshare/fund/fund_em.py:623-644 | akshare/fund/fund_em.py:655-674 — all 6 copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from every one of those sites — resolving only two of them leaves the rest to drift apart the first time one is edited. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `akshare/fund/fund_em.py:503` calls `to_numeric` and `akshare/fund/fund_em.py:531` does not — after which the two agree again for 4 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
Duplicated block (20–22 lines × 5) REDACTED:16— REDACTED:16-37 | REDACTED:164-183 | REDACTED:279-298 | REDACTED:413-432 | REDACTED:531-550 — all 5 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. 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. Note first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: the declarations holding them bind `symbol` to `str = "狭义乘用车"` in one and `str = "狭义乘用车-累计"` 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 (6–22 lines × 4) REDACTED:236— REDACTED:236-241 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_yjyg_em.py:49-54 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_yjyg_em.py:166-171 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_yzxdr_em.py:58-79 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `akshare/stock_feature/stock_yjyg_em.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 12 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 243 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `REDACTED:236` 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 (7–22 lines × 3) REDACTED:46— REDACTED:46-65 | REDACTED:92-98 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_profit_forecast_hk_etnet.py:52-73 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere all 3 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 3 times. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `REDACTED:92` 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 (12–22 lines × 2) akshare/index/index_stock_zh_csindex.py:38— akshare/index/index_stock_zh_csindex.py:38-59 | akshare/spot/spot_sge.py:145-156 — before extracting anything, compare `akshare/index/index_stock_zh_csindex.py` and `akshare/spot/spot_sge.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 3 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 62 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 (18–21 lines × 10) REDACTED:167— REDACTED:167-184 | REDACTED:215-235 | akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:371-388 | akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:410-430 | akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:230-247 | akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:269-289 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1082-1099 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1121-1141 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1505-1522 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1544-1564 — there are 10 copies across 4 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 10 sites; resolving a subset leaves the remainder to drift apart.
Duplicated block (11–21 lines × 7) REDACTED:243— REDACTED:243-253 | REDACTED:281-291 | REDACTED:230-241 | REDACTED:282-293 | REDACTED:339-349 | REDACTED:51-71 | REDACTED:357-377 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `REDACTED` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 7 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 178 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. 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 (12–21 lines × 5) akshare/economic/macro_finance_ths.py:96— akshare/economic/macro_finance_ths.py:96-116 | akshare/fund/fund_aum_em.py:77-89 | REDACTED:177-194 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_sina.py:43-54 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_hold.py:37-48 — before extracting anything, compare `akshare/economic/macro_finance_ths.py` and `REDACTED` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 7 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 98 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 `akshare/economic/macro_finance_ths.py:96` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `REDACTED:196` calls `to_numeric` and `akshare/economic/macro_finance_ths.py:118` 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 (21 lines × 3) REDACTED:158— REDACTED:158-178 | akshare/stock/stock_gsrl_em.py:38-62 | REDACTED:88-110 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere all 3 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 3 times. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `REDACTED:88` 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 (20–21 lines × 2) akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_sina.py:402— akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_sina.py:402-421 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_sina.py:460-480 — 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 `akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_sina.py:402` 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. 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 (20 lines × 14) akshare/index/index_cx.py:14— akshare/index/index_cx.py:14-33 | akshare/index/index_cx.py:42-61 | akshare/index/index_cx.py:70-89 | akshare/index/index_cx.py:98-117 | akshare/index/index_cx.py:126-145 | akshare/index/index_cx.py:154-173 | akshare/index/index_cx.py:182-201 | akshare/index/index_cx.py:210-229 | akshare/index/index_cx.py:238-257 | akshare/index/index_cx.py:266-285 | akshare/index/index_cx.py:294-313 | akshare/index/index_cx.py:322-341 | akshare/index/index_cx.py:350-369 | akshare/index/index_cx.py:378-397 — all 14 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 `akshare/index/index_cx.py:14` 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 (11–20 lines × 12) akshare/economic/macro_australia.py:49— akshare/economic/macro_australia.py:49-59 | akshare/economic/macro_australia.py:100-110 | akshare/economic/macro_australia.py:151-161 | akshare/economic/macro_australia.py:202-212 | akshare/economic/macro_australia.py:253-263 | akshare/economic/macro_australia.py:304-314 | akshare/economic/macro_australia.py:355-365 | REDACTED:3081-3091 | akshare/economic/macro_china_hk.py:54-64 | akshare/economic/macro_japan.py:54-64 | REDACTED:114-124 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_jgdy_em.py:160-179 — before extracting anything, compare `akshare/economic/macro_australia.py` and `REDACTED` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 6 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 249 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (20 lines × 8) akshare/fund/fund_report_cninfo.py:66— akshare/fund/fund_report_cninfo.py:66-89 | akshare/fund/fund_report_cninfo.py:133-154 | akshare/fund/fund_report_cninfo.py:192-213 | akshare/index/index_global_sina.py:47-68 | akshare/index/index_research_fund_sw.py:82-105 | REDACTED:57-84 | REDACTED:115-134 | akshare/stock/stock_hold_control_em.py:140-185 — before extracting anything, compare `akshare/index/index_research_fund_sw.py` and `REDACTED` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 6 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 215 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (17–20 lines × 5) akshare/stock_feature/stock_gpzy_em.py:97— akshare/stock_feature/stock_gpzy_em.py:97-114 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:28-47 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:240-256 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:447-463 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_restricted_em.py:120-138 — before extracting anything, compare `akshare/stock_feature/stock_gpzy_em.py` and `akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 21 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 373 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Note first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: the declarations holding them bind `end_date` to `str = "20230417"` in one and `str = "20240430"` 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. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:27` calls `join` and `akshare/stock_feature/stock_gpzy_em.py:95` 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 (20 lines × 4) akshare/stock/stock_dividend_cninfo.py:41— akshare/stock/stock_dividend_cninfo.py:41-62 | akshare/stock/stock_industry_cninfo.py:129-150 | REDACTED:49-70 | akshare/stock/stock_ipo_summary_cninfo.py:43-62 — before extracting anything, compare `akshare/stock/stock_dividend_cninfo.py` and `REDACTED` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 3 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 75 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `akshare/stock/stock_dividend_cninfo.py:64` calls `rename` and `akshare/stock/stock_industry_cninfo.py:152` 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 (19 lines × 9) REDACTED:134— REDACTED:134-174 | REDACTED:2749-2786 | akshare/economic/macro_china_hk.py:40-63 | akshare/economic/macro_japan.py:40-63 | REDACTED:29-55 | akshare/fx/fx_c_swap_cm.py:41-61 | akshare/index/index_research_fund_sw.py:36-56 | REDACTED:216-236 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_margin_sse.py:46-64 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `akshare/economic/macro_china_hk.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 5 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 213 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. 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 × 6) akshare/stock_feature/stock_three_report_em.py:36— akshare/stock_feature/stock_three_report_em.py:36-54 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_three_report_em.py:143-161 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_three_report_em.py:192-210 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_three_report_em.py:243-261 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_three_report_em.py:345-363 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_three_report_em.py:396-414 — all 6 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. 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 (19 lines × 5) REDACTED:243— REDACTED:243-261 | akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:438-456 | akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:297-315 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1149-1167 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1572-1590 — there are 5 copies across 4 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 5 sites; resolving a subset leaves the remainder to drift apart. The `return` at the foot of the matched lines is the enclosing body's own terminal exit, not an early one: it moves with them unchanged, and each site calls the extracted unit from the position that `return` occupied — no decision has to be handed back and re-acted on.
Duplicated block (11–19 lines × 4) REDACTED:57— REDACTED:57-71 | REDACTED:83-93 | REDACTED:123-139 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_restricted_em.py:38-56 — 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. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_restricted_em.py:38` 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 `date` to `str = "20220517"` in one and `str = "20220331"` 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. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `REDACTED:140` calls `reset_index` and `REDACTED:94` 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 (12–19 lines × 3) REDACTED:71— REDACTED:71-82 | REDACTED:177-192 | REDACTED:50-68 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere all 3 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 3 times.
Duplicated block (14–19 lines × 3) akshare/index/index_zh_em.py:240— akshare/index/index_zh_em.py:240-255 | akshare/index/index_zh_em.py:317-335 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1788-1801 — before extracting anything, compare `akshare/index/index_zh_em.py` and `akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 4 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 63 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 `akshare/index/index_zh_em.py:240` 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 (3–19 lines × 5) akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:306— akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:306-308 | akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:176-178 | akshare/index/index_zh_em.py:147-165 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1452-1454 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1728-1744 — before extracting anything, compare `akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py` and `akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 11 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 270 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `akshare/index/index_zh_em.py:147` 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. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1451` calls `DataFrame` and `akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:305` does not — after which the two agree again for 2 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
Duplicated block (10–19 lines × 3) akshare/stock/stock_info.py:48— akshare/stock/stock_info.py:48-66 | akshare/stock/stock_info.py:68-86 | akshare/stock/stock_info.py:87-96 — 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 `akshare/stock/stock_info.py:87` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately.
Duplicated block (16–19 lines × 2) akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1724— akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1724-1742 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1784-1799 — 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. 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 (18 lines × 11) REDACTED:3237— REDACTED:3237-3254 | REDACTED:3290-3307 | REDACTED:3348-3365 | REDACTED:3382-3399 | REDACTED:3416-3433 | REDACTED:3450-3467 | REDACTED:3527-3544 | REDACTED:3561-3578 | REDACTED:3595-3612 | REDACTED:3629-3646 | REDACTED:3664-3681 — all 11 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. 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 (18 lines × 9) akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:525— akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:525-566 | REDACTED:86-106 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:279-296 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:926-951 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:989-1014 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gpzy_em.py:123-159 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gpzy_em.py:267-288 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:391-412 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:529-549 — before extracting anything, compare `akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py` and `REDACTED` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 6 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 155 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 `REDACTED:86` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately.
Duplicated block (18 lines × 4) REDACTED:67— REDACTED:67-84 | REDACTED:143-160 | REDACTED:526-543 | REDACTED:627-644 — 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 `REDACTED:67` 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 first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: the declarations holding them bind `symbol` to `str = "创月新高"` in one and `str = "创月新低"` 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. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `REDACTED:544` calls `read_html`, `StringIO` and `REDACTED:645` does not — after which the two agree again for 4 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
Duplicated block (18 lines × 3) REDACTED:270— REDACTED:270-300 | akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:64-81 | akshare/index/index_stock_hk.py:76-112 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `akshare/fund/fund_rating.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 10 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 197 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 `akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:64` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately.
Duplicated block (17 lines × 19) akshare/index/index_cx.py:22— akshare/index/index_cx.py:22-38 | akshare/index/index_cx.py:50-66 | akshare/index/index_cx.py:78-94 | akshare/index/index_cx.py:106-122 | akshare/index/index_cx.py:134-150 | akshare/index/index_cx.py:162-178 | akshare/index/index_cx.py:190-206 | akshare/index/index_cx.py:218-234 | akshare/index/index_cx.py:246-262 | akshare/index/index_cx.py:274-290 | akshare/index/index_cx.py:302-318 | akshare/index/index_cx.py:330-346 | akshare/index/index_cx.py:358-374 | akshare/index/index_cx.py:386-402 | akshare/index/index_cx.py:418-434 | akshare/index/index_cx.py:450-466 | akshare/index/index_cx.py:482-498 | akshare/index/index_cx.py:514-530 | akshare/index/index_cx.py:546-562 — all 19 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. The `return` at the foot of the matched lines is the enclosing body's own terminal exit, not an early one: it moves with them unchanged, and each site calls the extracted unit from the position that `return` occupied — no decision has to be handed back and re-acted on.
Duplicated block (17 lines × 17) akshare/option/option_premium_analysis_em.py:15— akshare/option/option_premium_analysis_em.py:15-70 | akshare/option/option_risk_analysis_em.py:15-70 | akshare/option/option_value_analysis_em.py:56-72 | REDACTED:85-102 | REDACTED:181-198 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:74-96 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:164-186 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:254-276 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:125-146 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:233-254 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:341-362 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:449-471 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:562-584 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:671-693 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:845-866 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1280-1297 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1365-1382 — before extracting anything, compare `akshare/option/option_premium_analysis_em.py` and `akshare/option/option_risk_analysis_em.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 3 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 136 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `akshare/option/option_value_analysis_em.py:56` 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. 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. 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 (15–17 lines × 4) akshare/fund/fund_em.py:771— akshare/fund/fund_em.py:771-785 | akshare/fund/fund_em.py:896-912 | akshare/fund/fund_em.py:1031-1046 | akshare/fund/fund_em.py:1128-1143 — 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. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `akshare/fund/fund_em.py:1047` calls `sort_values` and `akshare/fund/fund_em.py:1144` does not — after which the two agree again for 4 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
Duplicated block (16–17 lines × 3) akshare/news/news_cctv.py:57— akshare/news/news_cctv.py:57-72 | akshare/news/news_cctv.py:108-123 | akshare/news/news_cctv.py:160-176 — 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 `akshare/news/news_cctv.py:160` 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. 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 (4–17 lines × 3) akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:288— akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:288-304 | akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:158-174 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:993-996 — before extracting anything, compare `akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py` and `akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 11 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 270 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. 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. 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 (15–17 lines × 2) akshare/stock_feature/stock_analyst_em.py:175— akshare/stock_feature/stock_analyst_em.py:175-191 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_analyst_em.py:226-240 — 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. 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 (16 lines × 20) akshare/economic/macro_australia.py:39— akshare/economic/macro_australia.py:39-58 | akshare/economic/macro_australia.py:90-109 | akshare/economic/macro_australia.py:141-160 | akshare/economic/macro_australia.py:192-211 | akshare/economic/macro_australia.py:243-262 | akshare/economic/macro_australia.py:294-313 | akshare/economic/macro_australia.py:345-364 | akshare/economic/macro_canada.py:39-59 | akshare/economic/macro_canada.py:90-110 | akshare/economic/macro_canada.py:141-161 | akshare/economic/macro_canada.py:192-212 | akshare/economic/macro_canada.py:243-263 | akshare/economic/macro_canada.py:294-314 | akshare/economic/macro_canada.py:345-365 | akshare/economic/macro_canada.py:396-416 | akshare/economic/macro_canada.py:447-467 | akshare/economic/macro_canada.py:498-518 | REDACTED:3075-3090 | REDACTED:104-123 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_jgdy_em.py:144-178 — before extracting anything, compare `akshare/economic/macro_australia.py` and `akshare/economic/macro_canada.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 5 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 229 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `akshare/stock_feature/stock_jgdy_em.py:141` calls `concat`, `reset_index`, `list` and `akshare/economic/macro_australia.py:38` 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 (16 lines × 19) akshare/option/option_premium_analysis_em.py:21— akshare/option/option_premium_analysis_em.py:21-70 | akshare/option/option_risk_analysis_em.py:21-70 | akshare/option/option_value_analysis_em.py:56-72 | akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:475-496 | REDACTED:85-102 | REDACTED:181-198 | REDACTED:526-547 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:74-96 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:164-186 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:254-276 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:131-146 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:239-254 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:347-362 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:455-471 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:568-584 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:677-693 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:851-866 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1280-1297 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1365-1382 — before extracting anything, compare `akshare/option/option_premium_analysis_em.py` and `akshare/option/option_risk_analysis_em.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 3 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 136 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `akshare/option/option_value_analysis_em.py:56` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately.
Duplicated block (16 lines × 8) akshare/index/index_option_qvix.py:69— akshare/index/index_option_qvix.py:69-84 | akshare/index/index_option_qvix.py:109-124 | akshare/index/index_option_qvix.py:149-164 | akshare/index/index_option_qvix.py:189-204 | akshare/index/index_option_qvix.py:229-244 | akshare/index/index_option_qvix.py:269-284 | akshare/index/index_option_qvix.py:309-324 | akshare/index/index_option_qvix.py:349-364 — all 8 copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from every one of those sites — resolving only two of them leaves the rest to drift apart the first time one is edited. 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 (14–16 lines × 3) akshare/fund/fund_scale_em.py:42— akshare/fund/fund_scale_em.py:42-56 | akshare/fund/fund_scale_em.py:98-111 | akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:41-56 — 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 `akshare/fund/fund_scale_em.py:42` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately.
Duplicated block (3–16 lines × 4) akshare/movie/movie_yien.py:313— akshare/movie/movie_yien.py:313-327 | akshare/movie/movie_yien.py:328-330 | akshare/movie/movie_yien.py:412-427 | akshare/movie/movie_yien.py:555-570 — 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. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `akshare/movie/movie_yien.py:328` calls `to_numeric` and `akshare/movie/movie_yien.py:331` 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 (13–16 lines × 3) akshare/stock/stock_hold_control_em.py:37— akshare/stock/stock_hold_control_em.py:37-52 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_yjyg_em.py:289-301 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_restricted_em.py:135-147 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere all 3 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 3 times. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `akshare/stock_feature/stock_yjyg_em.py:304` calls `reset_index`, `insert` and `akshare/stock/stock_hold_control_em.py:55` 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 (15–16 lines × 3) REDACTED:148— REDACTED:148-162 | REDACTED:188-203 | REDACTED:219-234 — 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 (4–16 lines × 4) akshare/bond/bond_cb_ths.py:81— akshare/bond/bond_cb_ths.py:81-84 | REDACTED:257-272 | akshare/index/index_spot.py:35-38 | akshare/index/index_stock_zh_csindex.py:86-101 — 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 (5–16 lines × 3) akshare/forex/forex_em.py:88— akshare/forex/forex_em.py:88-103 | REDACTED:182-197 | akshare/index/index_global_em.py:118-122 — before extracting anything, compare `akshare/forex/forex_em.py` and `REDACTED` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 4 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 114 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. Note first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: the declarations holding them bind `symbol` to `str = "USDCNH"` in one and `str = "HG00Y"` 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 (15 lines × 14) REDACTED:74— REDACTED:74-88 | REDACTED:145-159 | REDACTED:216-230 | akshare/qdii/qdii_jsl.py:54-77 | akshare/qdii/qdii_jsl.py:126-149 | akshare/stock/stock_hold_control_cninfo.py:167-188 | akshare/stock/stock_hold_control_cninfo.py:254-269 | akshare/stock/stock_share_hold.py:87-107 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_analyst_em.py:152-171 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_analyst_em.py:208-225 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:564-581 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:658-676 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:746-766 | REDACTED:91-111 — there are 14 copies across 7 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 14 sites; resolving a subset leaves the remainder to drift apart. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `akshare/stock/stock_share_hold.py:87` 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. Note first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: the declarations holding them bind `date` to `str = "20210930"` in one and `str = "20230331"` 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. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:581` calls `to_datetime`, `to_numeric` and `akshare/stock/stock_share_hold.py:107` 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 (15 lines × 12) REDACTED:1407— REDACTED:1407-1421 | REDACTED:1462-1476 | REDACTED:1517-1531 | REDACTED:1572-1586 | REDACTED:1627-1641 | REDACTED:1682-1696 | REDACTED:1737-1751 | REDACTED:1850-1864 | REDACTED:1905-1919 | REDACTED:1960-1974 | REDACTED:2015-2029 | REDACTED:2070-2084 — all 12 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 (15 lines × 11) REDACTED:193— REDACTED:193-207 | REDACTED:217-231 | REDACTED:241-255 | REDACTED:308-322 | REDACTED:332-346 | REDACTED:356-370 | REDACTED:442-456 | REDACTED:466-480 | REDACTED:560-574 | REDACTED:584-598 | REDACTED:751-765 — all 11 copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from every one of those sites — resolving only two of them leaves the rest to drift apart the first time one is edited. Note first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: the declarations holding them bind `symbol` to `str = "狭义乘用车-累计"` in one and `str = "MPV"` 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 (5–15 lines × 9) REDACTED:339— REDACTED:339-344 | akshare/stock/stock_us_pink.py:46-50 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_fhps_em.py:50-55 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_fhps_em.py:172-177 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gpzy_em.py:46-60 | REDACTED:383-388 | REDACTED:478-483 | REDACTED:586-590 | REDACTED:694-698 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `akshare/stock/stock_us_pink.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 3 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 70 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 `REDACTED:339` 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 × 6) akshare/stock/stock_hold_control_em.py:55— akshare/stock/stock_hold_control_em.py:55-100 | akshare/stock/stock_share_hold.py:154-187 | akshare/stock/stock_share_hold.py:239-272 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_esg_sina.py:82-96 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_esg_sina.py:288-321 | REDACTED:1581-1617 — there are 6 copies across 4 file(s) — more copies than files, so at least one file holds the block twice. Extract it once into a single shared function every call site can reach and call it from all 6 sites; resolving a subset leaves the remainder to drift apart. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `akshare/stock_feature/stock_esg_sina.py:82` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
Duplicated block (15 lines × 4) akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:394— akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:394-408 | akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:253-267 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1105-1119 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1528-1542 — before extracting anything, compare `akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py` and `akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 11 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 270 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. 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 (2–15 lines × 11) REDACTED:277— REDACTED:277-279 | REDACTED:210-225 | REDACTED:316-331 | REDACTED:225-239 | REDACTED:286-300 | REDACTED:394-395 | REDACTED:486-487 | REDACTED:588-589 | REDACTED:688-689 | REDACTED:775-776 | REDACTED:863-864 — there are 11 copies across 3 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 11 sites; resolving a subset leaves the remainder to drift apart.
Duplicated block (15 lines × 3) akshare/stock/stock_info.py:268— akshare/stock/stock_info.py:268-282 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_fhps_em.py:208-235 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_tfp_em.py:46-77 — before extracting anything, compare `akshare/stock_feature/stock_fhps_em.py` and `akshare/stock_feature/stock_tfp_em.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 4 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 131 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `akshare/stock/stock_info.py:268` 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. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `akshare/stock_feature/stock_fhps_em.py:236` calls `to_datetime` and `akshare/stock_feature/stock_tfp_em.py:78` does not — after which the two agree again for 2 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
Duplicated block (14–15 lines × 2) REDACTED:523— REDACTED:523-537 | akshare/option/cons.py:66-79 — `REDACTED` and `akshare/option/cons.py` are one unit implemented once per sibling directory, so they are most likely parallel implementations of one contract rather than a copy of each other — this scan matched 4 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 66 lines. If both are selected at run time, neither can be retired in favour of the other, and the lines that DIFFER between them are the reason both exist. The move that pays here is to hoist the identical part into a shared location the whole family can reach and give what differs a parameter or a seam, so a change lands once instead of once per sibling; extracting one helper per block leaves every sibling to drift on its own. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `REDACTED:523` 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. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately.
Duplicated block (14 lines × 13) REDACTED:191— REDACTED:191-204 | REDACTED:215-228 | REDACTED:239-252 | REDACTED:306-319 | REDACTED:330-343 | REDACTED:354-367 | REDACTED:440-453 | REDACTED:464-477 | REDACTED:488-501 | REDACTED:558-571 | REDACTED:582-595 | REDACTED:606-619 | REDACTED:749-762 — all 13 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 `REDACTED:191` 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 first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: the declarations holding them bind `symbol` to `str = "狭义乘用车-累计"` in one and `str = "MPV"` 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 (14 lines × 12) REDACTED:1356— REDACTED:1356-1369 | REDACTED:1411-1424 | REDACTED:1466-1479 | REDACTED:1521-1534 | REDACTED:1576-1589 | REDACTED:1631-1644 | REDACTED:1686-1699 | REDACTED:1741-1754 | REDACTED:1854-1867 | REDACTED:1909-1922 | REDACTED:1964-1977 | REDACTED:2019-2032 — all 12 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. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `REDACTED:1410` calls `concat` and `REDACTED:1355` 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 (14 lines × 5) REDACTED:31— REDACTED:31-44 | REDACTED:362-382 | REDACTED:462-482 | REDACTED:537-557 | akshare/stock/stock_dividend_cninfo.py:64-84 — there are 5 copies across 3 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 5 sites; resolving a subset leaves the remainder to drift apart. Note first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: the declarations holding them bind `date` to `str = "20221104"` in one and `str = "20221031"` 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 (11–14 lines × 4) akshare/fund/fund_position_lg.py:38— akshare/fund/fund_position_lg.py:38-48 | akshare/fund/fund_position_lg.py:76-86 | akshare/fund/fund_position_lg.py:114-124 | akshare/stock/stock_us_js.py:62-75 — 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. The `return` at the foot of the matched lines is the enclosing body's own terminal exit, not an early one: it moves with them unchanged, and each site calls the extracted unit from the position that `return` occupied — no decision has to be handed back and re-acted on.
Duplicated block (8–14 lines × 3) akshare/futures_derivative/futures_hog.py:165— akshare/futures_derivative/futures_hog.py:165-178 | akshare/futures_derivative/futures_hog.py:182-191 | akshare/futures_derivative/futures_hog.py:198-205 — 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 `akshare/futures_derivative/futures_hog.py:165` 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. 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. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `akshare/futures_derivative/futures_hog.py:197` calls `to_numeric` and `akshare/futures_derivative/futures_hog.py:165` 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 (12–14 lines × 3) akshare/stock/stock_hk_hot_rank_em.py:32— akshare/stock/stock_hk_hot_rank_em.py:32-43 | akshare/stock/stock_hot_rank_em.py:34-47 | akshare/stock/stock_hot_up_em.py:34-47 — before extracting anything, compare `akshare/stock/stock_hk_hot_rank_em.py` and `akshare/stock/stock_hot_rank_em.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 4 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 77 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `akshare/stock/stock_hot_rank_em.py:34` 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 (13–14 lines × 3) akshare/stock_feature/stock_hot_xq.py:62— akshare/stock_feature/stock_hot_xq.py:62-74 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_inner_trade_xq.py:53-65 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_basic_info_xq.py:47-60 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere all 3 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 3 times. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `akshare/stock_feature/stock_hot_xq.py:62` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
Duplicated block (11–14 lines × 3) akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_restricted_em.py:92— akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_restricted_em.py:92-102 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_restricted_em.py:187-199 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_restricted_em.py:275-288 — 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. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_restricted_em.py:89` calls `to_numeric` and `akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_restricted_em.py:185` 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 (13 lines × 44) akshare/bond/bond_china.py:123— akshare/bond/bond_china.py:123-135 | REDACTED:651-677 | akshare/crypto/crypto_hold.py:28-67 | akshare/economic/macro_australia.py:39-58 | akshare/economic/macro_australia.py:90-109 | akshare/economic/macro_australia.py:141-160 | akshare/economic/macro_australia.py:192-211 | akshare/economic/macro_australia.py:243-262 | akshare/economic/macro_australia.py:294-313 | akshare/economic/macro_australia.py:345-364 | akshare/economic/macro_canada.py:39-59 | akshare/economic/macro_canada.py:90-110 | akshare/economic/macro_canada.py:141-161 | akshare/economic/macro_canada.py:192-212 | akshare/economic/macro_canada.py:243-263 | akshare/economic/macro_canada.py:294-314 | akshare/economic/macro_canada.py:345-365 | akshare/economic/macro_canada.py:396-416 | akshare/economic/macro_canada.py:447-467 | akshare/economic/macro_canada.py:498-518 | REDACTED:229-249 | REDACTED:1163-1189 | REDACTED:2219-2245 | REDACTED:2282-2320 | REDACTED:2367-2400 | REDACTED:2451-2485 | REDACTED:2525-2555 | REDACTED:2601-2617 | REDACTED:2646-2666 | REDACTED:2699-2717 | REDACTED:2839-2859 | REDACTED:2892-2910 | REDACTED:2942-2960 | REDACTED:2993-3026 | REDACTED:3075-3090 | REDACTED:3121-3155 | REDACTED:3209-3229 | REDACTED:104-123 | REDACTED:288-307 | akshare/stock/stock_cg_guarantee.py:81-102 | REDACTED:72-103 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_account_em.py:38-72 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_margin_sse.py:102-129 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_margin_sse.py:169-198 — before extracting anything, compare `akshare/bond/bond_china.py` and `REDACTED` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 3 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 110 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `akshare/bond/bond_china.py:123` 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. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `REDACTED:104` calls `to_numeric` and `akshare/bond/bond_china.py:136` 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 (13 lines × 30) akshare/bond/bond_china.py:123— akshare/bond/bond_china.py:123-135 | REDACTED:651-677 | akshare/crypto/crypto_hold.py:28-67 | REDACTED:229-249 | REDACTED:1163-1190 | REDACTED:2219-2246 | REDACTED:2282-2320 | REDACTED:2367-2401 | REDACTED:2451-2485 | REDACTED:2525-2556 | REDACTED:2601-2617 | REDACTED:2646-2666 | REDACTED:2699-2717 | REDACTED:2839-2859 | REDACTED:2892-2910 | REDACTED:2942-2960 | REDACTED:2993-3027 | REDACTED:3121-3156 | REDACTED:3209-3229 | REDACTED:288-308 | akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:368-398 | REDACTED:310-339 | REDACTED:419-449 | akshare/stock/stock_cg_guarantee.py:81-103 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1045-1083 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1157-1195 | REDACTED:72-104 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_account_em.py:38-73 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_margin_sse.py:102-129 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_margin_sse.py:169-198 — before extracting anything, compare `akshare/bond/bond_china.py` and `REDACTED` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 3 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 110 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `akshare/bond/bond_china.py:123` 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. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `REDACTED:2246` calls `to_numeric` and `akshare/bond/bond_china.py:135` 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 (12–13 lines × 19) REDACTED:45— REDACTED:45-57 | REDACTED:58-70 | REDACTED:71-83 | REDACTED:109-121 | REDACTED:122-134 | REDACTED:135-147 | REDACTED:190-201 | REDACTED:214-225 | REDACTED:238-249 | REDACTED:305-316 | REDACTED:329-340 | REDACTED:353-364 | REDACTED:439-450 | REDACTED:463-474 | REDACTED:487-498 | REDACTED:557-568 | REDACTED:581-592 | REDACTED:605-616 | REDACTED:748-759 — all 19 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 `REDACTED:45` 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 `symbol` to `str = "狭义乘用车-累计"` in one and `str = "MPV"` 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 (13 lines × 14) REDACTED:1264— REDACTED:1264-1276 | REDACTED:1310-1322 | REDACTED:1357-1369 | REDACTED:1412-1424 | REDACTED:1467-1479 | REDACTED:1522-1534 | REDACTED:1577-1589 | REDACTED:1632-1644 | REDACTED:1687-1699 | REDACTED:1742-1754 | REDACTED:1855-1867 | REDACTED:1910-1922 | REDACTED:1965-1977 | REDACTED:2020-2032 — all 14 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. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `REDACTED:1356` calls `drop_duplicates` and `REDACTED:1263` does not — after which the two agree again for 4 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
Duplicated block (13 lines × 9) akshare/air/air_zhenqi.py:102— akshare/air/air_zhenqi.py:102-117 | akshare/air/air_zhenqi.py:148-164 | akshare/economic/macro_other.py:56-73 | REDACTED:70-84 | akshare/rate/repo_rate.py:48-60 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:17-29 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:229-241 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:436-448 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_restricted_em.py:109-121 — before extracting anything, compare `akshare/economic/macro_other.py` and `akshare/rate/repo_rate.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 3 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 68 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. 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. Note first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: the declarations holding them bind `end_date` to `str = "20220409"` in one and `str = "20221017"` 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 (13 lines × 6) REDACTED:840— REDACTED:840-853 | REDACTED:871-884 | REDACTED:998-1010 | REDACTED:1027-1039 | REDACTED:1056-1068 | REDACTED:1085-1097 — there are 6 copies across 2 file(s) — more copies than files, so at least one file holds the block twice. Extract it once into a single shared function every call site can reach and call it from all 6 sites; resolving a subset leaves the remainder to drift apart. 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. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `REDACTED:854` calls `fillna` and `REDACTED:885` does not — after which the two agree again for 4 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
Duplicated block (13 lines × 5) akshare/index/index_zh_em.py:146— akshare/index/index_zh_em.py:146-163 | akshare/index/index_zh_em.py:239-253 | akshare/index/index_zh_em.py:316-333 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1727-1742 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1787-1799 — before extracting anything, compare `akshare/index/index_zh_em.py` and `akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 4 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 63 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 (12–13 lines × 4) REDACTED:400— REDACTED:400-412 | REDACTED:426-437 | REDACTED:314-326 | REDACTED:340-351 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `REDACTED` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 15 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 166 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. 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 (13 lines × 3) akshare/index/index_sw.py:77— akshare/index/index_sw.py:77-89 | akshare/index/index_sw.py:138-151 | akshare/index/index_sw.py:200-213 — 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 `akshare/index/index_sw.py:77` 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 (10–13 lines × 2) akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1009— akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1009-1021 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_hold.py:114-123 — 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 `akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1009` 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. 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 lines × 25) REDACTED:44— REDACTED:44-55 | REDACTED:57-68 | REDACTED:70-81 | REDACTED:83-94 | REDACTED:108-119 | REDACTED:121-132 | REDACTED:134-145 | REDACTED:147-158 | REDACTED:189-200 | REDACTED:213-224 | REDACTED:237-248 | REDACTED:261-272 | REDACTED:304-315 | REDACTED:328-339 | REDACTED:352-363 | REDACTED:376-387 | REDACTED:438-449 | REDACTED:462-473 | REDACTED:486-497 | REDACTED:556-567 | REDACTED:580-591 | REDACTED:604-615 | REDACTED:747-758 | REDACTED:771-782 | REDACTED:795-806 — all 25 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 (12 lines × 10) REDACTED:247— REDACTED:247-258 | REDACTED:301-312 | REDACTED:372-383 | REDACTED:483-494 | REDACTED:537-548 | REDACTED:584-595 | REDACTED:640-651 | REDACTED:685-696 | REDACTED:744-755 | REDACTED:802-813 — all 10 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. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `REDACTED:638` calls `filterwarnings` and `REDACTED:245` 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 × 8) akshare/spot/spot_hog_soozhu.py:15— akshare/spot/spot_hog_soozhu.py:15-26 | akshare/spot/spot_hog_soozhu.py:42-53 | akshare/spot/spot_hog_soozhu.py:66-77 | akshare/spot/spot_hog_soozhu.py:90-101 | akshare/spot/spot_hog_soozhu.py:114-125 | akshare/spot/spot_hog_soozhu.py:138-149 | akshare/spot/spot_hog_soozhu.py:162-173 | akshare/spot/spot_hog_soozhu.py:186-197 — all 8 copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from every one of those sites — resolving only two of them leaves the rest to drift apart the first time one is edited. 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 (6–12 lines × 7) REDACTED:3507— REDACTED:3507-3516 | REDACTED:188-193 | akshare/stock/stock_repurchase_em.py:106-111 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:89-100 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:192-203 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdzjc_em.py:109-118 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_qsjy_em.py:73-80 — there are 7 copies across 6 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 7 sites; resolving a subset leaves the remainder to drift apart. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `REDACTED:3507` 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. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `REDACTED:3516` calls `to_numeric` and `akshare/stock/stock_repurchase_em.py:111` 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 (10–12 lines × 4) akshare/stock_feature/stock_a_pe_and_pb.py:371— akshare/stock_feature/stock_a_pe_and_pb.py:371-382 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_a_pe_and_pb.py:426-435 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_a_pe_and_pb.py:535-544 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_all_pb.py:27-36 — 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.
Duplicated block (10–12 lines × 2) REDACTED:84— REDACTED:84-93 | REDACTED:589-600 — 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 (11–12 lines × 2) REDACTED:151— REDACTED:151-162 | REDACTED:200-210 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (5–11 lines × 84) REDACTED:105— REDACTED:105-113 | akshare/crypto/crypto_hold.py:65-69 | REDACTED:103-107 | REDACTED:172-178 | REDACTED:297-304 | REDACTED:1117-1126 | REDACTED:1186-1195 | REDACTED:2242-2249 | REDACTED:2317-2322 | REDACTED:2397-2406 | REDACTED:2552-2561 | REDACTED:2783-2792 | REDACTED:3023-3032 | REDACTED:3152-3161 | REDACTED:3319-3323 | akshare/economic/macro_finance_ths.py:112-120 | akshare/economic/marco_cnbs.py:55-59 | akshare/fund/fund_etf_ths.py:93-99 | akshare/fund/fund_rank_em.py:327-333 | akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:171-180 | akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:264-269 | akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:352-357 | akshare/fund/fund_report_cninfo.py:215-223 | akshare/fund/fund_xq.py:175-180 | REDACTED:935-942 | REDACTED:1029-1036 | REDACTED:1276-1282 | akshare/futures/futures_zh_sina.py:314-318 | akshare/futures/futures_zh_sina.py:404-408 | akshare/futures/futures_zh_sina.py:516-520 | akshare/futures/futures_zh_sina.py:603-607 | akshare/index/index_sw.py:87-91 | akshare/index/index_sw.py:149-153 | akshare/index/index_sw.py:211-215 | REDACTED:72-80 | akshare/option/option_commodity_sina.py:114-118 | REDACTED:124-129 | REDACTED:197-202 | REDACTED:270-275 | akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:57-61 | akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:471-477 | akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:566-575 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:89-98 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:810-816 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:899-905 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:988-994 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1079-1088 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1191-1200 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1294-1302 | REDACTED:103-107 | akshare/stock/stock_ipo_summary_cninfo.py:92-98 | akshare/stock/stock_new_cninfo.py:155-159 | REDACTED:190-196 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_account_em.py:69-78 | REDACTED:96-102 | REDACTED:240-248 | REDACTED:390-394 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_fhps_em.py:111-120 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_fhps_em.py:245-254 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:296-305 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:678-686 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:768-776 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:871-879 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gpzy_em.py:367-371 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gpzy_em.py:436-440 | REDACTED:852-858 | REDACTED:921-927 | REDACTED:989-995 | REDACTED:1057-1063 | REDACTED:1299-1307 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:598-608 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:549-558 | REDACTED:68-72 | REDACTED:174-180 | REDACTED:277-283 | REDACTED:377-381 | REDACTED:445-449 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_yjbb_em.py:118-126 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_yjyg_em.py:106-114 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_sina.py:447-451 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_gbjg_em.py:143-149 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_profit_forecast_em.py:122-130 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_profit_forecast_hk_etnet.py:70-76 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_restricted_em.py:286-294 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `akshare/crypto/crypto_hold.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 5 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 53 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 `REDACTED:297` 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. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `REDACTED:178` calls `to_numeric` and `REDACTED:113` 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 (11 lines × 19) REDACTED:32— REDACTED:32-42 | REDACTED:96-106 | REDACTED:178-188 | REDACTED:202-212 | REDACTED:226-236 | REDACTED:250-260 | REDACTED:293-303 | REDACTED:317-327 | REDACTED:341-351 | REDACTED:365-375 | REDACTED:427-437 | REDACTED:451-461 | REDACTED:475-485 | REDACTED:545-555 | REDACTED:569-579 | REDACTED:593-603 | REDACTED:736-746 | REDACTED:760-770 | REDACTED:784-794 — all 19 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. 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. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `REDACTED:176` calls `DataFrame` and `REDACTED:734` does not — after which the two agree again for 3 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
Duplicated block (11 lines × 10) akshare/economic/macro_other.py:32— akshare/economic/macro_other.py:32-44 | akshare/futures/futures_zh_sina.py:633-643 | akshare/futures/futures_zh_sina.py:671-682 | akshare/option/option_commodity_sina.py:94-116 | akshare/reits/reits_basic.py:196-207 | akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:334-346 | REDACTED:382-395 | REDACTED:359-374 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_sina.py:151-161 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_sina.py:679-689 — before extracting anything, compare `akshare/economic/macro_other.py` and `akshare/reits/reits_basic.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 3 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 61 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. 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 `akshare/option/option_commodity_sina.py:94` 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 (11 lines × 6) REDACTED:2609— REDACTED:2609-2619 | akshare/index/index_research_fund_sw.py:47-58 | REDACTED:227-238 | akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:195-210 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:433-449 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_pankou_em.py:123-139 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `akshare/index/index_research_fund_sw.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 5 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 169 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 `REDACTED:2609` 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. The `return` at the foot of the matched lines is the enclosing body's own terminal exit, not an early one: it moves with them unchanged, and each site calls the extracted unit from the position that `return` occupied — no decision has to be handed back and re-acted on.
Duplicated block (6–11 lines × 2) akshare/bond/bond_convert.py:85— akshare/bond/bond_convert.py:85-90 | akshare/bond/bond_convert.py:195-205 — 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 `akshare/bond/bond_convert.py:85` 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 (10–11 lines × 2) akshare/stock/stock_zh_ah_tx.py:52— akshare/stock/stock_zh_ah_tx.py:52-62 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_ah_tx.py:122-131 — 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 `akshare/stock/stock_zh_ah_tx.py:122` 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 (10 lines × 48) akshare/bond/bond_buy_back_em.py:201— akshare/bond/bond_buy_back_em.py:201-214 | REDACTED:174-185 | REDACTED:1101-1118 | REDACTED:59-70 | akshare/forex/forex_em.py:122-136 | akshare/fund/fund_em.py:186-208 | akshare/fund/fund_em.py:491-502 | akshare/fund/fund_em.py:631-645 | akshare/fund/fund_rank_em.py:111-135 | akshare/fund/fund_rank_em.py:302-326 | akshare/fund/fund_rank_em.py:481-505 | akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:147-172 | akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:243-265 | akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:330-353 | REDACTED:216-233 | REDACTED:42-52 | akshare/index/index_global_em.py:140-154 | akshare/interest_rate/interbank_rate_em.py:118-127 | REDACTED:318-329 | REDACTED:359-370 | REDACTED:402-413 | akshare/option/option_lhb_em.py:74-92 | akshare/option/option_lhb_em.py:129-147 | akshare/option/option_lhb_em.py:184-202 | akshare/stock/stock_cg_equity_mortgage.py:77-93 | akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:355-377 | akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:455-470 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:68-90 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:389-410 | akshare/stock/stock_hold_control_cninfo.py:87-101 | akshare/stock/stock_hold_num_cninfo.py:76-93 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gpzy_em.py:60-74 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gpzy_em.py:484-498 | REDACTED:62-81 | REDACTED:418-435 | REDACTED:527-544 | REDACTED:634-651 | REDACTED:742-759 | REDACTED:836-851 | REDACTED:907-920 | REDACTED:975-988 | REDACTED:1043-1056 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:297-319 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:487-504 | REDACTED:53-67 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_yjyg_em.py:200-217 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_restricted_em.py:75-91 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_restricted_em.py:255-274 — before extracting anything, compare `akshare/bond/bond_buy_back_em.py` and `akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 4 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 144 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 `akshare/bond/bond_buy_back_em.py:201` 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 `date` to `str = "20230630"` in one and `str = "20230331"` 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. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:265` calls `to_numeric` and `akshare/bond/bond_buy_back_em.py:214` 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 (10 lines × 21) akshare/economic/macro_finance_ths.py:96— akshare/economic/macro_finance_ths.py:96-117 | akshare/economic/macro_other.py:32-45 | akshare/fund/fund_aum_em.py:77-90 | akshare/futures/futures_zh_sina.py:633-644 | akshare/futures/futures_zh_sina.py:671-683 | REDACTED:62-71 | REDACTED:74-85 | akshare/index/index_sw.py:77-90 | akshare/index/index_sw.py:138-152 | akshare/index/index_sw.py:200-214 | akshare/option/option_commodity_sina.py:94-117 | akshare/reits/reits_basic.py:196-208 | akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:335-347 | REDACTED:383-396 | REDACTED:177-195 | REDACTED:359-375 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_sina.py:43-55 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_sina.py:151-162 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_sina.py:679-690 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_hold.py:37-49 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_restricted_em.py:333-346 — before extracting anything, compare `akshare/economic/macro_finance_ths.py` and `akshare/futures/futures_zh_sina.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 6 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 78 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. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `akshare/option/option_commodity_sina.py:118` calls `to_numeric` and `akshare/economic/macro_finance_ths.py:118` 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 (10 lines × 17) akshare/futures/futures_comex_em.py:44— akshare/futures/futures_comex_em.py:44-53 | akshare/interest_rate/interbank_rate_em.py:92-104 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gddh_em.py:38-47 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdhs.py:57-66 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdhs.py:157-166 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdzjc_em.py:46-55 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:47-56 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:256-265 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:46-55 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:187-196 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:328-337 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:464-473 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_research_report_em.py:48-60 | REDACTED:45-54 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_zf_pg.py:44-53 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_zf_pg.py:125-134 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_profit_forecast_em.py:42-54 — before extracting anything, compare `akshare/futures/futures_comex_em.py` and `akshare/interest_rate/interbank_rate_em.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 7 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 85 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (10 lines × 16) akshare/futures/futures_comex_em.py:43— akshare/futures/futures_comex_em.py:43-52 | akshare/interest_rate/interbank_rate_em.py:91-103 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gddh_em.py:37-46 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdhs.py:56-65 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdhs.py:156-165 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdzjc_em.py:45-54 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:46-55 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:255-264 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:45-54 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:186-195 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:327-336 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:463-472 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_yzxdr_em.py:45-55 | REDACTED:44-53 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_zf_pg.py:43-52 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_zf_pg.py:124-133 — before extracting anything, compare `akshare/futures/futures_comex_em.py` and `akshare/interest_rate/interbank_rate_em.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 7 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 85 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 (6–10 lines × 12) REDACTED:58— REDACTED:58-63 | REDACTED:147-156 | REDACTED:254-259 | REDACTED:308-313 | REDACTED:379-384 | REDACTED:490-495 | REDACTED:544-549 | REDACTED:591-596 | REDACTED:647-652 | REDACTED:692-697 | REDACTED:751-756 | REDACTED:809-814 — all 12 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 `REDACTED:147` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately.
Duplicated block (10 lines × 9) akshare/bond/bond_gb_sina.py:37— akshare/bond/bond_gb_sina.py:37-46 | akshare/bond/bond_gb_sina.py:82-91 | REDACTED:93-102 | REDACTED:1800-1811 | REDACTED:2075-2086 | REDACTED:3734-3745 | akshare/index/index_stock_zh_csindex.py:40-59 | akshare/spot/spot_sge.py:147-156 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_sina.py:339-351 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `REDACTED` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 9 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. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `REDACTED:1798` calls `concat`, `drop_duplicates` and `akshare/bond/bond_gb_sina.py:36` does not — after which the two agree again for 2 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
Duplicated block (8–10 lines × 7) akshare/futures_derivative/futures_hog.py:135— akshare/futures_derivative/futures_hog.py:135-142 | akshare/futures_derivative/futures_hog.py:145-152 | akshare/futures_derivative/futures_hog.py:170-179 | akshare/futures_derivative/futures_hog.py:185-192 | akshare/futures_derivative/futures_hog.py:199-206 | akshare/futures_derivative/futures_hog.py:209-216 | akshare/futures_derivative/futures_hog.py:220-227 — all 7 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. 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. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `akshare/futures_derivative/futures_hog.py:197` calls `to_numeric` and `akshare/futures_derivative/futures_hog.py:183` 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 (10 lines × 6) REDACTED:83— REDACTED:83-92 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:28-45 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:240-254 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:447-461 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_restricted_em.py:38-55 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_restricted_em.py:120-136 — there are 6 copies across 3 file(s) — more copies than files, so at least one file holds the block twice. Extract it once into a single shared function every call site can reach and call it from all 6 sites; resolving a subset leaves the remainder to drift apart. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_restricted_em.py:38` 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 first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: the declarations holding them bind `end_date` to `str = "20240114"` in one and `str = "20230417"` 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. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_restricted_em.py:57` calls `reset_index` and `REDACTED:94` does not — after which the two agree again for 2 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
Duplicated block (10 lines × 4) akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_ths.py:44— akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_ths.py:44-53 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_ths.py:79-88 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_ths.py:117-126 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_ths.py:155-164 — 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.
Duplicated block (6–10 lines × 2) REDACTED:1411— REDACTED:1411-1420 | REDACTED:1504-1509 — 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 `REDACTED:1411` 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. The `return` at the foot of the matched lines is the enclosing body's own terminal exit, not an early one: it moves with them unchanged, and each site calls the extracted unit from the position that `return` occupied — no decision has to be handed back and re-acted on. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `REDACTED:1503` calls `to_numeric` and `REDACTED:1411` does not — after which the two agree again for 2 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
Duplicated block (9–10 lines × 2) akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_profit_forecast_ths.py:53— akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_profit_forecast_ths.py:53-62 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_profit_forecast_ths.py:85-93 — 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 `akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_profit_forecast_ths.py:53` 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. 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 (9 lines × 23) akshare/bond/bond_gb_sina.py:37— akshare/bond/bond_gb_sina.py:37-46 | akshare/bond/bond_gb_sina.py:82-91 | REDACTED:93-102 | REDACTED:1800-1811 | REDACTED:2075-2086 | REDACTED:3734-3745 | akshare/fund/fund_scale_em.py:101-111 | akshare/index/index_option_qvix.py:36-44 | akshare/index/index_option_qvix.py:76-84 | akshare/index/index_option_qvix.py:116-124 | akshare/index/index_option_qvix.py:156-164 | akshare/index/index_option_qvix.py:196-204 | akshare/index/index_option_qvix.py:236-244 | akshare/index/index_option_qvix.py:276-284 | akshare/index/index_option_qvix.py:316-324 | akshare/index/index_option_qvix.py:356-364 | akshare/index/index_stock_zh_csindex.py:40-59 | akshare/spot/spot_sge.py:147-156 | akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:44-56 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_cyq_em.py:286-298 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:998-1013 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_tx.py:94-105 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_sina.py:339-351 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `REDACTED` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 9 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. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `REDACTED:1798` calls `concat`, `drop_duplicates` and `akshare/bond/bond_gb_sina.py:36` does not — after which the two agree again for 2 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
Duplicated block (9 lines × 17) akshare/futures/futures_comex_em.py:46— akshare/futures/futures_comex_em.py:46-54 | akshare/interest_rate/interbank_rate_em.py:94-105 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gddh_em.py:40-48 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdhs.py:59-67 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdhs.py:159-167 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdzjc_em.py:48-56 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:49-57 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:258-266 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:48-56 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:189-197 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:330-338 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:466-474 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_yjbb_em.py:44-52 | REDACTED:47-55 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_zf_pg.py:46-54 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_zf_pg.py:127-135 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_profit_forecast_em.py:44-55 — before extracting anything, compare `akshare/futures/futures_comex_em.py` and `akshare/interest_rate/interbank_rate_em.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 7 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 85 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 after the matched lines, `akshare/futures/futures_comex_em.py:57` calls `reset_index` and `akshare/stock_feature/stock_gddh_em.py:50` does not — after which the two agree again for 2 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
Duplicated block (9 lines × 15) akshare/interest_rate/interbank_rate_em.py:95— akshare/interest_rate/interbank_rate_em.py:95-106 | akshare/stock/stock_hold_control_em.py:42-53 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdhs.py:60-68 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdhs.py:160-168 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdzjc_em.py:49-57 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:259-267 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:331-339 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:467-475 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_yjyg_em.py:42-50 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_yjyg_em.py:159-167 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_yjyg_em.py:294-302 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_zf_pg.py:47-55 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_zf_pg.py:128-136 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_profit_forecast_em.py:45-56 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_restricted_em.py:140-148 — before extracting anything, compare `akshare/interest_rate/interbank_rate_em.py` and `akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdhs.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 10 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 147 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, `akshare/interest_rate/interbank_rate_em.py:93` calls `get_tqdm` and `akshare/stock/stock_hold_control_em.py:40` does not — after which the two agree again for 3 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
Duplicated block (9 lines × 10) REDACTED:261— REDACTED:261-272 | REDACTED:315-331 | REDACTED:386-396 | REDACTED:444-455 | REDACTED:497-511 | REDACTED:551-560 | REDACTED:598-608 | REDACTED:654-662 | REDACTED:758-772 | REDACTED:816-825 — all 10 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 (9 lines × 8) akshare/bond/bond_cb_ths.py:72— akshare/bond/bond_cb_ths.py:72-80 | REDACTED:68-76 | REDACTED:56-64 | REDACTED:47-55 | akshare/stock/stock_hk_fhpx_ths.py:46-54 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_fhps_ths.py:33-41 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_sina.py:400-408 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_sina.py:452-460 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `REDACTED` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 3 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 41 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Note first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: the declarations holding them bind `date` to `str = "20240228"` in one and `str = ""` 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. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `REDACTED:54` calls `to_numeric` and `akshare/bond/bond_cb_ths.py:71` 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 (7–9 lines × 6) akshare/bond/bond_convert.py:322— akshare/bond/bond_convert.py:322-329 | REDACTED:66-73 | REDACTED:55-61 | REDACTED:46-52 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_sina.py:399-405 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_sina.py:449-457 — there are 6 copies across 5 file(s) — more copies than files, so at least one file holds the block twice. Extract it once into a single shared function every call site can reach and call it from all 6 sites; resolving a subset leaves the remainder to drift apart. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `akshare/bond/bond_convert.py:322` 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 first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: the declarations holding them bind `date` to `str = "20240228"` in one and `str = ""` 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. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `REDACTED:62` calls `to_datetime` and `akshare/bond/bond_convert.py:330` does not — after which the two agree again for 2 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
Duplicated block (9 lines × 5) REDACTED:376— REDACTED:376-384 | REDACTED:471-479 | REDACTED:579-587 | REDACTED:687-695 | REDACTED:1570-1578 — all 5 copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from every one of those sites — resolving only two of them leaves the rest to drift apart the first time one is edited.
Duplicated block (8–9 lines × 4) akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_sina.py:104— akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_sina.py:104-112 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_sina.py:141-149 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_sina.py:179-187 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_sina.py:227-234 — 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.
Duplicated block (8–9 lines × 2) REDACTED:164— REDACTED:164-171 | REDACTED:212-220 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately.
Duplicated block (8 lines × 21) akshare/futures/futures_comex_em.py:47— akshare/futures/futures_comex_em.py:47-54 | akshare/interest_rate/interbank_rate_em.py:95-105 | akshare/stock/stock_hold_control_em.py:42-52 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gddh_em.py:41-48 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdhs.py:60-67 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdhs.py:160-167 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdzjc_em.py:49-56 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:50-57 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:259-266 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:49-56 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:190-197 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:331-338 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:467-474 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_yjyg_em.py:42-49 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_yjyg_em.py:159-166 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_yjyg_em.py:294-301 | REDACTED:48-55 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_zf_pg.py:47-54 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_zf_pg.py:128-135 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_profit_forecast_em.py:45-55 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_restricted_em.py:140-147 — before extracting anything, compare `akshare/futures/futures_comex_em.py` and `akshare/interest_rate/interbank_rate_em.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 7 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 85 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, `akshare/futures/futures_comex_em.py:45` calls `get_tqdm` and `akshare/stock/stock_hold_control_em.py:40` 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 (8 lines × 5) akshare/futures_derivative/futures_hog.py:23— akshare/futures_derivative/futures_hog.py:23-30 | akshare/futures_derivative/futures_hog.py:34-41 | akshare/futures_derivative/futures_hog.py:45-52 | akshare/futures_derivative/futures_hog.py:67-74 | akshare/futures_derivative/futures_hog.py:78-85 — all 5 copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from every one of those sites — resolving only two of them leaves the rest to drift apart the first time one is edited.
Duplicated block (8 lines × 4) akshare/qhkc_web/qhkc_fund.py:96— akshare/qhkc_web/qhkc_fund.py:96-103 | akshare/qhkc_web/qhkc_fund.py:195-202 | akshare/qhkc_web/qhkc_fund.py:294-301 | akshare/qhkc_web/qhkc_fund.py:396-403 — 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.
Duplicated block (6–8 lines × 3) akshare/stock_feature/stock_fhps_em.py:43— akshare/stock_feature/stock_fhps_em.py:43-48 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_fhps_em.py:165-170 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_profit_forecast_em.py:39-46 — before extracting anything, compare `akshare/stock_feature/stock_fhps_em.py` and `akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_profit_forecast_em.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 6 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 61 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. 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 `akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_profit_forecast_em.py:39` 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 (5–7 lines × 50) REDACTED:333— REDACTED:333-337 | REDACTED:1037-1041 | REDACTED:1401-1405 | REDACTED:1456-1460 | REDACTED:1511-1515 | REDACTED:1566-1570 | REDACTED:1621-1625 | REDACTED:1676-1680 | REDACTED:1731-1735 | REDACTED:1789-1793 | REDACTED:1844-1848 | REDACTED:1899-1903 | REDACTED:1954-1958 | REDACTED:2009-2013 | REDACTED:2064-2068 | akshare/futures/futures_comex_em.py:42-48 | akshare/interest_rate/interbank_rate_em.py:90-96 | REDACTED:40-44 | REDACTED:40-44 | REDACTED:294-298 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gddh_em.py:36-42 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:39-43 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:141-145 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:244-248 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:335-339 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:529-533 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:626-630 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:713-717 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:811-815 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:915-919 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:978-982 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdhs.py:55-61 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdhs.py:155-161 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdzjc_em.py:44-50 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gpzy_em.py:112-116 | REDACTED:228-232 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:45-51 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:254-260 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:363-367 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:461-465 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:540-544 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:676-680 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:926-930 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:44-50 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:185-191 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:326-332 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:462-468 | REDACTED:43-49 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_zf_pg.py:42-48 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_zf_pg.py:123-129 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `REDACTED` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 13 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 345 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 `akshare/futures/futures_comex_em.py:42` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `akshare/futures/futures_comex_em.py:39` calls `f` and `REDACTED:330` 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 (7 lines × 14) REDACTED:91— REDACTED:91-115 | REDACTED:187-211 | REDACTED:285-310 | REDACTED:432-438 | REDACTED:527-545 | akshare/futures_derivative/futures_contract_info_ine.py:43-56 | akshare/futures_derivative/futures_contract_info_shfe.py:44-57 | akshare/stock/stock_new_cninfo.py:126-148 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_esg_sina.py:132-155 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_fhps_em.py:209-235 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gddh_em.py:67-84 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_tfp_em.py:61-78 | REDACTED:71-83 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_yjyg_em.py:318-336 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `akshare/futures_derivative/futures_contract_info_ine.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 3 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 81 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 `REDACTED:285` 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. Note first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: the declarations holding them bind `date` to `str = "20241129"` in one and `str = "20240513"` 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. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `akshare/stock/stock_new_cninfo.py:149` calls `to_datetime` and `REDACTED:310` 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 (7 lines × 9) REDACTED:55— REDACTED:55-61 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_three_report_em.py:74-80 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_three_report_em.py:132-138 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_three_report_em.py:181-187 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_three_report_em.py:230-236 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_three_report_em.py:281-287 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_three_report_em.py:332-338 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_three_report_em.py:383-389 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_three_report_em.py:434-440 — there are 9 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 9 sites; resolving a subset leaves the remainder to drift apart.
Duplicated block (6–7 lines × 5) akshare/futures_derivative/futures_hog.py:29— akshare/futures_derivative/futures_hog.py:29-34 | akshare/futures_derivative/futures_hog.py:40-45 | akshare/futures_derivative/futures_hog.py:73-78 | akshare/futures_derivative/futures_hog.py:84-90 | akshare/futures_derivative/futures_hog.py:207-212 — all 5 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 `akshare/futures_derivative/futures_hog.py:84` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. 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. 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 `symbol` to `str = "外三元"` in one and `str = "玉米"` 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 (7 lines × 5) akshare/stock/stock_hot_up_em.py:54— akshare/stock/stock_hot_up_em.py:54-68 | akshare/stock/stock_us_famous.py:86-103 | akshare/stock/stock_us_pink.py:89-106 | REDACTED:237-243 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1652-1673 — before extracting anything, compare `akshare/stock/stock_hot_up_em.py` and `REDACTED` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 3 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 61 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. 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 `REDACTED:237` 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. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1651` calls `astype` and `REDACTED:237` does not — after which the two agree again for 4 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
Duplicated block (2–7 lines × 13) akshare/bond/bond_convert.py:280— akshare/bond/bond_convert.py:280-281 | akshare/economic/macro_other.py:47-48 | REDACTED:275-276 | akshare/fund/fund_em.py:206-212 | REDACTED:143-144 | akshare/fund/fund_manager.py:85-91 | akshare/fund/fund_rank_em.py:515-516 | REDACTED:253-254 | akshare/futures/futures_hq_sina.py:212-213 | akshare/stock/stock_share_hold.py:189-190 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gpzy_em.py:79-80 | REDACTED:86-87 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_profit_forecast_em.py:128-136 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere all 13 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 13 times. 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 (2–7 lines × 3) REDACTED:323— REDACTED:323-329 | akshare/futures_derivative/futures_spot_sys.py:52-60 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_sina.py:632-633 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere all 3 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 3 times. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately.
Duplicated block (6–7 lines × 2) akshare/futures_derivative/futures_hog.py:97— akshare/futures_derivative/futures_hog.py:97-103 | akshare/futures_derivative/futures_hog.py:143-148 — 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 `akshare/futures_derivative/futures_hog.py:97` 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. 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 `symbol` to `str = "玉米"` in one and `str = "猪肉批发价"` 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 (6 lines × 51) REDACTED:35— REDACTED:35-40 | REDACTED:332-337 | REDACTED:1036-1041 | REDACTED:1400-1405 | REDACTED:1455-1460 | REDACTED:1510-1515 | REDACTED:1565-1570 | REDACTED:1620-1625 | REDACTED:1675-1680 | REDACTED:1730-1735 | REDACTED:1788-1793 | REDACTED:1843-1848 | REDACTED:1898-1903 | REDACTED:1953-1958 | REDACTED:2008-2013 | REDACTED:2063-2068 | akshare/futures/futures_comex_em.py:41-46 | akshare/interest_rate/interbank_rate_em.py:89-94 | REDACTED:39-44 | REDACTED:39-44 | REDACTED:293-298 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gddh_em.py:35-40 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:38-43 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:140-145 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:243-248 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:334-339 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:528-533 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:625-630 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:712-717 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:810-815 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:914-919 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:977-982 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdhs.py:54-59 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdhs.py:154-159 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdzjc_em.py:43-48 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gpzy_em.py:111-116 | REDACTED:227-232 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:44-49 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:253-258 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:362-367 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:460-465 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:539-544 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:675-680 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:925-930 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:43-48 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:184-189 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:325-330 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:461-466 | REDACTED:42-47 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_zf_pg.py:41-46 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_zf_pg.py:122-127 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `REDACTED` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 3 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 57 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `akshare/futures/futures_comex_em.py:39` calls `f` and `REDACTED:33` 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 (6 lines × 49) akshare/bond/bond_info_cm.py:141— akshare/bond/bond_info_cm.py:141-146 | REDACTED:333-338 | REDACTED:1037-1042 | REDACTED:1401-1406 | REDACTED:1456-1461 | REDACTED:1511-1516 | REDACTED:1566-1571 | REDACTED:1621-1626 | REDACTED:1676-1681 | REDACTED:1731-1736 | REDACTED:1789-1794 | REDACTED:1844-1849 | REDACTED:1899-1904 | REDACTED:1954-1959 | REDACTED:2009-2014 | REDACTED:2064-2069 | REDACTED:3724-3729 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_analyst_em.py:39-44 | REDACTED:40-45 | REDACTED:40-45 | REDACTED:294-299 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:39-44 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:141-146 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:244-249 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:335-340 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:529-534 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:626-631 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:713-718 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:811-816 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:915-920 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:978-983 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gpzy_em.py:112-117 | REDACTED:228-233 | REDACTED:878-883 | REDACTED:946-951 | REDACTED:1014-1019 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:363-368 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:461-466 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:540-545 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:676-681 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:926-931 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_ipo_declare.py:37-42 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_register_em.py:36-41 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_register_em.py:110-115 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_register_em.py:184-189 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_register_em.py:258-263 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_register_em.py:332-337 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_register_em.py:406-411 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_register_em.py:479-484 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `REDACTED` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 13 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 345 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, `akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:913` calls `update` and `REDACTED:331` 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 (6 lines × 37) REDACTED:335— REDACTED:335-340 | REDACTED:1039-1044 | REDACTED:1403-1408 | REDACTED:1458-1463 | REDACTED:1513-1518 | REDACTED:1568-1573 | REDACTED:1623-1628 | REDACTED:1678-1683 | REDACTED:1733-1738 | REDACTED:1791-1796 | REDACTED:1846-1851 | REDACTED:1901-1906 | REDACTED:1956-1961 | REDACTED:2011-2016 | REDACTED:2066-2071 | REDACTED:42-47 | REDACTED:42-47 | REDACTED:296-301 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_fhps_em.py:46-51 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_fhps_em.py:168-173 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:41-46 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:143-148 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:246-251 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:337-342 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:531-536 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:628-633 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:715-720 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:813-818 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:917-922 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:980-985 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gpzy_em.py:114-119 | REDACTED:230-235 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:365-370 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:463-468 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:542-547 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:678-683 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:928-933 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `REDACTED` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 13 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 345 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 after the matched lines, `REDACTED:1799` calls `drop_duplicates` and `REDACTED:344` 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 (6 lines × 20) REDACTED:232— REDACTED:232-237 | REDACTED:238-243 | REDACTED:244-249 | REDACTED:250-255 | REDACTED:256-261 | REDACTED:262-267 | REDACTED:268-273 | REDACTED:274-279 | REDACTED:280-285 | REDACTED:286-291 | REDACTED:292-297 | REDACTED:298-303 | REDACTED:304-309 | REDACTED:310-315 | REDACTED:316-321 | REDACTED:322-327 | REDACTED:328-333 | REDACTED:334-339 | REDACTED:340-345 | REDACTED:346-351 — all 20 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. 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 (2–6 lines × 5) REDACTED:78— REDACTED:78-84 | akshare/bond/bond_zh_sina.py:131-137 | akshare/index/index_stock_hk.py:133-138 | akshare/index/index_stock_us_sina.py:31-32 | akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:304-309 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `akshare/bond/bond_zh_sina.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 5 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 129 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `REDACTED:78` 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 (2–5 lines × 135) akshare/bond/bond_china.py:125— akshare/bond/bond_china.py:125-136 | akshare/bond/bond_convert.py:244-267 | REDACTED:419-444 | REDACTED:450-455 | REDACTED:667-678 | akshare/bond/bond_zh_sina.py:92-110 | akshare/crypto/crypto_hold.py:47-68 | REDACTED:155-177 | REDACTED:239-250 | REDACTED:283-303 | REDACTED:1174-1192 | REDACTED:2230-2248 | REDACTED:2299-2321 | REDACTED:2381-2403 | REDACTED:2468-2486 | REDACTED:2538-2558 | REDACTED:2609-2618 | REDACTED:2655-2667 | REDACTED:2708-2718 | REDACTED:2767-2789 | REDACTED:2849-2860 | REDACTED:2901-2911 | REDACTED:2951-2961 | REDACTED:3007-3029 | REDACTED:3136-3158 | REDACTED:3219-3230 | akshare/economic/macro_info_ws.py:75-89 | akshare/forex/forex_em.py:54-69 | akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:154-158 | REDACTED:86-104 | akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py:88-107 | akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:66-82 | REDACTED:140-159 | REDACTED:298-310 | REDACTED:315-329 | akshare/futures/futures_zh_sina.py:496-517 | akshare/futures/futures_zh_sina.py:590-604 | akshare/index/index_research_fund_sw.py:47-57 | REDACTED:227-237 | REDACTED:297-311 | akshare/index/index_stock_hk.py:99-113 | akshare/index/index_stock_hk.py:190-208 | akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:103-119 | akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:177-196 | akshare/index/index_stock_zh.py:262-281 | akshare/movie/movie_yien.py:428-429 | akshare/movie/movie_yien.py:491-492 | akshare/option/option_current_szse.py:48-55 | REDACTED:77-97 | REDACTED:151-171 | akshare/option/option_premium_analysis_em.py:56-72 | akshare/option/option_risk_analysis_em.py:55-72 | akshare/option/option_value_analysis_em.py:58-74 | akshare/reits/reits_basic.py:89-106 | akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:94-111 | akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:383-399 | akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:477-498 | REDACTED:87-104 | REDACTED:183-200 | REDACTED:324-340 | REDACTED:434-450 | REDACTED:528-549 | akshare/stock/stock_cg_guarantee.py:91-105 | akshare/stock/stock_dividend_cninfo.py:85-89 | akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:143-161 | akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:195-209 | akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:267-284 | akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:547-572 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:791-813 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:880-902 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:969-991 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1063-1085 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1175-1197 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1276-1299 | akshare/stock/stock_hk_famous.py:78-95 | REDACTED:76-97 | akshare/stock/stock_hot_up_em.py:55-69 | REDACTED:87-106 | akshare/stock/stock_us_famous.py:87-104 | akshare/stock/stock_us_pink.py:90-107 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:76-98 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:166-188 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_a_special.py:256-278 | akshare/stock/stock_zh_ah_tx.py:80-98 | REDACTED:94-112 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_account_em.py:53-75 | REDACTED:88-108 | REDACTED:75-99 | REDACTED:237-245 | REDACTED:274-276 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_fhps_em.py:88-117 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_fhps_em.py:128-131 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:281-302 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:433-448 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdhs.py:88-109 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdhs.py:112-118 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdhs.py:190-210 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdhs.py:218-222 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gpzy_em.py:143-161 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gpzy_em.py:269-290 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gpzy_em.py:292-294 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gpzy_em.py:355-368 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gpzy_em.py:424-437 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:97-101 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:205-209 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:313-317 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:421-425 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:532-536 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:643-647 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:752-756 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:925-929 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1282-1299 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1367-1384 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:1653-1674 | REDACTED:288-309 | REDACTED:1278-1304 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_jgdy_em.py:86-102 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:397-419 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:575-604 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:702-716 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:832-847 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:879-894 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_margin_sse.py:118-130 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_margin_sse.py:185-199 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_pankou_em.py:123-138 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:122-143 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:263-284 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:393-414 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:531-555 | REDACTED:435-446 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_yjbb_em.py:98-123 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_yjyg_em.py:86-111 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_zf_pg.py:74-90 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_zf_pg.py:183-185 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_sina.py:761-762 — before extracting anything, compare `akshare/bond/bond_china.py` and `REDACTED` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 3 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 110 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `akshare/bond/bond_china.py:125` 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 `date` to `str = "20240218"` in one and `str = "20231231"` 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. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `akshare/futures/futures_zh_sina.py:518` calls `to_numeric` and `akshare/bond/bond_china.py:137` 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 × 92) akshare/bond/bond_convert.py:317— akshare/bond/bond_convert.py:317-323 | REDACTED:105-113 | akshare/crypto/crypto_hold.py:64-68 | REDACTED:102-106 | REDACTED:171-177 | REDACTED:295-303 | REDACTED:1115-1123 | REDACTED:1184-1192 | REDACTED:2240-2248 | REDACTED:2315-2321 | REDACTED:2395-2403 | REDACTED:2550-2558 | REDACTED:2663-2667 | REDACTED:2781-2789 | REDACTED:3021-3029 | REDACTED:3150-3158 | akshare/economic/macro_finance_ths.py:111-117 | akshare/economic/marco_cnbs.py:54-58 | akshare/fund/fund_etf_ths.py:92-96 | akshare/fund/fund_rank_em.py:326-330 | akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:169-177 | akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:262-268 | akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:350-356 | akshare/fund/fund_report_cninfo.py:214-220 | akshare/fund/fund_xq.py:173-179 | REDACTED:933-939 | REDACTED:1027-1033 | REDACTED:1275-1279 | REDACTED:306-310 | akshare/futures_derivative/futures_hog.py:161-169 | akshare/futures_derivative/futures_hog.py:194-198 | REDACTED:81-85 | akshare/index/index_sugar.py:107-115 | akshare/index/index_sw.py:86-90 | akshare/index/index_sw.py:148-152 | akshare/index/index_sw.py:210-214 | REDACTED:71-77 | akshare/option/option_commodity_sina.py:113-117 | REDACTED:124-128 | REDACTED:197-201 | REDACTED:270-274 | akshare/stock/stock_cg_guarantee.py:101-105 | akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:56-60 | akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:470-474 | akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:564-572 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:87-95 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:809-813 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:898-902 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:987-991 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1077-1085 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1189-1197 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1293-1299 | akshare/stock/stock_hold_num_cninfo.py:91-95 | akshare/stock/stock_hot_up_em.py:65-69 | REDACTED:102-106 | akshare/stock/stock_ipo_summary_cninfo.py:91-95 | akshare/stock/stock_new_cninfo.py:154-158 | akshare/stock/stock_share_hold.py:107-113 | REDACTED:189-195 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_account_em.py:67-75 | REDACTED:95-99 | REDACTED:239-245 | REDACTED:389-393 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_fhps_em.py:109-117 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_fhps_em.py:243-251 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:294-302 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:582-588 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:677-683 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:767-773 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:870-876 | REDACTED:851-855 | REDACTED:920-924 | REDACTED:988-992 | REDACTED:1056-1060 | REDACTED:1298-1304 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:596-604 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:843-847 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:890-894 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:547-555 | REDACTED:173-177 | REDACTED:276-280 | REDACTED:376-380 | REDACTED:956-960 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_yjbb_em.py:117-123 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_yjyg_em.py:105-111 | REDACTED:112-116 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_sina.py:554-558 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_gbjg_em.py:142-146 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_profit_forecast_em.py:121-127 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_profit_forecast_hk_etnet.py:69-73 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_restricted_em.py:194-202 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_restricted_em.py:285-291 — there are 92 copies across 48 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 92 sites; resolving a subset leaves the remainder to drift apart. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `REDACTED:178` calls `to_numeric` and `REDACTED:114` does not — after which the two agree again for 4 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 89) REDACTED:105— REDACTED:105-113 | akshare/crypto/crypto_hold.py:65-69 | REDACTED:103-107 | REDACTED:172-178 | REDACTED:297-304 | REDACTED:1117-1126 | REDACTED:1186-1195 | REDACTED:2242-2249 | REDACTED:2317-2322 | REDACTED:2397-2406 | REDACTED:2552-2561 | REDACTED:2783-2792 | REDACTED:3023-3032 | REDACTED:3152-3161 | REDACTED:3319-3323 | akshare/economic/macro_finance_ths.py:112-120 | akshare/economic/marco_cnbs.py:54-58 | akshare/fund/fund_etf_ths.py:93-99 | akshare/fund/fund_manager.py:84-91 | akshare/fund/fund_rank_em.py:327-333 | akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:171-180 | akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:264-269 | akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:352-357 | akshare/fund/fund_report_cninfo.py:215-223 | akshare/fund/fund_xq.py:175-180 | REDACTED:933-939 | REDACTED:1027-1033 | REDACTED:1276-1282 | akshare/futures/futures_zh_sina.py:314-318 | akshare/futures/futures_zh_sina.py:404-408 | akshare/futures/futures_zh_sina.py:516-520 | akshare/futures/futures_zh_sina.py:603-607 | REDACTED:94-98 | akshare/futures_derivative/futures_hog.py:161-169 | akshare/index/index_sw.py:87-91 | akshare/index/index_sw.py:149-153 | akshare/index/index_sw.py:211-215 | REDACTED:72-80 | akshare/option/option_commodity_sina.py:114-118 | REDACTED:124-128 | REDACTED:197-201 | REDACTED:270-274 | akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:57-61 | akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:471-477 | akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:566-575 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:89-98 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:810-816 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:899-905 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:988-994 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1079-1088 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1191-1200 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1294-1302 | REDACTED:103-107 | akshare/stock/stock_ipo_summary_cninfo.py:92-98 | akshare/stock/stock_new_cninfo.py:155-159 | REDACTED:190-196 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_account_em.py:69-78 | REDACTED:96-102 | REDACTED:240-248 | REDACTED:390-394 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_fhps_em.py:111-120 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_fhps_em.py:245-254 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:296-305 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:678-686 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:768-776 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:871-879 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gpzy_em.py:367-371 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gpzy_em.py:436-440 | REDACTED:852-858 | REDACTED:921-927 | REDACTED:989-995 | REDACTED:1057-1063 | REDACTED:1299-1307 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:598-608 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:549-558 | REDACTED:68-72 | REDACTED:174-180 | REDACTED:277-283 | REDACTED:377-381 | REDACTED:445-449 | REDACTED:956-960 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_yjbb_em.py:118-126 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_yjyg_em.py:106-114 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_sina.py:447-451 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_gbjg_em.py:143-149 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_profit_forecast_em.py:121-127 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_profit_forecast_hk_etnet.py:68-73 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_restricted_em.py:193-202 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_restricted_em.py:284-291 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `akshare/crypto/crypto_hold.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 5 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 53 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 `REDACTED:297` 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. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `REDACTED:178` calls `to_numeric` and `REDACTED:113` 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 (5 lines × 88) REDACTED:105— REDACTED:105-113 | akshare/crypto/crypto_hold.py:65-69 | REDACTED:103-107 | REDACTED:172-178 | REDACTED:297-304 | REDACTED:1117-1126 | REDACTED:1186-1195 | REDACTED:2242-2249 | REDACTED:2317-2322 | REDACTED:2397-2406 | REDACTED:2552-2561 | REDACTED:2783-2792 | REDACTED:3023-3032 | REDACTED:3152-3161 | REDACTED:3319-3323 | akshare/economic/macro_finance_ths.py:112-120 | akshare/economic/marco_cnbs.py:55-59 | akshare/fund/fund_etf_ths.py:93-99 | akshare/fund/fund_rank_em.py:327-333 | akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:171-180 | akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:264-269 | akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:352-357 | akshare/fund/fund_report_cninfo.py:215-223 | akshare/fund/fund_xq.py:175-180 | REDACTED:935-942 | REDACTED:1029-1036 | REDACTED:1276-1282 | akshare/futures/futures_zh_sina.py:314-318 | akshare/futures/futures_zh_sina.py:404-408 | akshare/futures/futures_zh_sina.py:516-520 | akshare/futures/futures_zh_sina.py:603-607 | REDACTED:82-88 | akshare/index/index_sw.py:87-91 | akshare/index/index_sw.py:149-153 | akshare/index/index_sw.py:211-215 | REDACTED:48-52 | REDACTED:72-80 | akshare/option/option_commodity_sina.py:114-118 | REDACTED:125-129 | REDACTED:198-202 | REDACTED:271-275 | akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:57-61 | akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:471-477 | akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:566-575 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:89-98 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:810-816 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:899-905 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:988-994 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1079-1088 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1191-1200 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1294-1302 | REDACTED:103-107 | akshare/stock/stock_ipo_summary_cninfo.py:92-98 | akshare/stock/stock_new_cninfo.py:155-159 | REDACTED:190-196 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_account_em.py:69-78 | REDACTED:96-102 | REDACTED:240-248 | REDACTED:390-394 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_fhps_em.py:111-120 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_fhps_em.py:245-254 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:296-305 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:678-686 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:768-776 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:871-879 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gpzy_em.py:367-371 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gpzy_em.py:436-440 | REDACTED:852-858 | REDACTED:921-927 | REDACTED:989-995 | REDACTED:1057-1063 | REDACTED:1299-1307 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:598-608 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:844-850 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:891-897 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:549-558 | REDACTED:68-72 | REDACTED:174-180 | REDACTED:277-283 | REDACTED:377-381 | REDACTED:445-449 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_yjbb_em.py:118-126 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_yjyg_em.py:106-114 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_sina.py:447-451 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_gbjg_em.py:143-149 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_profit_forecast_em.py:122-130 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_profit_forecast_hk_etnet.py:70-76 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_restricted_em.py:286-294 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `akshare/crypto/crypto_hold.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 5 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 53 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 `REDACTED:297` 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. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `REDACTED:178` calls `to_numeric` and `REDACTED:113` 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 (5 lines × 87) REDACTED:105— REDACTED:105-113 | akshare/crypto/crypto_hold.py:65-69 | REDACTED:103-107 | REDACTED:172-178 | REDACTED:297-304 | REDACTED:1117-1126 | REDACTED:1186-1195 | REDACTED:2242-2249 | REDACTED:2317-2322 | REDACTED:2397-2406 | REDACTED:2552-2561 | REDACTED:2783-2792 | REDACTED:3023-3032 | REDACTED:3152-3161 | REDACTED:3319-3323 | akshare/economic/macro_finance_ths.py:112-120 | akshare/economic/marco_cnbs.py:55-59 | akshare/fund/fund_etf_ths.py:93-99 | akshare/fund/fund_rank_em.py:327-333 | akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:171-180 | akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:264-269 | akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:352-357 | akshare/fund/fund_report_cninfo.py:215-223 | akshare/fund/fund_xq.py:175-180 | REDACTED:935-942 | REDACTED:1029-1036 | REDACTED:1276-1282 | akshare/futures/futures_zh_sina.py:314-318 | akshare/futures/futures_zh_sina.py:404-408 | akshare/futures/futures_zh_sina.py:516-520 | akshare/futures/futures_zh_sina.py:603-607 | akshare/index/index_sw.py:87-91 | akshare/index/index_sw.py:149-153 | akshare/index/index_sw.py:211-215 | REDACTED:72-80 | akshare/movie/movie_yien.py:631-635 | akshare/option/option_commodity_sina.py:114-118 | REDACTED:124-128 | REDACTED:197-201 | REDACTED:270-274 | akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:57-61 | akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:471-477 | akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:566-575 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:89-98 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:810-816 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:899-905 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:988-994 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1079-1088 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1191-1200 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1294-1302 | REDACTED:103-107 | akshare/stock/stock_ipo_summary_cninfo.py:92-98 | akshare/stock/stock_new_cninfo.py:155-159 | REDACTED:190-196 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_account_em.py:69-78 | REDACTED:96-102 | REDACTED:240-248 | REDACTED:390-394 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_fhps_em.py:111-120 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_fhps_em.py:245-254 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:296-305 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:678-686 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:768-776 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:871-879 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gpzy_em.py:367-371 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gpzy_em.py:436-440 | REDACTED:852-858 | REDACTED:921-927 | REDACTED:989-995 | REDACTED:1057-1063 | REDACTED:1299-1307 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:598-608 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:549-558 | REDACTED:68-72 | REDACTED:174-180 | REDACTED:277-283 | REDACTED:377-381 | REDACTED:445-449 | REDACTED:956-960 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_yjbb_em.py:118-126 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_yjyg_em.py:106-114 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_sina.py:447-451 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_gbjg_em.py:143-149 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_profit_forecast_em.py:121-127 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_profit_forecast_hk_etnet.py:70-76 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_restricted_em.py:193-202 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_restricted_em.py:284-291 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `akshare/crypto/crypto_hold.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 5 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 53 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 `REDACTED:297` 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. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `REDACTED:178` calls `to_numeric` and `REDACTED:113` 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 (5 lines × 83) REDACTED:472— REDACTED:472-477 | REDACTED:191-198 | REDACTED:1192-1201 | REDACTED:2329-2338 | REDACTED:2412-2421 | REDACTED:2564-2573 | REDACTED:2664-2670 | REDACTED:2801-2810 | REDACTED:3038-3047 | REDACTED:3167-3176 | REDACTED:3338-3343 | akshare/economic/marco_cnbs.py:61-67 | akshare/fund/fund_report_cninfo.py:217-226 | REDACTED:1279-1288 | REDACTED:35-39 | REDACTED:307-313 | akshare/futures/futures_zh_sina.py:131-135 | akshare/futures_derivative/futures_hog.py:163-172 | akshare/index/index_sw.py:88-92 | akshare/index/index_sw.py:150-154 | akshare/index/index_sw.py:212-216 | akshare/option/option_commodity_sina.py:131-135 | REDACTED:142-146 | REDACTED:215-219 | REDACTED:288-292 | akshare/option/option_margin.py:61-65 | REDACTED:63-67 | akshare/stock/stock_board_concept_em.py:114-118 | REDACTED:107-111 | REDACTED:203-207 | akshare/stock/stock_cg_equity_mortgage.py:94-98 | akshare/stock/stock_cg_guarantee.py:102-108 | akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:62-68 | akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:287-291 | akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:389-398 | akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:472-480 | akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:590-599 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:113-118 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:434-443 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:831-840 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:920-929 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1009-1018 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:1311-1320 | akshare/stock/stock_hold_num_cninfo.py:96-102 | REDACTED:109-117 | akshare/stock/stock_ipo_summary_cninfo.py:101-107 | akshare/stock/stock_share_hold.py:109-114 | REDACTED:197-203 | REDACTED:403-408 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:302-309 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:583-591 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:680-687 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:776-785 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:879-888 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gpzy_em.py:369-377 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gpzy_em.py:438-446 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:116-120 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:224-228 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:332-336 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:440-444 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:662-666 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:771-775 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py:944-948 | REDACTED:765-774 | REDACTED:853-861 | REDACTED:922-930 | REDACTED:990-998 | REDACTED:1058-1066 | REDACTED:1624-1633 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:327-331 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:634-644 | REDACTED:180-189 | REDACTED:283-290 | REDACTED:446-450 | REDACTED:113-119 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_sina.py:555-559 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_gbjg_em.py:149-154 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_hold.py:50-54 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_hold.py:114-120 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_profit_forecast_hk_etnet.py:74-78 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_restricted_em.py:196-205 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_restricted_em.py:288-297 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_restricted_em.py:347-353 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `akshare/fund/fund_report_cninfo.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 8 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 298 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 `REDACTED:472` 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. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `REDACTED:470` calls `to_numeric` and `akshare/economic/marco_cnbs.py:61` 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 (5 lines × 41) REDACTED:336— REDACTED:336-340 | REDACTED:1040-1044 | REDACTED:1404-1408 | REDACTED:1459-1463 | REDACTED:1514-1518 | REDACTED:1569-1573 | REDACTED:1624-1628 | REDACTED:1679-1683 | REDACTED:1734-1738 | REDACTED:1792-1796 | REDACTED:1847-1851 | REDACTED:1902-1906 | REDACTED:1957-1961 | REDACTED:2012-2016 | REDACTED:2067-2071 | REDACTED:43-47 | REDACTED:43-47 | REDACTED:297-301 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_fhps_em.py:47-51 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_fhps_em.py:169-173 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:42-46 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:144-148 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:247-251 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:338-342 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:532-536 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:629-633 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:716-720 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:814-818 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:918-922 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:981-985 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gpzy_em.py:115-119 | REDACTED:231-235 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:366-370 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:464-468 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:543-547 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:679-683 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:929-933 | REDACTED:108-112 | REDACTED:217-221 | REDACTED:318-322 | REDACTED:410-414 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `REDACTED` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 13 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 345 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 after the matched lines, `REDACTED:1799` calls `drop_duplicates` and `REDACTED:344` 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 × 34) REDACTED:102— REDACTED:102-106 | REDACTED:1115-1123 | akshare/fund/fund_em.py:206-212 | akshare/fund/fund_etf_ths.py:92-96 | akshare/fund/fund_rank_em.py:326-330 | akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:169-177 | akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:262-268 | akshare/fund/fund_rating.py:350-356 | akshare/fund/fund_report_cninfo.py:214-220 | akshare/index/index_sugar.py:107-115 | REDACTED:71-77 | akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:56-60 | akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:470-474 | akshare/stock/stock_fund_em.py:87-95 | akshare/stock/stock_hold_num_cninfo.py:91-95 | akshare/stock/stock_ipo_summary_cninfo.py:91-95 | akshare/stock/stock_new_cninfo.py:154-158 | akshare/stock/stock_share_hold.py:107-113 | REDACTED:389-393 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_fhps_em.py:243-251 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:582-588 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:677-683 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:767-773 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:870-876 | REDACTED:851-855 | REDACTED:920-924 | REDACTED:988-992 | REDACTED:1056-1060 | REDACTED:173-177 | REDACTED:276-280 | REDACTED:376-380 | REDACTED:112-116 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_sina.py:554-558 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_gbjg_em.py:142-146 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `REDACTED` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 9 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. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `akshare/fund/fund_etf_ths.py:97` calls `to_numeric` and `REDACTED:107` 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 × 31) akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:38— akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:38-42 | akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:330-334 | akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:437-441 | akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:520-525 | REDACTED:46-51 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:45-49 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:250-255 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:341-346 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:632-637 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:719-724 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:817-822 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:921-926 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:984-989 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gpzy_em.py:118-123 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gpzy_em.py:218-222 | REDACTED:234-239 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:264-268 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:369-373 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:467-471 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:546-550 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:682-686 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:336-341 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:472-477 | REDACTED:111-115 | REDACTED:220-224 | REDACTED:321-325 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_tfp_em.py:40-45 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_yjyg_em.py:47-52 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_yjyg_em.py:164-169 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_profit_forecast_em.py:53-58 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_restricted_em.py:145-150 — before extracting anything, compare `akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py` and `REDACTED` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 6 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 155 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 × 27) akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:331— akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:331-335 | akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:438-442 | akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py:521-526 | REDACTED:47-52 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:46-50 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:251-256 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:342-347 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:633-638 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:720-725 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:922-927 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:985-990 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gpzy_em.py:119-124 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gpzy_em.py:219-223 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:265-269 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:370-374 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:468-472 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:547-551 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:683-687 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:337-342 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_report_em.py:473-478 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_ipo_declare.py:44-48 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_register_em.py:43-47 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_register_em.py:117-121 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_register_em.py:191-195 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_register_em.py:265-269 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_register_em.py:339-343 | akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_register_em.py:413-417 — before extracting anything, compare `akshare/stock/stock_dzjy_em.py` and `REDACTED` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 6 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 155 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 × 21) REDACTED:232— REDACTED:232-236 | REDACTED:238-242 | REDACTED:244-248 | REDACTED:250-254 | REDACTED:256-260 | REDACTED:262-266 | REDACTED:268-272 | REDACTED:274-278 | REDACTED:280-284 | REDACTED:286-290 | REDACTED:292-296 | REDACTED:298-302 | REDACTED:304-308 | REDACTED:310-314 | REDACTED:316-320 | REDACTED:322-326 | REDACTED:328-332 | REDACTED:334-338 | REDACTED:340-344 | REDACTED:346-350 | REDACTED:352-356 — all 21 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. The `return` at the foot of the matched lines is the enclosing body's own terminal exit, not an early one: it moves with them unchanged, and each site calls the extracted unit from the position that `return` occupied — no decision has to be handed back and re-acted on.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 20) REDACTED:129— REDACTED:129-136 | REDACTED:104-108 | REDACTED:306-312 | REDACTED:1123-1132 | akshare/economic/macro_finance_ths.py:114-123 | akshare/futures/futures_zh_sina.py:325-331 | akshare/futures/futures_zh_sina.py:527-533 | REDACTED:82-88 | REDACTED:48-52 | REDACTED:74-83 | akshare/option/option_lhb_em.py:94-98 | akshare/option/option_lhb_em.py:149-153 | akshare/option/option_lhb_em.py:204-208 | akshare/option/option_lhb_em.py:247-251 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_account_em.py:86-90 | REDACTED:1409-1418 | REDACTED:1502-1507 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:844-850 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_lhb_em.py:891-897 | REDACTED:72-79 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `REDACTED` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 6 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 63 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 `REDACTED:129` 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. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `REDACTED:304` calls `to_numeric` and `REDACTED:129` 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 (5 lines × 17) REDACTED:1406— REDACTED:1406-1410 | REDACTED:1461-1465 | REDACTED:1516-1520 | REDACTED:1571-1575 | REDACTED:1626-1630 | REDACTED:1681-1685 | REDACTED:1736-1740 | REDACTED:1849-1853 | REDACTED:1904-1908 | REDACTED:1959-1963 | REDACTED:2014-2018 | REDACTED:2069-2073 | akshare/stock/stock_repurchase_em.py:36-40 | REDACTED:45-49 | REDACTED:163-167 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:146-150 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_gdfx_em.py:534-538 — there are 17 copies across 4 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 17 sites; resolving a subset leaves the remainder to drift apart. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `REDACTED:50` calls `reset_index` and `REDACTED:169` 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 (3–5 lines × 5) REDACTED:859— REDACTED:859-861 | REDACTED:1018-1022 | REDACTED:1047-1051 | REDACTED:1076-1080 | REDACTED:1105-1109 — there are 5 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 5 sites; resolving a subset leaves the remainder to drift apart. The `return` at the foot of the matched lines is the enclosing body's own terminal exit, not an early one: it moves with them unchanged, and each site calls the extracted unit from the position that `return` occupied — no decision has to be handed back and re-acted on. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `REDACTED:1017` calls `concat`, `astype` and `REDACTED:859` does not — after which the two agree again for 4 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
Duplicated block (2–5 lines × 4) akshare/fund/fund_em.py:788— akshare/fund/fund_em.py:788-789 | akshare/fund/fund_em.py:1048-1052 | akshare/fund/fund_em.py:1143-1148 | akshare/stock_feature/stock_hsgt_min_em.py:51-52 — 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 `akshare/fund/fund_em.py:1143` 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. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `akshare/fund/fund_em.py:786` calls `sort_values`, `to_datetime` and `akshare/fund/fund_em.py:1143` does not — after which the two agree again for 3 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
Duplicated block (9 lines × 7) akshare/air/air_zhenqi.py:24— akshare/air/air_zhenqi.py:24-35 | REDACTED:544-552 | REDACTED:556-564 | akshare/movie/artist_yien.py:21-32 | akshare/movie/movie_yien.py:21-32 | akshare/movie/video_yien.py:21-32 | akshare/option/cons.py:85-93 — `REDACTED` and `akshare/option/cons.py` are one unit implemented once per sibling directory, so they are most likely parallel implementations of one contract rather than a copy of each other — this scan matched 4 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 66 lines. If both are selected at run time, neither can be retired in favour of the other, and the lines that DIFFER between them are the reason both exist. The move that pays here is to hoist the identical part into a shared location the whole family can reach and give what differs a parameter or a seam, so a change lands once instead of once per sibling; extracting one helper per block leaves every sibling to drift on its own. 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. Note first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: the declarations holding them bind `module_file` to `str = None` in one and `str = ""` 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 (8 lines × 7) akshare/spot/spot_hog_soozhu.py:55— akshare/spot/spot_hog_soozhu.py:55-62 | akshare/spot/spot_hog_soozhu.py:79-86 | akshare/spot/spot_hog_soozhu.py:103-110 | akshare/spot/spot_hog_soozhu.py:127-134 | akshare/spot/spot_hog_soozhu.py:151-158 | akshare/spot/spot_hog_soozhu.py:175-182 | akshare/spot/spot_hog_soozhu.py:199-206 — all 7 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. The `return` at the foot of the matched lines is the enclosing body's own terminal exit, not an early one: it moves with them unchanged, and each site calls the extracted unit from the position that `return` occupied — no decision has to be handed back and re-acted on.
Duplication concentrated across 3 sibling directories (17 clone groups) akshare/data/ths.js:1— 17 duplicated blocks under akshare/ have copies in at least two of the sibling directories air, data, stock_feature — 9 of them are reported below, and 8 are counted here but not reported individually: those copies match on shape but no longer clear R10's bar for an individually reported row — either they kept neither their own names nor their values, or what was copied is too small to stand on its own (it reports near-exact duplication only, and only of substantial extent). What this row states is the concentration, which the detector measured over all 17 and which does not depend on how exactly each block's copies still match. That concentration is one structural fact, not 17 local ones: the siblings replicate behaviour none of them owns, which is the shape of a missing shared module — a common library every sibling imports — rather than 17 separate extractions. Check first whether the siblings are deliberately standalone deliverables (scaffold templates, demo apps that must stay copy-pasteable); where they are, the duplication is the design and the per-block rows are the ones to act on.
Wholesale file copy (757 identical lines × 2 files) akshare/data/ths.js:1— akshare/data/ths.js:1 · akshare/stock_feature/ths.js:1 — these 2 files are line-for-line copies of one another — 757 lines are identical, in the same order, in every one of them — so this is one fact about the file set, not a block to extract. An edit made to one file and not the others changes behaviour silently, which is the failure a wholesale copy guarantees. Pick one file as the single source and derive the others from it (re-export it, spread it into the local overrides each variant genuinely needs, or generate the copies at build time) — the few lines that differ between the files are exactly the part each variant should still own. Check first whether the copies are deliberately standalone deliverables (a translation file seeded from its sibling and waiting to be translated); where they are, the duplication is the design, and the honest move is to mark the seeded file as untranslated rather than to let it pass as done.
Duplicated block (174 lines × 2 locations) REDACTED:2506— REDACTED:2506 · REDACTED:3825 — all 2 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.
Duplicated block (126 lines × 2 locations) REDACTED:2306— REDACTED:2306 · REDACTED:3625 — all 2 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.
Duplicated block (104 lines × 2 locations) REDACTED:2682— REDACTED:2682 · REDACTED:4001 — 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 (101 lines × 2 locations) REDACTED:130— REDACTED:130 · REDACTED:2188 — 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 (80 lines × 2 locations) REDACTED:2867— REDACTED:2867 · REDACTED:4186 — 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 (71 lines × 2 locations) REDACTED:2433— REDACTED:2433 · REDACTED:3752 — 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.
R10 · Code Duplication· Duplicated block with local edits (51 matched lines × 2 locations) · ×1
Duplicated block with local edits (51 matched lines × 2 locations) REDACTED:1765— REDACTED:1765 · REDACTED:5224 — the two spans are one implementation copied and then locally edited — 483 tokens are still identical, in the same order in both files, with only local edits between them. The copies have already begun to drift, which is this row's finding: an edit made to one and not the other changes behaviour silently. Diff the two spans first to learn what genuinely differs, then extract the shared core into one module both sites use, passing the differences in as parameters — or, if one copy exists only because the other could not be imported from its context, make one of them the single source the other is generated or re-exported from. If one copy is no longer reachable, delete it rather than letting it shadow the live one.
R10 · Code Duplication· Duplicated block with local edits (43 matched lines × 2 locations) · ×1
Duplicated block with local edits (43 matched lines × 2 locations) akshare/movie/jm.js:76— akshare/movie/jm.js:76 · akshare/movie/jm.js:1439 — the two spans are one implementation copied and then locally edited — 217 tokens are still identical, in the same order in both spans, with only local edits between them. The copies have already begun to drift, which is this row's finding: an edit made to one and not the other changes behaviour silently. Diff the two spans first to learn what genuinely differs, then extract the shared core into one module both sites use, passing the differences in as parameters — or, if one copy exists only because the other could not be imported from its context, make one of them the single source the other is generated or re-exported from. If one copy is no longer reachable, delete it rather than letting it shadow the live one.
Duplicated block (40 lines × 2 locations) REDACTED:20— REDACTED:20 · REDACTED:2080 — all 2 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.
Duplicated block (36 lines × 2 locations) REDACTED:3499— REDACTED:3499 · REDACTED:4818 — all 2 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.
Duplicated block (27 lines × 2 locations) REDACTED:2956— REDACTED:2956 · REDACTED:4275 — 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 (24 lines × 3 locations) REDACTED:788— REDACTED:788 · REDACTED:2782 · REDACTED:4101 — all 3 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.
Duplicated block (23 lines × 3 locations) REDACTED:668— REDACTED:668 · REDACTED:2674 · REDACTED:3993 — 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 (22 lines × 2 locations) REDACTED:1033— REDACTED:1033 · REDACTED:1780 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (18 lines × 3 locations) REDACTED:713— REDACTED:713 · REDACTED:2717 · REDACTED:4036 — all 3 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.
Duplicated block (16 lines × 2 locations) REDACTED:5661— REDACTED:5661 · REDACTED:5873 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (15 lines × 3 locations) REDACTED:1853— REDACTED:1853 · REDACTED:2015 · REDACTED:2050 — 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 (14 lines × 2 locations) akshare/air/crypto.js:1— akshare/air/crypto.js:1 · REDACTED:1 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.
Duplicated block (13 lines × 2 locations) REDACTED:900— REDACTED:900 · REDACTED:1681 — all 2 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.
Duplicated block (11 lines × 3 locations) REDACTED:901— REDACTED:901 · REDACTED:1213 · REDACTED:1394 — the 3 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.
Complex function _doProcessBlock (cyclomatic 21, cognitive 35) REDACTED:2978— _doProcessBlock has cyclomatic complexity 21 and cognitive complexity 35; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
Complex function clone (cyclomatic 17, cognitive 17) akshare/movie/jm.js:224— clone has cyclomatic complexity 17 and cognitive complexity 17; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
Complex function (anonymous) (cyclomatic 17, cognitive 17) akshare/movie/jm.js:2174— (anonymous) has cyclomatic complexity 17 and cognitive complexity 17; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
Complex function init (cyclomatic 13, cognitive 14) REDACTED:1585— init has cyclomatic complexity 13 and cognitive complexity 14; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
Complex function _doReset (cyclomatic 12, cognitive 19) REDACTED:4466— _doReset has cyclomatic complexity 12 and cognitive complexity 19; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
Complex function _doProcessBlock (cyclomatic 11, cognitive 23) REDACTED:2690— _doProcessBlock has cyclomatic complexity 11 and cognitive complexity 23; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
Complex function _process (cyclomatic 11, cognitive 19) akshare/movie/jm.js:584— _process has cyclomatic complexity 11 and cognitive complexity 19; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
Complex function concat (cyclomatic 11, cognitive 15) akshare/movie/jm.js:348— concat has cyclomatic complexity 11 and cognitive complexity 15; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
Complex function _doProcessBlock (cyclomatic 11, cognitive 14) REDACTED:1684— _doProcessBlock has cyclomatic complexity 11 and cognitive complexity 14; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
REDACTED: 5262 lines of code REDACTED:1— REDACTED has 5262 significant lines (blank lines excluded), over the 400-line bar, and contains logic — a file this long is usually several responsibilities in one module.
REDACTED: 4831 lines of code REDACTED:1— REDACTED has 4831 significant lines (blank lines excluded), over the 400-line bar, and contains logic — a file this long is usually several responsibilities in one module.
akshare/movie/jm.js: 2256 lines of code akshare/movie/jm.js:1— akshare/movie/jm.js has 2256 significant lines (blank lines excluded), over the 400-line bar, and contains logic — a file this long is usually several responsibilities in one module.
akshare/data/ths.js: 978 lines of code akshare/data/ths.js:1— akshare/data/ths.js has 978 significant lines (blank lines excluded), over the 400-line bar, and contains logic — a file this long is usually several responsibilities in one module.
R3 · Large Files· akshare/stock_feature/ths.js · ×1
akshare/stock_feature/ths.js: 978 lines of code akshare/stock_feature/ths.js:1— akshare/stock_feature/ths.js has 978 significant lines (blank lines excluded), over the 400-line bar, and contains logic — a file this long is usually several responsibilities in one module.
Dead file (~989 LoC) akshare/data/ths.js— no import path from any entry point (5 application, 0 tooling, 0 test roots considered), and no other file in the scanned tree imports it — nothing in-repo names this module at all, which is the strongest form of this claim the import graph can make
Duplicated predicate akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_ipo_review.py:51— `"result" not in data_json or "pages" not in data_json["result"]` appears character-identically in 2 files — akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_ipo_review.py, akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_ipo_tutor.py. 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 akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py:289— `data_json["data"] and data_json["data"]["klines"]` appears character-identically in 3 files — akshare/fund/fund_etf_em.py, akshare/fund/fund_lof_em.py, akshare/stock_feature/stock_hist_em.py. 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 akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_ipo_review.py:41— `start == -1 or end == -1 or end <= start` appears character-identically in 2 files — akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_ipo_review.py, akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_ipo_tutor.py. 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.
Off-boarding risk: anonymized user #1 — If anonymized user #1 becomes unavailable, 39 significant file(s) lose their only recent owner: REDACTED, REDACTED, scripts/check_punctuation.py, akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_ths.py, akshare/economic/macro_china_nbs.py, REDACTED, akshare/stock_feature/stock_a_pe_and_pb.py, REDACTED (+31 more). Pair on, review, or document these before any departure.
Off-boarding risk: anonymized user #2 — If anonymized user #2 becomes unavailable, 4 significant file(s) lose their only recent owner: akshare/stock_feature/stock_cyq_em.py, akshare/stock_fundamental/stock_finance_us_em.py, akshare/stock/stock_dividend_cninfo.py, akshare/futures/futures_contract_detail.py. Pair on, review, or document these before any departure.
README/code drift docs/uv.md:16— docs/uv.md runs `powershell -ExecutionPolicy ByPass -c "irm https://astral.sh/uv/install.ps1`, but `https:/astral.sh/uv/install.ps1` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
README/code drift docs/uv.md:141— docs/uv.md documents the environment variable `UV_DEFAULT_INDEX`, but no code, script or configuration file names it. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
D26 · Project Cohesion· Projects may be oversized for their cohesion · ×1
Projects may be oversized for their cohesion — 1 of 2 project(s) overshoot their size bounds, lowering Project Cohesion to 0.0/10. The most over is `(repository root)` (111627 LoC, 392 module-visible types across 38 directories). Review these for cohesion — draw the boundary inside the module first (group each responsibility into its own package or directory and keep the cross-boundary members non-public), since splitting a published package moves types between packages and breaks consumers.
D28 · Secrets (history)· Rotate the exposed credentials · ×1
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 bandit, `semgrep --config=p/python`, or CodeQL's python pack as a CI step. What was searched, so you can tell an absence from a miss: the 4227 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 release approval gate — The release is automated and no gate that pauses it for a human is DECLARED IN THIS REPOSITORY'S PIPELINE FILES. What was read: every file under `.github/workflows/`, `.forgejo/workflows/`, `.gitea/workflows/`, `.azuredevops/` and `.azure-pipelines/`, plus `.gitlab-ci*` and `azure-pipelines*` — with comment text stripped, so documenting a gate is not declaring one. What would have counted: GitLab's `when: manual`, CircleCI's `type: approval`, an Azure `ManualValidation@` task or an `approvals:` block, a Jenkins `input` step, a `uses:` step naming an approval action, an `environment:` paired with `reviewers` / `required_reviewers` / `protection` / `wait-timer` / `deployment_branch_policy`, a draft-release step, a `workflow_dispatch` promotion, or a release-event gate. ★ What this cannot see, because none of it is a file: a GitHub environment whose required reviewers are configured in repo SETTINGS, a branch protection rule, or an organisation deployment policy — all of them real, enforced gates that live outside the repository. If yours is one of those, this row is wrong and nothing in the tree could have told us. Otherwise: whatever the release trigger points at is published to users unreviewed, so a mistagged or unverified commit ships and the only remedy is a follow-up release.
R7 · Dead Code· Unused module-local declaration 'getResCode1' · ×1
Unused module-local declaration 'getResCode1' REDACTED:5977— This top-level declaration is not exported and its name occurs nowhere else in its module — not called, read, typed against, re-exported or named by a string. Nothing outside the module can reach a non-exported binding, so this is the whole search: remove it, or use it.
R7 · Dead Code· Unused module-local declaration 'my_decode' · ×1
Unused module-local declaration 'my_decode' REDACTED:5990— This top-level declaration is not exported and its name occurs nowhere else in its module — not called, read, typed against, re-exported or named by a string. Nothing outside the module can reach a non-exported binding, so this is the whole search: remove it, or use it.
R7 · Dead Code· Unused module-local declaration 'new_my_decode' · ×1
Unused module-local declaration 'new_my_decode' REDACTED:6003— This top-level declaration is not exported and its name occurs nowhere else in its module — not called, read, typed against, re-exported or named by a string. Nothing outside the module can reach a non-exported binding, so this is the whole search: remove it, or use it.
Dependency hygiene PARTLY measured — Python dependencies read, no exact pin to grade for currency — This repository's Python dependencies were read: 16 shipped distribution(s) across 2 manifest(s) (12 development or optional declaration(s) excluded, because a consumer does not install them). Whether any of them is behind its current release is the dependency-CURRENCY question, and no declaration here carries an EXACT pin to ask it about — every one is a floor or a range, which installs the newest release it admits and therefore cannot be behind one. That is a healthy declaration style, NOT a defect and NOT a gap in this analyzer; there is simply no currency question to answer. This is NOT a finding that these dependencies are current or healthy. Lockfiles are deliberately not read (poetry.lock, REDACTED, Pipfile.lock, pdm.lock): the four disagree about dev/optional membership, and misreading one would charge a test-only package a consumer never receives. Known CVEs in the same dependency graph are a separate question, reported under D30.
Appendix B — Reproduction & audit trail
Every external tool invocation behind a deep-scan dimension — the tool, its captured version, the exact command, how many findings it yielded, and a link to the retained raw output. To reproduce any finding: check out the same commit and run the command shown (repo-relative — never an absolute scratch path). The complete raw scanner output is retained verbatim under artifacts/raw/ (indexed in artifacts/raw/index.json); per-invocation exit codes and wall-clock durations are in sidecar.json — kept out of this table so the rendered report stays byte-identical across runs of the same commit.
semgrep: not applicable — No personal data was found crossing a boundary the PII/GDPR ruleset checks — nothing written to a log or console sink, placed in a URL or query string, or persisted to browser storage. That is a clean result for the LEAK surface only: this ruleset detects personal data escaping, it does not inventory the personal data a repository holds, so it is not evidence that this repository has no personal-data surface. The personal-data map (Appendix C) and the C1-C5 compliance cards are what speak to that.
disclosure: not applicable — No vulnerability-disclosure policy file found (SECURITY.md/.markdown/.rst/.txt at root or under .github/.forgejo/.gitea/docs, .well-known/security.txt). A coordinated-disclosure policy may live off-repo, so this is not evidenced rather than failed.
runtime-hardening: not applicable — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; network egress policy is a cluster-native control that may live at the platform/firewall layer, so there is nothing to assess here.
runtime-hardening: not applicable — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; seccomp/AppArmor/SELinux confinement is a workload-level control, so there is nothing to assess here.
runtime-hardening: not applicable — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; runtime threat-detection and admission-control policy are cluster-level controls, so there is nothing to assess here.
Run 01a15ab0-9148-7c26-a81d-4eea9700790d · every finding is also locatable in findings.md, and the complete scoring record (with exit codes + durations) in sidecar.json.
Issues: 101 · Warnings: 2986 · Recommendations: 228 · Info: 1 — Appendix A · all findings · full markdown report.
Generated by Watchdog — deterministic code-health analysis. 20-10-2026 @ 19:01 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.