Public report of atomvm/AtomVM, published 27 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, 27 October 2026, 16:43 UTC · Survey ID cd_233c435f756c43ceb77843585465e3d7
atomvm/AtomVM
Measured 27 October 2026, 16:41 UTC, at code version 3a9ea46
No regression since the last survey
A regression is a drop of 0.5 points or more in the score, or of 2.5 or more out of 10 in a dimension, since the last survey.
CAI scoreAdequate
CriticalWeakAdequateStrongExemplary
No change 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: 89,733 lines of product code in 8 projects, tests not counted · Estimated rebuild effort: about 1.8 person-years · Weakest lens: Security and Compliance, 66
Findings by how serious they are
134 critical704 serious50 minor
23 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
27 October 2026, 16:41 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 58 dimensions measured by tools.
876of 888 findings point to an exact file and line, so you can open each one in the code. The other 12 concern the repository as a whole, such as missing documentation.
58dimensions across 6 lenses, read from 89,733 lines of product code in 8 projects.
atomvm/AtomVM falls short of our standard for a preview release because its Testing dimensions are rated Weak, and it has pipeline tools referenced by a changeable name. It scores 71 out of 100, which alone would earn Strong, but it is rated Adequate: a rating can't sit more than one step above its weakest group.
Security and Compliance, at 66, is the weakest lens and counts most in the score. The best first step is rebalancing the test suite towards unit tests, worth about 2 points. Fixing the seven pipeline jobs with more access than they need would lift Security and Compliance itself, also worth about 2.
113 pipeline tools are referenced by a changeable name, so the build pipeline can be tampered with. Seven pipeline steps run downloads nobody checks, and six weaknesses in the code could be used by an attacker. Pinning each tool to an exact version, checking each download against a checksum and fixing the weaknesses the scanner points to would close these risks. Limiting each secret to its own step would fix the two secrets exposed to more of the pipeline than needed, and the three pipeline steps that install packages without pinning their versions need the packages they install pinned to exact versions. The two parts of the code nobody has worked on for a long time need someone to learn and document them before anyone changes them.
The product code is 89,733 lines, about €260,000 to rebuild.
A lens is capped at Adequate while one of its dimensions scores below 4 out of 10, however well the rest of the lens does. That way a serious problem in one place always shows in the lens's rating.
How the score is built: what each lens counts forThe lenses don't count equally. The weakest lens counts most, the next weakest a little less, and so on, so a weak area pulls the score down instead of being averaged away. In the bar below, each part's width shows how much that lens counts and its colour shows its rating. Improving the widest part moves the score most, and as that lens improves, it counts for less, because another lens becomes the weakest.
If Security and Compliance rose from 66 to 68, the lowest score rated Strong, the score would rise from 71 to about 71.
Code composition: what the lines of code are
Product code 46%Tests 54%
Rebuild cost: about €260,000 · Estimate
Cost to rebuild
€85,000 to €430,000, for 1,420 to 4,506 hours of work, about 1.8 person-years for 1 to 4 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
×1.0 at a score of 71. 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: 89,733 lines of product code
What it is not
Not a quotation: nobody has offered to build it for that. Not a valuation: it says nothing about what the business is worth. Not a certified figure: no professional has signed it as one.
How the estimate is made: Watchdog prices the hours a team would need to write this code again, at €60 to €95 an hour. Declarations and boilerplate are priced at a fast rate and logic at a slower one, and the logic is then multiplied by the difficulty of the problem and by the quality factor. The estimate can be about 30% off either way, and it moves most with the hourly rate and the difficulty. For this code, every line is priced as straight logic, which keeps the estimate on the low side.
Top priorities
The three actions that raise the score most for the work they take. The full ranked list is in the Roadmap.
1
Resolve the 1 Inverted test pyramid finding(s) in Test Distribution.
Resolve the 2 Off-boarding risk finding(s) in Bus Factor.
Raises the score by about 1 point · Low effort · Bus Factor
Diagnosis: what the measurements show together
Each conclusion below combines several dimensions into one point that no single dimension shows, and lists the measurements it rests on.
If you do one thing first · First action
Resolve the 1 Inverted test pyramid finding(s) in Test Distribution. Of all the actions in this report, it raises the score most for the work it takes: about 2 points for low effort, because it clears the 1 Test Distribution findings. The next survey will show the change in the score.
Based on: the ranked actions in Top priorities, by score gain and effort
What hard-to-read code costs each year · Cost
Four dimensions measure how easy the code is to work in: two measure how tangled its logic is, one how much of it is copied, and one how well each part sticks to a single job. In this codebase they average 7.3 out of 10. Code at that level is slower to change than clean code, and Watchdog estimates the extra work at 2% to 5% on every change. The history of the code shows how much it changes: about 13,203 lines over the last 90 days, which is about 53,546 lines a year. At that pace, the extra work comes to an estimated 2.7 to 17.8 engineer-days a year, and it grows as more code changes.
How this is estimated: The number of changed lines is measured from the history of the code. The rest rests on two assumptions of Watchdog's own: code scoring 8 out of 10 or more adds no extra work, and each point below 8 adds 2.5% to 5.6% to every change, never less than 2% to 5% and never more than 40% to 60% in all; and an engineer changes 150 to 400 lines in a day. The result is a range for planning, not a measurement.
Based on: Cyclomatic Complexity · Cognitive Complexity · Code Duplication · Cohesion (LCOM4) · the code's change history
What to do: Start with the files listed under Churn × Complexity Hotspots, which change often and are hard to read, because that is where the extra work is paid most often.
Architecture — module dependency graph
Project dependencies, layered top-to-bottom; arrows show direction. Any dashed red edge points upward or sideways, which only happens where the projects form a dependency cycle. A graph without cycles has none.
Architecture: which parts of the code depend on which
The code is divided into modules, groups of code that each handle one part of the product, and a module depends on another when it uses code from it. The table lists the modules both down the side and across the top, in an order where each module should only use modules listed above it. A number in a cell means the module on that row uses the module in that column, and it counts the pairs of building blocks (types) that connect them. The one thing to look for is a mark above the diagonal line. It means two or more modules use each other in a loop (a dependency cycle), so none of them can be changed, tested or released on its own.
46 modules, with 5 dependencies between them. Every module uses only modules listed above it, so there are no loops.
The table shows the 40 modules with the most connections; 6 more are left out to keep it readable.
Which modules use which. The module on each row uses the module in each column, and the number counts the pairs of types that connect them. A cell above the diagonal is part of a loop.
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
133
High / Critical
A03:2025 — Software Supply Chain Failures
23
Medium
Roadmap
Begin by addressing the inverted test pyramid in Test Distribution and securing the supply chain by adding permissions blocks to the seven flagged PR-triggered workflows. Next, resolve the twenty mutable container image issues in Static Analysis, prioritizing the build-and-test, run-tests-with-beam, and wasm-build configuration files. Finally, improve onboarding and long-term maintainability by adding a quick-start section to the root README and documenting significant design decisions in a dedicated ADR folder.
Ranked by impact ÷ effort. "Helps" is the estimated gain on the 0–100 health score.
Do this
Helps
Effort
Dimension
Resolve the 1 Inverted test pyramid finding(s) in Test Distribution.
Per-file score 0–10 — a quality signature. Of 112 files carrying findings, judged against the Preview bar: 10% slop · 20% mixed · 70% near-clean.
File
Score
Band
Worst signal
REDACTED
1.3
Slop
Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED
1.3
Slop
Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED
1.6
Slop
Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED
2.3
Slop
Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED
2.3
Slop
Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED
2.3
Slop
Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED
2.3
Slop
Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED
2.3
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
2.7
Slop
Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED
3.0
Mixed
Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED
3.0
Mixed
Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED
3.7
Mixed
Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED
3.7
Mixed
Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED
3.7
Mixed
Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED
4.4
Mixed
Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED
4.5
Mixed
Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED
4.8
Mixed
Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED
5.1
Mixed
Static Analysis (SAST): High: 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 — 134
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 — 704
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 — 50
Recorded, with no effect on how the codebase functions.
Present so the survey is complete, not because it needs doing.
Could not be resolved — 23
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 58 evaluated dimensions are computed purely by tools and static analysis (confidence 1.0); none rely on LLM judgement. Overall confidence is 0.8 — the weighted average across measured dimensions; it falls as more of the score leans on LLM-assisted judgement and rises when it's fully tool-backed.
Every figure here is one of three kinds, and we label which: ✓ Measured — a deterministic fact (LoC, complexity, coverage); ~ Modeled — an estimate from a stated model (cost, effort, value-at-risk), always a range with its assumptions, never a precise fact; ◐ Advisory — an LLM prose judgement. We never present a modelled estimate as if it were measured. Perfect or absent scores carry their provenance too (ADR-0011): ✓ Tool-verified means the property itself was measured across the surface; ○ Nothing flagged means the probes came back clean — a claim bounded by what a repository can show; ⊘ Not evidenced means a working control (a tested restore, an automated rollback) showed no positive evidence — absence of evidence is not evidence of a control, so it's excluded from the score rather than awarded a spurious 10; ◐ Sampled · advisory marks an LLM verdict over a bounded sample — advisory, never a deterministic measurement.
What we checked — 58 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, 876 of 888 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.
D4 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. The 465 duplicated block group(s) on this row were found in the languages this pass could tokenize, and they do NOT cover all of this repository's production source: .c (88,525 lines, 50% of production source) went unread, because no language model this pass could load exposed a clone-unit token stream for those file kinds. Duplication in that source is UNMEASURED — its absence from the count above is a gap in this analyzer's language coverage, not a finding that the code is free of duplication.
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 (.erl, .js) 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 (`rebar3 do eunit --cover, cover` (or covertool for Cobertura XML), or lcov — `vitest --coverage`, `jest --coverage`, `bun test --coverage --coverage-reporter=lcov`, or `nyc`) 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 (`rebar3 do eunit --cover, cover` (or covertool for Cobertura XML), or lcov — `vitest --coverage`, `jest --coverage`, `bun test --coverage --coverage-reporter=lcov`, or `nyc`) 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.
D10 Test Quality — measured, with a gap in what it reached — Watchdog measured this, but not all of it. What it did not reach is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — so the numbers on that dimension cover less than the repository, and the part left out is not evidence that it would have passed. The 29 test(s) behind this row are the ones the JavaScript/TypeScript census could read, and this repository also carries at least 617 test source file(s) (.erl) that it cannot: it reads JavaScript/TypeScript test declarations off disk, so a JUnit/pytest-style suite is invisible to it. Skipped tests, zero-assertion tests and the other quality signals on this row are UNMEASURED in that suite — their absence from the counts above is a gap in this analyzer's language coverage, not a finding that those tests are sound.
D11 Test Reliability — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. Test source is present (.erl, .js) but the built-in reliability runner does not support this repository's ecosystem, so flakiness couldn't be assessed. Not scored — this is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
D14 License Compliance — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. Not scored — this repository's package manifest is not parsed for licence data yet. A gap in the analyzer's language coverage, NOT a finding that the repository's licenses are compliant (a Python pyproject.toml/requirements.txt (pip/uv/Poetry)), which this pass does not parse yet — so this dimension asserts nothing about this repository's licensing in either direction.
D19 Documentation Quality — measured, with a gap in what it reached — Watchdog measured this, but not all of it. What it did not reach is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — so the numbers on that dimension cover less than the repository, and the part left out is not evidence that it would have passed. Each ecosystem's manifests (what makes a folder runnable or a published package) need their own proof before D19 judges its units. Until then those folders' READMEs are judged only as documents (boilerplate, structure), never counted as complete.
D21 Naming Consistency — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. D21's deterministic naming rules are gated on C# first (docs/plans/deterministic-engine.md, P5): each other language is switched on only after its own concept suite and A/B gate pass. Until then its declarations carry no naming verdict this run — this says nothing about whether its names are consistent.
D22 Internal API Consistency — not measured this run — 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 a COLLECTOR gap, not an environment fault: it declares a published package (libs/jit/src/jit.app.src), but no published-package marker D22 reads admitted any project here, so this ecosystem's public API has no collector, and the remedy is to write one — no change to the scan image can close it.
D24 Comment Value — 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's reader does not cover the language this repository's product is written in, so it had nothing of the product to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding about this repository.
D26 Project Cohesion — 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. Project size and spread are measured over build units (a .NET project, a Maven or Gradle module, an npm, Deno or JSR package, a Go module, a Cargo crate, a Python, Composer, Bundler, RubyGems, Mix, rebar3, sbt, SwiftPM or pub package, an OTP application, an Xcode project or XcodeGen spec, or a checkout that declares no build at all) whose source a code model reads. This repository's production source is in a language no model reads, or in units whose build tool D26 does not recognise. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository's projects are cohesive.
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. This check's reader does not cover the language this repository's product is written in, so it had nothing of the product to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding about this repository.
D44 Platform End-of-Life — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This dimension reads a project's own statement about the platform it runs on: a TargetFramework in a .NET project file, a .nvmrc or .python-version, a capped requires-python, a Rust toolchain file or Cargo.toml rust-version, a .go-version, .java-version, .ruby-version, .tool-versions or .sdkmanrc, a go.mod go directive, a Maven or Gradle Java level or toolchain, a Gemfile's ruby directive, a mix.exs elixir requirement, a rebar.config minimum_otp_vsn, a pubspec.yaml SDK constraint, a build.sbt scalaVersion, or a framework major pinned by a dependency constraint. This repository carries none of them, so nothing about its platform was established. That is a gap in this analyzer's coverage, NOT a finding that the platform is supported — a language whose runtime is declared elsewhere (Package.swift, a Dockerfile) is simply not read here yet.
C1 Data Protection — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. These personal data controls are read from declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names and guard methods in a C# source model, and none was loaded on this run, so there was nothing to gather. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository lacks personal data controls.
C2 Access Controls — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. These authorization controls are read from declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names and guard methods in a C# source model, and none was loaded on this run, so there was nothing to gather. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository lacks authorization controls.
C3 Audit Trail — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. These audit controls are read from declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names and guard methods in a C# source model, and none was loaded on this run, so there was nothing to gather. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository lacks audit controls.
C4 Data Retention — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. These retention controls are read from declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names and guard methods in a C# source model, and none was loaded on this run, so there was nothing to gather. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository lacks retention controls.
C5 Data-Subject Rights — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. These data-subject rights controls are read from declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names and guard methods in a C# source model, and none was loaded on this run, so there was nothing to gather. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository lacks data-subject rights controls.
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 Elixir, Erlang, c 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 Elixir, Erlang, c 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.
M4 Documentation accuracy — 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. M4 checks only the claim kinds adjudicated at or above 95 % precision: links and versions (PREREGISTRATION version 9). Paths, command arguments, installs, environment variables, settings, projects, packages, routes, cd targets, infrastructure products and removed modules are read but not checked, and none of them is reported or counted.
P5 DR & Backup — not measured this run — This is a true statement about the repository that carries nothing for its owner to act on, so it is reported here rather than as a defect in their code. No backup/snapshot/replication config, RTO/RPO or restore-procedure documentation was found — and no production persistence was detected either (no data-access packages, no data-store services, no database resources), so there is nothing in this repository whose loss a DR control would recover. If this system's data lives in a platform or ops repo we can't see, that's where the DR evidence belongs.
S1 Web-Security Posture — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. These web-security controls are read from declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names and guard methods in a C# source model, and none was loaded on this run, so there was nothing to gather. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository lacks web-security controls.
X2 Cancellation propagation — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check reads C# syntax, and JavaScript/TypeScript, Go, PHP, Dart, Kotlin, Ruby, Scala, Java, Python and Rust source only, and no C# was loaded, and no named async function in this repository's JavaScript/TypeScript, nor any Go, PHP or Dart function or Kotlin suspend function, makes a request that can be cancelled (fetch, axios, ky, ofetch; net/http, net.Dial; amphp; Dio; Ktor, OkHttp), so there is nothing to judge, 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.
X26 Unsynchronised callback handoff — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check reads C# syntax, and Java, Kotlin, Scala, Go, Swift, Python and Ruby source only, and no C# was loaded, no Java, Kotlin, Scala, Go, Swift, Python or Ruby was found, and this repository's C 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.
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 C 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.
X7 Silent fallback defaults — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. X7 measured the part of this repository it reads (C#, Python, TypeScript/JavaScript, Rust, Go, Java, Kotlin, Scala, PHP, Ruby, Swift and Dart), and its Elixir, Erlang source is outside the check's reach, so the card covers only part of the product. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the unread source is free of silent defaults.
Repo exclusion declarations (.gitattributes linguist-generated/vendored, .editorconfig generated_code): none declared — every source file was scored.
Limitations & what we did not check
Watchdog assesses the repository exactly as committed, and only the repository. By design it does not reach outside the source tree: the live cloud account, the running CI/CD pipeline, the host's branch-protection and approval rules, the production configuration, or a restore actually exercised against a backup are all out of scope. That boundary is a feature, not a gap — a repo-relative, deterministic scan re-runs identically on any commit and every finding opens at a real file and line, where a live audit can neither be reproduced nor traced. The visible consequence is that controls which leave no in-repo evidence are reported as "not evidenced" and excluded from the score rather than awarded a number a static scan cannot justify.
Per-dimension blind spots
For each dimension that was measured, what a static, repo-only scan structurally cannot see — the honest edge of the measurement, not a failure of it.
D1 Cyclomatic Complexity: Cyclomatic complexity counts branches statically — it cannot tell an essential decision tree from accidental tangle, nor see complexity that lives in data or configuration (large switch-case token tables, DSL lexers/parsers, data-as-code rule tables) rather than control flow: a tokenizer's many single-character cases read as high complexity though each branch is trivial.
D2 Cognitive Complexity: Cognitive-complexity heuristics approximate how hard code is to follow; genuine domain difficulty and well-named intent that eases reading are not captured.
D3 God Classes: "God class" is sized by members and responsibilities visible in the type — a deliberately broad facade over a coherent subsystem can read the same as an accidental grab-bag. For front-end JS the file-length check is cohesion-aware (a single-responsibility module — one class/IIFE — earns a 3× threshold), but cohesion is approximated from top-level declarations, not true dependency structure.
D4 Code Duplication: Duplication is token-similarity — an in-process token-stream comparison over sliding windows, with type-aware normalization — so it finds copy-paste, not semantic duplication expressed differently. Committed machine-written code (scaffolded migrations, designer/codegen output, protobuf/OpenAPI stubs, model snapshots) is EXCLUDED — its repetition is the tool's, not the team's — so the score reflects hand-written duplication only.
D5 Coupling: Coupling is measured between projects/assemblies — runtime coupling through DI, reflection, messaging or shared databases is invisible to a static reference graph.
D6 Cohesion (LCOM4): LCOM4 cohesion is syntactic — it infers connectivity from which methods touch which fields/methods by name, not from real runtime behaviour or intent.
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.
D10 Test Quality: Assertion density is structural — it cannot tell a meaningful behavioural assertion from a trivial one, only that an assertion is present.
D12 Dependency Hygiene: Dependency health reads manifests and lockfiles — a vulnerability in a vendored/copied dependency, or risk from how a dependency is actually used, is outside this view.
D13 Secret Scanning: Secret detection is signature- and entropy-based on the current tree — a secret that does not match a known pattern, or one already rotated, will not be flagged (a clean scan is "nothing matched", not "no secrets exist").
D15 Churn × Complexity Hotspots: Churn hotspots come from git history — a freshly imported or squashed repository has no churn signal, and recent rewrites can mask a historically risky file.
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 publishes two things only: a runnable or packaged unit with no example, and a multi-project root README that maps none of its parts. It does not judge clarity, and its other checks (overview, licence, boilerplate, structure, empty sections, XML-doc coverage) are withheld after adjudication: their candidates are counted in the card's gaps, not shown as rows. A false statement in a document is M4's; units are .NET projects only.
D28 Secrets (history): Secret-history scanning sweeps the git log for known patterns — a secret that predates the available history, or never matched a signature, is not found (clean means "nothing matched in the history we can see").
D29 Static Analysis (SAST): SAST findings are pattern-based (semgrep) — it finds classes of bug it has rules for; logic flaws, auth/authorization gaps and issues needing runtime context are out of reach (and clean means "no rule matched").
D30 Dependency Vulnerabilities: CVE matching depends on accurate package/version metadata and on the advisory databases — a vulnerability with no published advisory, or in code not declared as a dependency, is not seen. Coverage needs a RESOLVED graph: an unpinned requirements.txt, or a pom without a resolved build, yields partial coverage rather than a clean verdict. An ecosystem the analyzer cannot scan is reported as unmeasured, never as clean.
D34 Knowledge Freshness: Freshness is decayed commit RECENCY, not comprehension — code read often but rarely committed reads as orphaned, and stable code that genuinely needs no changes is penalised the same as forgotten code; bot/squash commits distort it like the bus factor.
D35 Change Coupling: Change coupling is co-change in COMMITS — files split across separate commits, or coupled only through a shared config/build step, read as uncoupled, and a sweeping commit (rename/format) is excluded so it doesn't couple everything. It shows that files change together, not WHY: a high coupling can be a healthy cohesive pair as readily as a hidden leak.
D43 Malicious Dependencies: Only packages some vulnerability database has already NAMED as malicious are seen — a compromise published in the last hours, or never reported at all, is invisible here, and this dimension reading 10 is not evidence that a dependency is trustworthy. There is no typosquat or dependency-confusion analysis: a package nobody has reported is simply absent from the feeds. Coverage is the dependency scan's: an ecosystem that could not be scanned is disclosed as unmeasured, never as clean.
AX10 Code composition: Role is inferred from namespace/folder convention, not semantics — a domain concept living in a folder named "Services" reads as application, and the split is lines-of-code, not business value. The business-logic-share score is a SOFT, FLOORED signal: it contributes to the Architecture lens but is floored at the Critical gate, so an infrastructure-heavy design (a gateway, an ETL, a driver) is legitimately low without being nuked to zero.
AX9 CQS / query purity: Handlers are found by interface/name convention — a query handler using neither is not seen. Mutation is a resolved write/publish invocation (SaveChanges/repository/bus), so a write hidden behind a hand-rolled wrapper, reflection, or a string-keyed service locator resolves to a non-persistence type and isn't flagged; it detects that a query writes state, not whether the write is a legitimate read-side cache update. Clean means "no resolved write/publish in a query body", not a proof of CQS purity.
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.
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.
40 method(s) exceeded the cyclomatic complexity threshold of 15; the worst was jit.first_pass at 170. A further 29 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 jit_aarch64_asm.reg_to_num at 33 — they are counted neither in the figure above nor in this dimension's score. 8 files carry no cyclomatic complexity row at all for this reason — every one of their over-threshold functions was excluded, so the exclusion is disclosed nowhere in the file itself: libs/jit/src/jit_riscv32_asm.erl (jit_riscv32_asm.reg_to_num at 33), libs/avm_network/src/http_server.erl (http_server.parse_http at 21), libs/jit/src/jit_arm32_asm.erl (jit_arm32_asm.reg_to_num at 19), libs/jit/src/jit_wasm32.erl (jit_wasm32.emit_push_args at 19), libs/avm_rp2/src/i2c.erl (i2c.handle_request at 18), and 3 more not listed here. They are named here because the per-file figures other dimensions report are taken BEFORE this exclusion, so such a file can show a high maximum complexity elsewhere in this report and nothing here, with nothing to reconcile the two.
+ 35 more group(s) — more in Appendix A; the complete list is findings.md.
What to do
Bring the 1 body over 120 down to 120 or less in Cyclomatic Complexity — start with jit.first_pass (cyclomatic 170). — Refactoring it lifts Cyclomatic Complexity from 5.5 to about 5.8/10.
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.
+ 23 more group(s) — more in Appendix A; the complete list is findings.md.
What to do
Bring the 1 body over 60 down to 60 or less in Cognitive Complexity — start with jit_xtensa.if_block_cond (cognitive 85). — Refactoring it lifts Cognitive Complexity from 6.2 to about 6.5/10.
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 Classes7.8 / 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 23 TooManyFunctions finding(s) in God Classes — start with jit_riscv64_asm.erl, jit_riscv32.erl, jit_riscv64.erl. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (23 warning-level).
Resolve the 18 FileTooLong finding(s) in God Classes — start with jit.erl, jit_xtensa.erl, jit_armv6m.erl. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (18 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.
465 duplicated block group(s) detected. A further 44 rows report members as variants of one another; they aggregate block groups already counted above and are not themselves counted. 15 of the 509 are in trees this repository does not ship — vendored, example/demo, project-template, fixture and benchmark code — and are ranked below the shipped groups rather than excluded from them: the duplication there is real and is still counted in this dimension's score. The dimensions that publish a production-file census leave those trees out of theirs, so this count is deliberately drawn over the wider population. Measured on part of this repository only: .c (50% of production source) was not exposed to the token comparison, so duplication there is unmeasured and is not in this count.
+ 164 more group(s) — more in Appendix A; the complete list is findings.md.
What to do
Resolve the 44 Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with jit.erl (15), jit_arm32.erl (6), jit_armv6m.erl (4). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (44 warning-level).
Resolve the 27 Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with jit.erl (6), jit_arm32.erl (5), jit_armv6m.erl (3). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (27 warning-level).
Resolve the 24 Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with jit_aarch64.erl (5), jit_arm32.erl (5), jit.erl (3). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (24 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.
Do you agree with this assessment?
D5 · Coupling10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified
What it measures: Whether volatile projects sit underneath others that depend on them (so their churn ripples upward), and whether project dependencies form cycles. A widely-depended-on but stable shared/kernel project is healthy, not penalised.
Method: Dependency cycles via elementary-DFS over real .csproj references, plus Martin instability (afferent/efferent) per project. Exhaustive over the reference graph, deterministic.
Coverage: Exhaustive · type-level: afferent/efferent coupling + cycles computed over every production type — the population is all types, not a name convention.
8 production modules (OTP+CMake), 0 dependency cycle(s), 0 unstable depended-on module(s). Read from the build's own module declarations; 0 module(s) off the main sequence, with abstractness counted on 4 of the 8 (the rest declare no modelled class or interface, export only macros, declare types in source no model reads, or have no source directory of their own).
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 Distribution0.1 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified
What it measures: Whether the test suite has a healthy mix of unit / integration / end-to-end tests.
Method: Test projects classified (Unit/Integration/BDD/E2E) from compiled metadata; test methods counted exhaustively across projects with placement-agnostic disk fallback. Deterministic.
30 test methods: 1 unit, 0 integration, 0 BDD, 29 e2e. The JavaScript/TypeScript suite contributes 29 `it`/`test` case(s) across 7 test file(s) declaring at least one; its tier split is read from package names and paths only. The Python suite contributes 1 test function(s) across 1 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.
Inverted test pyramid
What to do
Resolve the 1 Inverted test pyramid finding(s) in Test Distribution. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 recommendation-level).
Detailed fixes: d9_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.
Do you agree with this assessment?
D10 · Test Quality9.5 / 10Stronggated by 1 serious finding✓ Tool-verified
What it measures: Whether the tests truly assert behaviour rather than just running the code.
Method: Per-test assertions, skips, and mock references analyzed via Roslyn; structured skip-reason tags (BUG:/ENV:) separate documented deferrals from debt. Deterministic.
0 skipped, 1 zero-assertion, no mocking-framework packages referenced (hand-written doubles or no mocking) across 29 tests. Measured on the JavaScript/TypeScript suite only — at least 617 test source file(s) (.erl) went unread, so its test quality is unmeasured and is not in these counts.
No assertions: should list examplessrc/platforms/emscripten/tests/cypress/e2e/examples.spec.cy.js:21
What to do
Resolve the 1 No assertions finding(s) in Test Quality — start with examples.spec.cy.js. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
Enforce Test Quality in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.
Detailed fixes: d10_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.
What it measures: Whether dependencies are current, secure, and not bloated.
Method: Manifest scan via dotnet list package across all projects; worst-signal-per-package deduction (saturating for vulnerabilities, capped-linear for deprecation/outdated) per KLoC. Exhaustive, deterministic.
1 outdated, 0 retired direct Hex dependencies, 0 pinning defect(s). Whether any of these packages is UNMAINTAINED is not graded — hex.pm publishes no maintenance status, and release age does not stand in for one. Whether any is UNUSED is not graded either: a Hex app name does not determine the modules it provides (`ecto_sql` provides Ecto.Adapters.SQL), and a large idiomatic class of BEAM dependencies — runtime adapters, codec plugins, protocol implementations and OTP applications the release starts — is correctly declared and never referenced in source, so absence of a reference is not evidence of an unused dependency. Known CVEs in this dependency graph are D30's question, read from REDACTED there.
Outdated: ex_doc
✓ On the Gold path — maintain.
Detailed fixes: d12_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.
What it measures: Whether any secrets (keys, tokens, passwords) have leaked into the code.
Method: In-process native secret scanner (entropy plus signature patterns) across all tracked files; no external tool. A clean result is a measured 10, not no-data zero. Deterministic.
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 1 Hotspot finding(s) in Churn × Complexity Hotspots — start with supervisor.erl. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 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 Factor6.6 / 10Adequate✓ 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.
55 source file(s) have their living knowledge concentrated in one author (≥90% of recent, decayed contribution). The largest is libs/jit/src/jit.erl. Counted over 164 of the 224 production source files in this repository: 59 are under the ~2,400-byte size floor this dimension measures over, and the remaining 1 have no attributable history left to measure.
Off-boarding risk: anonymized user #1 · ×2
Further sole-owners (lower concentration)
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).
Resolve the 1 Further sole-owners (lower concentration) finding(s) in Bus Factor. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 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.
55 deducted task-comment markers across 89733 LoC (0.1/KLoC) → score 9.9. 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 · ×53tests/libs/exavmlib/Tests.ex:230
HackComment · ×2libs/alisp/src/alisp.erl:26
What to do
Resolve the 53 TodoComment finding(s) in Explicit Debt — start with supervisor.erl (6), gen_tcp_inet.erl (5), gen_tcp_socket.erl (5). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (53 warning-level).
Resolve the 2 HackComment finding(s) in Explicit Debt — start with alisp.erl, arepl.erl. — 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: Every README, docs/ document and root guide parsed by its markup and measured in Unicode letters. Published: a runnable or packaged .NET project whose README (or a document it links, or a root guide) shows no example, and a root README naming none of three or more projects. Overview, licence, boilerplate, wall-of-text, empty-section and XML-doc rows are measured and withheld (counted in gaps) after adjudication. Deterministic, exhaustive, advisory.
What it measures: Whether any secrets were ever committed — scanned across the full git history, not just now.
Method: Secret scan via TWO gitleaks detect passes in an isolated checkout — the full git history, then a second --no-git pass over the working tree as it stands — merged and de-duplicated by (rule, file, line); each match flagged High. Both invocations are recorded in the audit trail. Exhaustive; when the tool is absent, or when its output cannot be parsed into the expected shape, the dimension is WITHHELD as an explicit measurement gap on our side — unscored and excluded from the lens, never a hedged middling score.
What it measures: Real static-analysis (SAST) findings — likely security bugs in the code, any language.
Method: Polyglot static analysis via semgrep across the repo using the pinned, image-baked p/security-audit + p/owasp-top-ten rulesets (no scan-time registry fetch); severity rules (ERROR/WARNING/INFO) map to a full-band severity-weighted score. Exhaustive, deterministic; degrades on parse failure.
Coverage: semgrep pattern rules over all files — exhaustive for the rule set, blind to classes of bug without a rule (clean = no rule matched).
133 finding(s): 0 critical, 132 high, 1 medium, 0 low. 93 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. semgrep hit a parse error in 53 file(s) — `doc/_templates/versions.html` (lines 10–11, line 19, line 29, …), `src/libAtomVM/context.c` (line 176, line 182, line 188, …), `src/libAtomVM/context.h` (line 155), `src/libAtomVM/dictionary.c` (line 34, line 115), `src/libAtomVM/dist_nifs.c` (line 122, line 261, line 314, …), … (+48 more) — so no absence of findings in the named regions is evidence of anything; rows reported elsewhere in those files are real. Fix the syntax error (or exclude the file deliberately) and re-scan to cover them. Separately, one or more rules could not re-parse an embedded snippet in 11 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
+ 5 more group(s) — more in Appendix A; the complete list is findings.md.
What to do
Resolve the 20 REDACTED finding(s) in Static Analysis (SAST) — start with REDACTED (5), REDACTED (4), REDACTED (4). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (20 issue-level).
Resolve the 6 REDACTED finding(s) in Static Analysis (SAST) — start with REDACTED (6). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (6 issue-level).
No action in Static Analysis (SAST) — all 93 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 (93 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 Medium CVE finding(s) in Dependency Vulnerabilities — start with REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
Detailed fixes: d30_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.
16 of 165 significant source file(s) are orphaned — their living knowledge has decayed to nothing, so no one currently understands them. The largest is libs/estdlib/src/logger.erl. Counted over 165 of the 224 production source files in this repository: the rest are under the ~2,400-byte size floor this dimension measures over.
Resolve the 2 Orphaned knowledge finding(s) in Knowledge Freshness — start with logger.erl, gen_tcp_socket.erl. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 issue-level).
Resolve the 14 Orphaned file finding(s) in Knowledge Freshness — start with gen_udp_socket.erl, i2c.erl, logger_manager.erl. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (14 recommendation-level).
Resolve the 1 Further orphaned files (smaller) finding(s) in Knowledge Freshness. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 recommendation-level).
Detailed fixes: d34_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.
What it measures: Whether files that change together actually belong together — pairs that repeatedly co-change in git history despite having no explicit code dependency, surfacing the hidden/logical coupling (and boundaries in the wrong place) a static scan can't see.
Method: Pairwise co-occurrence over the per-commit file sets in git history (production source only — tests and generated dropped): Degree-of-Coupling = shared ÷ min individual revisions, reported above noise floors (each file ≥10 revisions, ≥5 shared commits, ≥50% strength); sweeping commits excluded. Deterministic over fixed history.
Coverage: Population: PRODUCTION source files only — test and generated files are dropped before pairing, so a class co-changing with its own test (trivially ~100%) can't drown the real production↔production coupling. Pairs ranked by Degree-of-Coupling. A non-source file is never a coupling PARTICIPANT either: documentation, schemas, config and data files are dropped with the rest, so a code↔docs pair — a command and the reference page that restates it — is not reported however strongly the two co-change; nor is coupling that runs THROUGH a build step or config file.
What it measures: Whether 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.
+ 4 more group(s) — more in Appendix A; the complete list is findings.md.
What to do
Resolve the 7 REDACTED finding(s) in Supply-chain Provenance & Signing — start with REDACTED, REDACTED, REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (7 warning-level).
Resolve the 4 REDACTED finding(s) in Supply-chain Provenance & Signing — start with REDACTED, REDACTED, REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (4 warning-level).
Resolve the 3 REDACTED finding(s) in Supply-chain Provenance & Signing — start with REDACTED (2), REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (3 warning-level).
Detailed fixes: d36_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.
What it measures: Whether the repository publishes a coordinated-vulnerability-disclosure policy (SECURITY.md or security.txt) with a reporting contact, so finders know how to report a vulnerability. Presence of a policy file with a contact, not whether the policy is adequate or honoured.
Method: Vulnerability-disclosure policy read deterministically from the repo: a SECURITY.md (root/.github/docs) or .well-known/security.txt / security.txt, regex-checked for a reporting contact (email / URL / mailto). Present + contact → 10; present without a contact → 4; NotApplicable when no policy file exists (it may live off-repo). Detects the policy file's presence + contact, not its adequacy.
What it measures: Whether any dependency the repository declares is published as MALICIOUS rather than merely vulnerable — a package that is an attacker's work, in any ecosystem osv-scanner reads. Scored apart from D30 because the answer is binary: there is no safe version to upgrade to, and the fix is to remove the package and rotate every credential it could have read.
Method: The same dependency scan D30 reads, partitioned on the scanner's own classification rather than rescanned: a row is MALICIOUS when its id is in the `MAL-` space (the ossf/malicious-packages feed) OR its `database_specific.cwe_ids` carries `CWE-506` ("Embedded Malicious Code"). Both channels are structural; the summary text is deliberately NOT read, because a malicious-package record whose summary says only "Critical severity vulnerability" is a real shape ([GHSA redacted]) and a text matcher misses it. Scored BINARY: any surviving row is 0, whatever its severity and however many CVEs sit beside it — a hostile dependency is not a quantity. Applicability and degradation are D30's: NotApplicable only when no ecosystem is readable, and an unscannable ecosystem degrades rather than reading clean. SCORED, not informational.
Other · Architecture — How the codebase splits by code ROLE — domain, application, infrastructure, test, generated. The significance map behind the knowledge/coupling weighting, and a DDD signal in its own right: a thin domain core under fat infrastructure is the anemic-domain smell, quantified. How each file's role is decided, because the split is only as good as that: a generated name or a build-output tree makes it Generated, a test project makes it Test, and otherwise the file's NAMESPACE and PATH words are matched against fixed vocabularies in a fixed ORDER — domain, then infrastructure, then application — so a file whose words hit two layers is counted under the earlier one. A production file matching none of them counts as application, so that share reads 'application or unclassified' rather than a measured application layer. Roles come from naming convention, never from what the code does. On this repository the split was taken from the source tree on disk rather than from a loaded .NET workspace, so a file's role is decided by its PATH segments alone — no declared namespace was available to add to the evidence — and generated output is excluded from the census entirely rather than counted as a generated share.
Method: Roslyn line-count by code ROLE: every source file classified Domain/Application/Infrastructure/Test/Generated by namespace + path convention (the shared CodeRoleClassifier), then significant lines summed per role. Deterministic; the advisory score is the business-logic (domain+application) share of production code.
Coverage: Population: ALL source files, each bucketed into ONE of five roles (Domain/Application/Infrastructure/Test/Generated) by namespace + path convention — a file whose layer isn't named in the convention falls to Application (the neutral default), and the split is line-count, not semantic depth or business value.
What to do
The domain core is a small share of production code, but most of the rest matched no layer vocabulary at all — so this is not yet an anemic-domain finding. The namespace/path convention could not place that code, which makes the composition above a statement about the naming, not about the design. Name the layers (or check that the repository's conventions differ from the ones this check knows) before reading a thin domain into it.
Other · Architecture — Whether the project-reference graph is acyclic (cycles block independent build/deploy and signal eroding boundaries).
Method: Project reference cycles via elementary-DFS over real .csproj references, using the engine shared with D5/D7; cyclic versus acyclic. Exhaustive, deterministic.
Other · Architecture — Whether dependencies point inward (Domain ← Application ← Infrastructure/Web) — the clean-architecture dependency rule, checked across the project graph.
Method: Layer violations by name-segment inference (Domain/Core to Application to Infrastructure/Web) over the project-reference graph. Exhaustive over all projects, deterministic.
Do you agree with this assessment?
AX8 · Test isolation10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified
Other · Architecture — Whether production projects stay free of references to test projects — tests may depend on production, never the reverse.
Method: Csproj graph: each production project checked for references to test projects (identified by test-framework presence, not name). Zero violations is clean. Deterministic.
Other · Architecture — Whether read (query) handlers stay side-effect-free — a query that writes persistent state or raises events breaks CQS and makes reads unsafe to retry, cache, or route to a read replica.
Method: Roslyn scan: CQRS handlers classified query-vs-command by interface (IQueryHandler/ICommandHandler/IRequestHandler<TQuery,TResult>) and name convention (*Query/Get*/Find* vs *Command); each query handler's body checked for persistent-state writes (SaveChanges/repository Add-Update) or event publishes by resolved invocation. Deterministic, type-level, exhaustive over the detected handlers.
Coverage: Population: CQRS handlers identified by IQueryHandler/ICommandHandler/IRequestHandler interface + *Query/Get*/Find*/*Command NAME convention; query purity then checked exhaustively within that set — a query handler using neither convention is invisible, and mutation is a resolved persistence/publish CALL, not full dataflow.
Other · Event Sourcing — Whether the event-sourcing replay fold reconstructs state purely from the event (no wall clock, UUID or randomness) so replay is reproducible.
Method: Roslyn syntax scan (event-sourcing gated): Apply/When folds checked for forbidden tokens (DateTime.Now, Guid.NewGuid, Random, IO), stripped of comments/strings. Deterministic, hard fact per fold.
Other · Event Sourcing — Whether persisted events stay immutable (never rewritten in place).
Method: Roslyn scan (event-sourcing gated): persisted events checked for public setters; immutability verified per property/field. Deterministic, hard fact.
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.
63 code files changed in the last 6 months but the README was not touched — it may no longer reflect the system.
What to do
Add a build/run (quick start) section to the root README — the first thing a newcomer needs.
Explain in the README how to run the tests. Add a section called Testing to the README in the repository's top folder, saying how to run the test suite.
Add an 'Architecture' / 'How it works' section to the root README — the high-level shape.
Add a README to the 6 of 7 project(s) that lack one — worth up to 1.7 pts.
Review the README against recent changes; refresh the parts that drifted.
Maturity · Maturity — Whether key decisions (ADRs) and the high-level shape (C4/diagrams) are written down.
Method: Filesystem scan: ADR folder/naming conventions or content, plus Mermaid/PlantUML/C4/architecture.md discovery. Exhaustive, deterministic.
No Architecture Decision Records found — no conventional ADR directory, no numbered `NNNN-title` documents in any markup this check reads, and nothing ADR-shaped by content. Design rationale recorded elsewhere (a design-notes tree, a mailing list, pull-request discussion) is not visible to this check and is not re-findable per decision, so a future maintainer cannot ask why one choice was made and get an answer.
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.
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.
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.
Do you agree with this assessment?
P2 · Observability7.0 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified
Readiness · Readiness — Whether the code is diagnosable in production — structured logging, tracing/metrics, health checks.
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.
What to do
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.
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.
Do you agree with this assessment?
X27 · Collection changed while being enumerated10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged
Other · Code Health — Whether a walk over an ETS table leaves the key it stands on alone — Erlang's own lists and maps are values no body can change, but an ETS key traversal asks the table for the key after the current one, so on a `set`, `bag` or `duplicate_bag` that is not fixed with `ets:safe_fixtable/2`, deleting the current key and then calling `ets:next/2` (or `ets:prev/2`) from it raises `badarg` and the rest of the table is never visited.
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. — src/platforms/emscripten/src/atomvm.pre.js:89
`catch _:_` 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. (×2) — libs/etest/src/etest.erl:105, libs/estdlib/src/gen.erl:98
`catch error:_` 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. (×3) — libs/avm_network/src/ahttp_client.erl:377, libs/avm_esp32/src/i2c.erl:299, libs/avm_esp32/src/i2c.erl:305
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.
Unscored — 2 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 — 17 observation(s) recorded · Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score.
X31 Test-only surface in a production module — 9 observation(s) recorded · Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score.
Not evidenced — 4 control(s) we could not find positive evidence for
These checks grade a working control, and the repository shows no evidence of one. That is deliberately not scored as a zero: a repository cannot show an ops runbook, a database TTL or an infrastructure-side audit log, so absence of evidence here is not evidence the control is missing. It is also not a statement that the check is irrelevant to this codebase — the thing it grades applies; we just could not see it. Excluded from the score either way.
C3 Audit Trail — Not assessed: these audit controls are read from a source model (declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names, guard methods) that was not loaded for this repository — because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. Absence of an idiom this check recognises is NOT evidence that this repository lacks audit controls: it may implement them entirely in its own ecosystem. This is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
C4 Data Retention — Not assessed: these retention controls are read from a source model (declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names, guard methods) that was not loaded for this repository — because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. Absence of an idiom this check recognises is NOT evidence that this repository lacks retention controls: it may implement them entirely in its own ecosystem. This is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
C5 Data-Subject Rights — Not assessed: these data-subject rights controls are read from a source model (declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names, guard methods) that was not loaded for this repository — because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. Absence of an idiom this check recognises is NOT evidence that this repository lacks data-subject rights controls: it may implement them entirely in its own ecosystem. This is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
P5 DR & Backup — not evidenced — repo shows no backup/RTO/RPO controls; absence of evidence is not evidence of a working control
Not included — 59 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: the BEAM has no dependency-injection container — state lives in processes, and no process is handed an instance whose lifetime another one scopes; 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.
AX2 Stateful singletons — Not applicable: Elixir processes share no mutable memory — state lives in a process's own mailbox — so there is no shared object to race on. Erlang processes share no mutable memory — state lives in a process's own mailbox — so there is no shared object to race on. 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 — no exported interface declares behaviour
AX7 Slice cohesion — not applicable — not a vertical-slice architecture
AXB1 Runtime evidence locked — no reproducible boot — This repository has nothing the runtime tiers could boot or serve — no markup, no UI framework or web-server dependency, no UI component source, no native UI project and no API definition — nothing here is a surface to boot — so runtime a11y/egress/header evidence has no subject here. Not applicable: this is neither a gap in the scan nor a finding about your code.
AXB2 Runtime readiness — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
C1 Data Protection — Not assessed: these personal data controls are read from a source model (declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names, guard methods) that was not loaded for this repository — because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. Absence of an idiom this check recognises is NOT evidence that this repository lacks personal data controls: it may implement them entirely in its own ecosystem. This is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
C2 Access Controls — Not assessed: these authorization controls are read from a source model (declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names, guard methods) that was not loaded for this repository — because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. Absence of an idiom this check recognises is NOT evidence that this repository lacks authorization controls: it may implement them entirely in its own ecosystem. This is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
D11 Test Reliability — Test reliability not included — no .erl test runner
D14 License Compliance — Package manifest not parsed for licence data — analyzer language-coverage gap
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.
D21 Naming Consistency — Naming consistency is measured on C# only; Elixir, Erlang, TypeScript, html not measured.
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, nor 2+ projects each declaring an entity of their own. Declaring this codebase's bounded contexts (≥2) would let cross-boundary type coupling be assessed. Declare them in `.codehealth/config.yaml` at the repository root (create it if absent), mapping each context name to the module-path or namespace prefixes that belong to it — e.g. `architecture:` → `contexts:` → `Billing: ["src/billing", "Acme.Billing"]`, `Catalog: ["src/catalog", "Acme.Catalog"]`.
D24 Comment Value — D24 reads C# and Visual Basic comments only — this repository's production source is .erl, .ex, .exs, which was left unread. Not scored: this is a gap in the analyzer, not a verdict about this repository.
D25 ADR Conformance — no ADRs to check
D26 Project Cohesion — D26 measured no build unit over this repository's .c, .erl source. Not scored: this is a gap in the analyzer, not a verdict about this repository.
D27 Navigability — D27 reads resolved call sites in the languages it reads only — this repository's production source is .c, .ex, .exs, which was left unread. Not scored: this is a gap in the analyzer, not a verdict about this repository.
D31 IaC & Container Security — No Infrastructure-as-Code or container manifests found (Dockerfile, Docker Compose, Terraform, Kubernetes/Helm, CloudFormation, ARM, Bicep, Ansible); nothing to scan.
D32 Data Compliance (PII/GDPR) — No personal data was found crossing a boundary the PII/GDPR ruleset checks — nothing written to a log or console sink, placed in a URL or query string, or persisted to browser storage. That is a clean result for the LEAK surface only: this ruleset detects personal data escaping, it does not inventory the personal data a repository holds, so it is not evidence that this repository has no personal-data surface. The personal-data map (Appendix C) and the C1-C5 compliance cards are what speak to that.
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.
D44 Platform End-of-Life — Platform end-of-life not assessed — this repository declares no platform this pass reads
D7 Architectural Integrity — no checkable ADRs, and no 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 only 1 of the 3 signals this lens looks for (44 value object(s))
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
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'.
P7 Outbound HTTP resilience — no outbound HTTP usage detected — no HTTP client call or construction in the Elixir, Erlang, JavaScript/TypeScript source (service entry point: libs/esp32devmode/src/esp32devmode.erl:147 (gen_tcp:listen())
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 (`rebar3 do eunit --cover, cover` (or covertool for Cobertura 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 `erlperf:run`/`compare`/`benchmark`/`time` calls, a common_test `benchmark_data` event, `bench_*` functions in a `bench_*.erl` module where rebar.config installs rebar3_bench, or erlperf or rebar3_bench in a rebar.config, 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: Erlang and Elixir 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: Elixir and Erlang has no async/await function colour, so there is no asynchronous code for a blocking call to stall.
S1 Web-Security Posture — Not assessed: these web-security controls are read from a source model (declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names, guard methods) that was not loaded for this repository — because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. Absence of an idiom this check recognises is NOT evidence that this repository lacks web-security controls: it may implement them entirely in its own ecosystem. This is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
SC1 Supply-chain hygiene — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
X2 Cancellation propagation — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
X20 Mistyped argument guard — This check 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.
X26 Unsynchronised callback handoff — 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
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.
Orphaned knowledge libs/estdlib/src/logger.erl:1— No living knowledge remains for this large file — its last meaningful change has decayed away; if it breaks, no one currently understands it. Schedule a read-through / add characterisation tests before it bites.
Orphaned knowledge libs/estdlib/src/gen_tcp_socket.erl:1— No living knowledge remains for this large file — its last meaningful change has decayed away; if it breaks, no one currently understands it. Schedule a read-through / add characterisation tests before it bites.
TodoComment tests/libs/exavmlib/Tests.ex:230— # TODO: match for arity: 2, function: :ined, module: :undef — 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 tests/libs/exavmlib/Tests.ex:375— # TODO: structs are not yet supported — 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 tests/libs/estdlib/test_gen_tcp.erl:58— %% TODO bug closing listening socket — 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 tests/libs/estdlib/test_tcp_socket.erl:233— %% estdlib 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 tests/erlang_tests/test_base64.erl:282— %% TODO E doesn't seem to match error and R doesn't seem to match Reason — 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 tests/erlang_tests/test_bs_int.erl:35— % TODO: make this test work again — 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 tests/erlang_tests/test_fun_info.erl:62— % TODO: implement env: env is mocked here and always return [] — 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 tests/erlang_tests/test_fun_info.erl:74— % TODO: implement env: env is mocked here and always return [] — 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 tests/erlang_tests/test_fun_info.erl:87— % TODO: implement env: env is mocked here and always return [] — 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 tests/erlang_tests/test_raw_raise.erl:33— % TODO: verify if undefined is an acceptable value or an AtomVM only extension — 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 libs/jit/src/jit.erl:1957— % TODO: previous implementation yielded a slightly smaller code as raise block was shared. — 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 libs/jit/src/jit.erl:2008— % TODO: previous implementation yielded a slightly smaller code as raise block was shared. — 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 libs/jit/src/jit.erl:2323— % TODO: add skip_dest and redecode when we need it — 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 libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:3303— %% TODO: push r4-r7 and lr — 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 libs/jit/src/jit_dwarf.erl:1072— %% TODO: y register (stack frame) locations — 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 libs/exavmlib/lib/Base.ex:188— # TODO: support :case option — 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 libs/exavmlib/lib/Exception.ex:191— # TODO: Code.ensure_loaded?(module) is not supported right now — 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 libs/exavmlib/lib/GenServer.ex:815— # TODO: Remove this on v2.0 — 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 libs/exavmlib/lib/GenServer.ex:889— # TODO: Remove this on v2.0 — 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 libs/exavmlib/lib/Range.ex:208— # TODO: change function head back to this, as soon as we update Elixir — 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 libs/estdlib/src/gen_tcp_inet.erl:116— %% TODO close port — 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 libs/estdlib/src/gen_tcp_inet.erl:134— %% TODO close port — 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 libs/estdlib/src/gen_tcp_inet.erl:184— %% TODO close port — 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 libs/estdlib/src/gen_udp_inet.erl:121— %% TODO close port — 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 libs/estdlib/src/gen_tcp_inet.erl:188— %% TODO implement this in lists — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `% REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) libs/avm_rp2/src/i2c.erl:631— libs/avm_rp2/src/i2c.erl:631-635 | libs/avm_stm32/src/i2c.erl:469-473 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/avm_rp2/src/i2c.erl` and `libs/avm_stm32/src/i2c.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 5 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.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) libs/avm_rp2/src/i2c.erl:644— libs/avm_rp2/src/i2c.erl:644-648 | libs/avm_stm32/src/i2c.erl:482-486 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/avm_rp2/src/i2c.erl` and `libs/avm_stm32/src/i2c.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 5 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.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) libs/estdlib/src/erl_epmd.erl:99— libs/estdlib/src/erl_epmd.erl:99-103 | libs/estdlib/src/erl_epmd.erl:136-140 — 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) libs/estdlib/src/gen_tcp_socket.erl:122— libs/estdlib/src/gen_tcp_socket.erl:122-128 | libs/estdlib/src/gen_udp_socket.erl:70-74 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/estdlib/src/gen_tcp_socket.erl` and `libs/estdlib/src/gen_udp_socket.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 8 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. 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) libs/jit/src/jit.erl:1634— libs/jit/src/jit.erl:1634-1638 | libs/jit/src/jit.erl:1649-1653 — 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) libs/jit/src/jit.erl:1809— libs/jit/src/jit.erl:1809-1814 | libs/jit/src/jit.erl:1882-1886 — 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) libs/jit/src/jit.erl:1984— libs/jit/src/jit.erl:1984-1988 | libs/jit/src/jit.erl:2005-2013 — 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) libs/jit/src/jit.erl:3795— libs/jit/src/jit.erl:3795-3799 | libs/jit/src/jit.erl:3861-3865 — 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) libs/jit/src/jit.erl:4051— libs/jit/src/jit.erl:4051-4055 | libs/jit/src/jit.erl:4097-4101 — 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) libs/jit/src/jit.erl:4121— libs/jit/src/jit.erl:4121-4125 | libs/jit/src/jit.erl:4143-4147 — 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) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:2144— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:2144-2148 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:2930-2936 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 36 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 426 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) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:2288— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:2288-2292 | libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:2322-2326 — 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) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:732— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:732-736 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:835-839 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 124 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 1506 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) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2253— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2253-2257 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2298-2302 — 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) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2653— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2653-2658 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2672-2676 — 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) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:3436— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:3436-3440 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:3942-3946 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 124 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 1506 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) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:3541— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:3541-3545 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:4084-4088 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 124 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 1506 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) libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:1561— libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:1561-1565 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:1578-1582 — 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) libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:3540— libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:3540-3544 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:3594-3598 — 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) libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:4203— libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:4203-4207 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:4237-4246 — 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) libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:4212— libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:4212-4216 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:4266-4273 — 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) libs/jit/src/jit_wasm32.erl:1280— libs/jit/src/jit_wasm32.erl:1280-1286 | libs/jit/src/jit_wasm32.erl:1314-1318 — 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) libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:1916— libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:1916-1920 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:2007-2011 — 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) libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:458— libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:458-462 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:4107-4111 — 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) libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:2453— libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:2453-2457 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:2469-2473 — 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) libs/avm_rp2/src/spi.erl:487— libs/avm_rp2/src/spi.erl:487-492 | libs/avm_stm32/src/spi.erl:465-470 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/avm_rp2/src/spi.erl` and `libs/avm_stm32/src/spi.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 6 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. 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) libs/avm_rp2/src/spi.erl:561— libs/avm_rp2/src/spi.erl:561-566 | libs/avm_rp2/src/spi.erl:574-579 — 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) libs/estdlib/src/gen_tcp_inet.erl:231— libs/estdlib/src/gen_tcp_inet.erl:231-236 | libs/estdlib/src/inet.erl:260-265 — 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) libs/estdlib/src/gen_tcp_socket.erl:443— libs/estdlib/src/gen_tcp_socket.erl:443-448 | libs/estdlib/src/gen_udp_socket.erl:296-301 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/estdlib/src/gen_tcp_socket.erl` and `libs/estdlib/src/gen_udp_socket.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 8 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. 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 (6 lines × 2) libs/estdlib/src/json.erl:263— libs/estdlib/src/json.erl:263-268 | libs/estdlib/src/json.erl:327-332 — 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) libs/jit/src/jit.erl:1064— libs/jit/src/jit.erl:1064-1069 | libs/jit/src/jit.erl:2480-2485 — 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) libs/jit/src/jit.erl:1326— libs/jit/src/jit.erl:1326-1331 | libs/jit/src/jit.erl:1358-1363 — 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) libs/jit/src/jit.erl:1506— libs/jit/src/jit.erl:1506-1511 | libs/jit/src/jit.erl:1521-1526 — 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) libs/jit/src/jit.erl:2124— libs/jit/src/jit.erl:2124-2129 | libs/jit/src/jit.erl:2248-2253 — 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) libs/jit/src/jit.erl:3638— libs/jit/src/jit.erl:3638-3643 | libs/jit/src/jit.erl:3688-3693 — 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) libs/jit/src/jit.erl:4967— libs/jit/src/jit.erl:4967-4972 | libs/jit/src/jit.erl:4982-4987 — 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) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64_asm.erl:795— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64_asm.erl:795-800 | libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64_asm.erl:805-810 — 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) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2921— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2921-2926 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:3295-3300 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 124 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 1506 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 (6 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:3106— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:3106-3112 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:3283-3288 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 56 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 685 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 (6 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:3132— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:3132-3138 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:3352-3357 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 56 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 685 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 (6 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:3674— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:3674-3679 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:3702-3707 — 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) libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:494— libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:494-500 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:505-510 — 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) libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:3616— libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:3616-3621 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:3800-3805 — 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) libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:3654— libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:3654-3659 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:3674-3679 — 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) libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m_asm.erl:202— libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m_asm.erl:202-207 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m_asm.erl:600-605 — 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) libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m_asm.erl:212— libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m_asm.erl:212-217 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m_asm.erl:610-615 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:1590— libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:1590-1595 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:1743-1750 — 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) libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:4171— libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:4171-4176 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:4200-4205 — 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) libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:4181— libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:4181-4186 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:4216-4221 — 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) libs/estdlib/src/serial_dist.erl:412— libs/estdlib/src/serial_dist.erl:412-417 | libs/estdlib/src/socket_dist.erl:129-134 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from both call sites, so a change lands once.
Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) libs/avm_rp2/src/i2c.erl:650— libs/avm_rp2/src/i2c.erl:650-656 | libs/avm_stm32/src/i2c.erl:488-494 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/avm_rp2/src/i2c.erl` and `libs/avm_stm32/src/i2c.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 5 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.
Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit.erl:309— libs/jit/src/jit.erl:309-315 | libs/jit/src/jit.erl:471-477 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit.erl:2131— libs/jit/src/jit.erl:2131-2137 | libs/jit/src/jit.erl:2255-2261 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit.erl:3898— libs/jit/src/jit.erl:3898-3904 | libs/jit/src/jit.erl:3946-3952 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1088— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1088-1094 | libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1108-1114 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:2381— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:2381-2387 | libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:2394-2400 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:2532— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:2532-2538 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:3313-3319 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 42 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 511 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 × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:2555— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:2555-2561 | libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:2576-2582 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:2659— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:2659-2665 | libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:2725-2731 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1033— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1033-1039 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:1267-1273 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 124 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 1506 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 × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1164— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1164-1170 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:1433-1439 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 124 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 1506 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 × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:3020— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:3020-3026 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:3409-3415 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 124 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 1506 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 × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:3063— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:3063-3069 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:3379-3385 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:3682— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:3682-3688 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:4250-4256 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 124 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 1506 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 × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32_asm.erl:434— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32_asm.erl:434-440 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32_asm.erl:463-469 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:508— libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:508-514 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:944-950 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:3432— libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:3432-3438 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:3869-3875 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_wasm32.erl:917— libs/jit/src/jit_wasm32.erl:917-923 | libs/jit/src/jit_wasm32.erl:940-946 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_wasm32.erl:1595— libs/jit/src/jit_wasm32.erl:1595-1601 | libs/jit/src/jit_wasm32.erl:1613-1619 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:816— libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:816-822 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:843-849 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64_asm.erl:193— libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64_asm.erl:193-199 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64_asm.erl:252-258 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) libs/avm_esp32/src/i2c.erl:259— libs/avm_esp32/src/i2c.erl:259-265 | libs/avm_esp32/src/uart.erl:181-187 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from both call sites, so a change lands once.
Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) examples/erlang/network_console.erl:91— examples/erlang/network_console.erl:91-97 | libs/esp32devmode/src/esp32devmode.erl:226-232 — before extracting anything, compare `examples/erlang/network_console.erl` and `libs/esp32devmode/src/esp32devmode.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 3 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 37 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 (7 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:1400— libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:1400-1406 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:1418-1424 — 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.
TooManyFunctions: jit_riscv64_asm libs/jit/src/jit_riscv64_asm.erl:21— TooManyFunctions — 100 functions. The bar is 30 functions; this is 70 over it, 3.33× the bar. The counted members are a module's functions — a module holds no instance state, so there is no shared data to group them by and no type to move them onto. To reduce it, extract each cohesive family of functions into a new module of its own and have this one delegate to it, so no single module carries every responsibility.
TooManyFunctions: jit_riscv32 libs/jit/src/jit_riscv32.erl:21— TooManyFunctions — 95 functions. The bar is 30 functions; this is 65 over it, 3.17× the bar. The counted members are a module's functions — a module holds no instance state, so there is no shared data to group them by and no type to move them onto. To reduce it, extract each cohesive family of functions into a new module of its own and have this one delegate to it, so no single module carries every responsibility.
TooManyFunctions: jit_riscv64 libs/jit/src/jit_riscv64.erl:21— TooManyFunctions — 95 functions. The bar is 30 functions; this is 65 over it, 3.17× the bar. The counted members are a module's functions — a module holds no instance state, so there is no shared data to group them by and no type to move them onto. To reduce it, extract each cohesive family of functions into a new module of its own and have this one delegate to it, so no single module carries every responsibility.
TooManyFunctions: jit_wasm32_asm libs/jit/src/jit_wasm32_asm.erl:21— TooManyFunctions — 80 functions. The bar is 30 functions; this is 50 over it, 2.67× the bar. The counted members are a module's functions — a module holds no instance state, so there is no shared data to group them by and no type to move them onto. To reduce it, extract each cohesive family of functions into a new module of its own and have this one delegate to it, so no single module carries every responsibility.
TooManyFunctions: lists libs/estdlib/src/lists.erl:31— TooManyFunctions — 71 functions. The bar is 30 functions; this is 41 over it, 2.37× the bar. The counted members are a module's functions — a module holds no instance state, so there is no shared data to group them by and no type to move them onto. To reduce it, extract each cohesive family of functions into a new module of its own and have this one delegate to it, so no single module carries every responsibility.
TooManyFunctions: esp libs/avm_esp32/src/esp.erl:27— TooManyFunctions — 46 functions. The bar is 30 functions; this is 16 over it, 1.53× the bar. The counted members are a module's functions — a module holds no instance state, so there is no shared data to group them by and no type to move them onto. To reduce it, extract each cohesive family of functions into a new module of its own and have this one delegate to it, so no single module carries every responsibility.
TooManyFunctions: jit_xtensa_asm libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa_asm.erl:21— TooManyFunctions — 46 functions. The bar is 30 functions; this is 16 over it, 1.53× the bar. The counted members are a module's functions — a module holds no instance state, so there is no shared data to group them by and no type to move them onto. To reduce it, extract each cohesive family of functions into a new module of its own and have this one delegate to it, so no single module carries every responsibility.
TooManyFunctions: Enum libs/exavmlib/lib/Enum.ex:22— TooManyFunctions — 44 functions. The bar is 30 functions; this is 14 over it, 1.47× the bar. The counted members are a module's functions — a module holds no instance state, so there is no shared data to group them by and no type to move them onto. To reduce it, extract each cohesive family of functions into a new module of its own and have this one delegate to it, so no single module carries every responsibility.
TooManyFunctions: logger libs/estdlib/src/logger.erl:44— TooManyFunctions — 41 functions. The bar is 30 functions; this is 11 over it, 1.37× the bar. The counted members are a module's functions — a module holds no instance state, so there is no shared data to group them by and no type to move them onto. To reduce it, extract each cohesive family of functions into a new module of its own and have this one delegate to it, so no single module carries every responsibility.
TooManyFunctions: queue libs/estdlib/src/queue.erl:27— TooManyFunctions — 41 functions. The bar is 30 functions; this is 11 over it, 1.37× the bar. The counted members are a module's functions — a module holds no instance state, so there is no shared data to group them by and no type to move them onto. To reduce it, extract each cohesive family of functions into a new module of its own and have this one delegate to it, so no single module carries every responsibility.
TooManyFunctions: jit_arm32_asm libs/jit/src/jit_arm32_asm.erl:19— TooManyFunctions — 40 functions. The bar is 30 functions; this is 10 over it, 1.33× the bar. The counted members are a module's functions — a module holds no instance state, so there is no shared data to group them by and no type to move them onto. To reduce it, extract each cohesive family of functions into a new module of its own and have this one delegate to it, so no single module carries every responsibility.
TooManyFunctions: string libs/estdlib/src/string.erl:28— TooManyFunctions — 39 functions. The bar is 30 functions; this is 9 over it, 1.30× the bar. The counted members are a module's functions — a module holds no instance state, so there is no shared data to group them by and no type to move them onto. To reduce it, extract each cohesive family of functions into a new module of its own and have this one delegate to it, so no single module carries every responsibility.
TooManyFunctions: jit_armv6m_asm libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m_asm.erl:19— TooManyFunctions — 39 functions. The bar is 30 functions; this is 9 over it, 1.30× the bar. The counted members are a module's functions — a module holds no instance state, so there is no shared data to group them by and no type to move them onto. To reduce it, extract each cohesive family of functions into a new module of its own and have this one delegate to it, so no single module carries every responsibility.
TooManyFunctions: atomvm libs/eavmlib/src/atomvm.erl:27— TooManyFunctions — 38 functions. The bar is 30 functions; this is 8 over it, 1.27× the bar. The counted members are a module's functions — a module holds no instance state, so there is no shared data to group them by and no type to move them onto. To reduce it, extract each cohesive family of functions into a new module of its own and have this one delegate to it, so no single module carries every responsibility.
TooManyFunctions: socket libs/estdlib/src/socket.erl:21— TooManyFunctions — 38 functions. The bar is 30 functions; this is 8 over it, 1.27× the bar. The counted members are a module's functions — a module holds no instance state, so there is no shared data to group them by and no type to move them onto. To reduce it, extract each cohesive family of functions into a new module of its own and have this one delegate to it, so no single module carries every responsibility.
TooManyFunctions: ahttp_client libs/avm_network/src/ahttp_client.erl:21— TooManyFunctions — 37 functions. The bar is 30 functions; this is 7 over it, 1.23× the bar. The counted members are a module's functions — a module holds no instance state, so there is no shared data to group them by and no type to move them onto. To reduce it, extract each cohesive family of functions into a new module of its own and have this one delegate to it, so no single module carries every responsibility.
TooManyFunctions: io_lib libs/estdlib/src/io_lib.erl:28— TooManyFunctions — 35 functions. The bar is 30 functions; this is 5 over it, 1.17× the bar. The counted members are a module's functions — a module holds no instance state, so there is no shared data to group them by and no type to move them onto. To reduce it, extract each cohesive family of functions into a new module of its own and have this one delegate to it, so no single module carries every responsibility.
TooManyFunctions: spi libs/avm_rp2/src/spi.erl:44— TooManyFunctions — 34 functions. The bar is 30 functions; this is 4 over it, 1.13× the bar. The counted members are a module's functions — a module holds no instance state, so there is no shared data to group them by and no type to move them onto. To reduce it, extract each cohesive family of functions into a new module of its own and have this one delegate to it, so no single module carries every responsibility.
TooManyFunctions: maps libs/estdlib/src/maps.erl:36— TooManyFunctions — 34 functions. The bar is 30 functions; this is 4 over it, 1.13× the bar. The counted members are a module's functions — a module holds no instance state, so there is no shared data to group them by and no type to move them onto. To reduce it, extract each cohesive family of functions into a new module of its own and have this one delegate to it, so no single module carries every responsibility.
TooManyFunctions: sets libs/estdlib/src/sets.erl:27— TooManyFunctions — 34 functions. The bar is 30 functions; this is 4 over it, 1.13× the bar. The counted members are a module's functions — a module holds no instance state, so there is no shared data to group them by and no type to move them onto. To reduce it, extract each cohesive family of functions into a new module of its own and have this one delegate to it, so no single module carries every responsibility.
TooManyFunctions: i2c libs/avm_rp2/src/i2c.erl:55— TooManyFunctions — 33 functions. The bar is 30 functions; this is 3 over it, 1.10× the bar. The counted members are a module's functions — a module holds no instance state, so there is no shared data to group them by and no type to move them onto. To reduce it, extract each cohesive family of functions into a new module of its own and have this one delegate to it, so no single module carries every responsibility.
TooManyFunctions: uart libs/avm_rp2/src/uart.erl:44— TooManyFunctions — 32 functions. The bar is 30 functions; this is 2 over it, 1.07× the bar. The counted members are a module's functions — a module holds no instance state, so there is no shared data to group them by and no type to move them onto. To reduce it, extract each cohesive family of functions into a new module of its own and have this one delegate to it, so no single module carries every responsibility.
TooManyFunctions: ssl libs/estdlib/src/ssl.erl:21— TooManyFunctions — 31 functions. The bar is 30 functions; this is 1 over it, 1.03× the bar. The counted members are a module's functions — a module holds no instance state, so there is no shared data to group them by and no type to move them onto. To reduce it, extract each cohesive family of functions into a new module of its own and have this one delegate to it, so no single module carries every responsibility.
Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) libs/estdlib/src/gen_tcp_socket.erl:244— libs/estdlib/src/gen_tcp_socket.erl:244-252 | libs/estdlib/src/gen_udp_socket.erl:184-192 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/estdlib/src/gen_tcp_socket.erl` and `libs/estdlib/src/gen_udp_socket.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 8 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. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) libs/estdlib/src/gen_tcp_socket.erl:403— libs/estdlib/src/gen_tcp_socket.erl:403-411 | libs/estdlib/src/gen_udp_socket.erl:260-268 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/estdlib/src/gen_tcp_socket.erl` and `libs/estdlib/src/gen_udp_socket.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 8 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. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit.erl:1774— libs/jit/src/jit.erl:1774-1782 | libs/jit/src/jit.erl:1854-1862 — 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) libs/jit/src/jit.erl:1947— libs/jit/src/jit.erl:1947-1955 | libs/jit/src/jit.erl:1998-2006 — 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) libs/jit/src/jit.erl:3990— libs/jit/src/jit.erl:3990-3998 | libs/jit/src/jit.erl:4005-4013 — 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) libs/jit/src/jit.erl:4031— libs/jit/src/jit.erl:4031-4039 | libs/jit/src/jit.erl:4077-4085 — 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) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:2291— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:2291-2299 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:2344-2352 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 49 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 634 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 (9 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1096— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1096-1104 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:1364-1372 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 124 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 1506 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 (9 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1139— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1139-1147 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:1407-1415 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 124 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 1506 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 (9 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2160— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2160-2168 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:2483-2491 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 124 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 1506 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 (9 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:3092— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:3092-3100 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:3393-3401 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 124 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 1506 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 (9 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:3283— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:3283-3291 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:3774-3782 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 124 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 1506 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 (9 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:3077— libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:3077-3085 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:2881-2889 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 51 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 607 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 (9 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m_asm.erl:300— libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m_asm.erl:300-308 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m_asm.erl:387-395 — 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) libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:696— libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:696-704 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:822-830 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 28 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 376 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 (9 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:2655— libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:2655-2663 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:2676-2684 — 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) libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:3288— libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:3288-3296 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:3357-3365 — 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) libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:3317— libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:3317-3325 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:3386-3394 — 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) libs/estdlib/src/gen_tcp_socket.erl:570— libs/estdlib/src/gen_tcp_socket.erl:570-578 | libs/estdlib/src/gen_udp_socket.erl:376-384 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/estdlib/src/gen_tcp_socket.erl` and `libs/estdlib/src/gen_udp_socket.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 8 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. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) examples/erlang/i2c_lis3dh.erl:82— examples/erlang/i2c_lis3dh.erl:82-90 | examples/erlang/spi_lis3dh.erl:101-109 — 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 (9 lines × 2) examples/erlang/i2c_lis3dh.erl:117— examples/erlang/i2c_lis3dh.erl:117-125 | examples/erlang/i2c_scanner.erl:76-84 — 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 (9 lines × 2) examples/erlang/spi_flash.erl:120— examples/erlang/spi_flash.erl:120-128 | examples/erlang/spi_lis3dh.erl:146-154 — 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.
FileTooLong: src/jit.erl libs/jit/src/jit.erl— FileTooLong — 4320 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), declaring 119 functions. The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 3820 over it, 8.64× the bar. In this language a module is exactly one source file, so its length cannot be moved into sibling files of the same module. To reduce it, extract each cohesive family of functions into a new module of its own and have this one delegate to it, so no one module has to be read whole to change one of them.
FileTooLong: src/jit_xtensa.erl libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl— FileTooLong — 3480 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), declaring 113 functions. The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 2980 over it, 6.96× the bar. In this language a module is exactly one source file, so its length cannot be moved into sibling files of the same module. To reduce it, extract each cohesive family of functions into a new module of its own and have this one delegate to it, so no one module has to be read whole to change one of them.
FileTooLong: src/jit_armv6m.erl libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl— FileTooLong — 3465 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), declaring 101 functions. The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 2965 over it, 6.93× the bar. In this language a module is exactly one source file, so its length cannot be moved into sibling files of the same module. To reduce it, extract each cohesive family of functions into a new module of its own and have this one delegate to it, so no one module has to be read whole to change one of them.
FileTooLong: src/jit_arm32.erl libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl— FileTooLong — 3004 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), declaring 96 functions. The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 2504 over it, 6.01× the bar. In this language a module is exactly one source file, so its length cannot be moved into sibling files of the same module. To reduce it, extract each cohesive family of functions into a new module of its own and have this one delegate to it, so no one module has to be read whole to change one of them.
FileTooLong: src/jit_x86_64.erl libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl— FileTooLong — 2384 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), declaring 82 functions. The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 1884 over it, 4.77× the bar. In this language a module is exactly one source file, so its length cannot be moved into sibling files of the same module. To reduce it, extract each cohesive family of functions into a new module of its own and have this one delegate to it, so no one module has to be read whole to change one of them.
FileTooLong: src/jit_aarch64.erl libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl— FileTooLong — 2240 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), declaring 82 functions. The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 1740 over it, 4.48× the bar. In this language a module is exactly one source file, so its length cannot be moved into sibling files of the same module. To reduce it, extract each cohesive family of functions into a new module of its own and have this one delegate to it, so no one module has to be read whole to change one of them.
FileTooLong: src/jit_wasm32.erl libs/jit/src/jit_wasm32.erl— FileTooLong — 1473 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), declaring 91 functions. The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 973 over it, 2.95× the bar. In this language a module is exactly one source file, so its length cannot be moved into sibling files of the same module. To reduce it, extract each cohesive family of functions into a new module of its own and have this one delegate to it, so no one module has to be read whole to change one of them.
FileTooLong: src/jit_dwarf.erl libs/jit/src/jit_dwarf.erl— FileTooLong — 1250 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 750 over it, 2.50× the bar. In this language a module is exactly one source file, so its length cannot be moved into sibling files of the same module. To reduce it, extract each cohesive family of functions into a new module of its own and have this one delegate to it, so no one module has to be read whole to change one of them.
FileTooLong: src/jit_riscv32_asm.erl libs/jit/src/jit_riscv32_asm.erl— FileTooLong — 1123 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), declaring 104 functions. The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 623 over it, 2.25× the bar. In this language a module is exactly one source file, so its length cannot be moved into sibling files of the same module. To reduce it, extract each cohesive family of functions into a new module of its own and have this one delegate to it, so no one module has to be read whole to change one of them.
FileTooLong: src/erlang.erl libs/estdlib/src/erlang.erl— FileTooLong — 975 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), declaring 204 functions. The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 475 over it, 1.95× the bar. In this language a module is exactly one source file, so its length cannot be moved into sibling files of the same module. To reduce it, extract each cohesive family of functions into a new module of its own and have this one delegate to it, so no one module has to be read whole to change one of them.
FileTooLong: src/jit_aarch64_asm.erl libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64_asm.erl— FileTooLong — 798 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), declaring 61 functions. The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 298 over it, 1.60× the bar. In this language a module is exactly one source file, so its length cannot be moved into sibling files of the same module. To reduce it, extract each cohesive family of functions into a new module of its own and have this one delegate to it, so no one module has to be read whole to change one of them.
FileTooLong: src/network.erl libs/avm_network/src/network.erl— FileTooLong — 781 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), declaring 48 functions. The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 281 over it, 1.56× the bar. In this language a module is exactly one source file, so its length cannot be moved into sibling files of the same module. To reduce it, extract each cohesive family of functions into a new module of its own and have this one delegate to it, so no one module has to be read whole to change one of them.
FileTooLong: src/json.erl libs/estdlib/src/json.erl— FileTooLong — 669 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), declaring 63 functions. The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 169 over it, 1.34× the bar. In this language a module is exactly one source file, so its length cannot be moved into sibling files of the same module. To reduce it, extract each cohesive family of functions into a new module of its own and have this one delegate to it, so no one module has to be read whole to change one of them.
FileTooLong: tools/atomvm_stm32_config_query.erl src/platforms/stm32/tools/atomvm_stm32_config_query.erl— FileTooLong — 632 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 132 over it, 1.26× the bar. In this language a module is exactly one source file, so its length cannot be moved into sibling files of the same module. To reduce it, extract each cohesive family of functions into a new module of its own and have this one delegate to it, so no one module has to be read whole to change one of them.
FileTooLong: src/jit_x86_64_asm.erl libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64_asm.erl— FileTooLong — 565 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), declaring 45 functions. The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 65 over it, 1.13× the bar. In this language a module is exactly one source file, so its length cannot be moved into sibling files of the same module. To reduce it, extract each cohesive family of functions into a new module of its own and have this one delegate to it, so no one module has to be read whole to change one of them.
FileTooLong: src/supervisor.erl libs/estdlib/src/supervisor.erl— FileTooLong — 564 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), declaring 34 functions. The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 64 over it, 1.13× the bar. In this language a module is exactly one source file, so its length cannot be moved into sibling files of the same module. To reduce it, extract each cohesive family of functions into a new module of its own and have this one delegate to it, so no one module has to be read whole to change one of them.
FileTooLong: src/jit_precompile.erl libs/jit/src/jit_precompile.erl— FileTooLong — 561 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 61 over it, 1.12× the bar. In this language a module is exactly one source file, so its length cannot be moved into sibling files of the same module. To reduce it, extract each cohesive family of functions into a new module of its own and have this one delegate to it, so no one module has to be read whole to change one of them.
FileTooLong: src/emscripten.erl libs/avm_emscripten/src/emscripten.erl— FileTooLong — 556 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), declaring 100 functions. The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 56 over it, 1.11× the bar. In this language a module is exactly one source file, so its length cannot be moved into sibling files of the same module. To reduce it, extract each cohesive family of functions into a new module of its own and have this one delegate to it, so no one module has to be read whole to change one of them.
Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) libs/estdlib/src/socket.erl:378— libs/estdlib/src/socket.erl:378-387 | libs/estdlib/src/socket.erl:429-438 — 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) libs/jit/src/jit.erl:2864— libs/jit/src/jit.erl:2864-2873 | libs/jit/src/jit.erl:2881-2890 — 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) libs/jit/src/jit.erl:3064— libs/jit/src/jit.erl:3064-3073 | libs/jit/src/jit.erl:3097-3106 — 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) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1451— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1451-1460 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:1409-1418 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 49 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 634 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 (10 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:2085— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:2085-2094 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:2203-2212 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 49 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 634 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 (10 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:935— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:935-944 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:994-1003 — 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) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:948— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:948-957 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:1180-1189 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 124 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 1506 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 (10 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:975— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:975-984 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:1208-1217 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 124 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 1506 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 (10 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:991— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:991-1000 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:1224-1233 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 124 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 1506 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 (10 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:998— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:998-1007 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1061-1070 — 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) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1282— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1282-1291 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:1567-1576 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 124 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 1506 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 (10 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2201— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2201-2210 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:2525-2534 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 124 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 1506 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 (10 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:1167— libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:1167-1176 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:1227-1236 — 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) libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:1231— libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:1231-1240 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:1296-1305 — 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) libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:3417— libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:3417-3426 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:3440-3449 — 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) libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:1473— libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:1473-1482 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:1519-1528 — 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) libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:2160— libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:2160-2169 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:2935-2944 — 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) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1825— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1825-1834 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:2148-2157 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 124 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 1506 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 (11 lines × 2) libs/avm_rp2/src/i2c.erl:618— libs/avm_rp2/src/i2c.erl:618-628 | libs/avm_stm32/src/i2c.erl:456-466 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/avm_rp2/src/i2c.erl` and `libs/avm_stm32/src/i2c.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 5 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.
Duplicated block (11 lines × 2) libs/estdlib/src/gen_tcp_socket.erl:328— libs/estdlib/src/gen_tcp_socket.erl:328-338 | libs/estdlib/src/gen_udp_socket.erl:223-233 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/estdlib/src/gen_tcp_socket.erl` and `libs/estdlib/src/gen_udp_socket.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 8 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. 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 (11 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit.erl:5020— libs/jit/src/jit.erl:5020-5030 | libs/jit/src/jit.erl:5036-5046 — 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) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:902— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:902-912 | libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:987-997 — 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) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:935— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:935-945 | libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:968-978 — 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) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1913— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1913-1923 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:2892-2902 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 45 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 551 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 (11 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:2062— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:2062-2072 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:3028-3038 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 45 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 551 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 (11 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1055— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1055-1065 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:1290-1300 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 124 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 1506 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 (11 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1908— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1908-1918 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:2231-2241 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 124 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 1506 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 (11 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2498— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2498-2508 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:2843-2853 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 124 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 1506 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 (11 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:3013— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:3013-3023 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:3056-3066 — 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) libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:1466— libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:1466-1476 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:1492-1502 — 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) libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:3509— libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:3509-3519 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:3563-3573 — 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) libs/jit/src/jit_riscv32_asm.erl:1639— libs/jit/src/jit_riscv32_asm.erl:1639-1649 | libs/jit/src/jit_riscv32_asm.erl:1659-1669 — 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) libs/jit/src/jit_riscv64_asm.erl:582— libs/jit/src/jit_riscv64_asm.erl:582-592 | libs/jit/src/jit_riscv64_asm.erl:602-612 — 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) libs/avm_rp2/src/uart.erl:450— libs/avm_rp2/src/uart.erl:450-460 | libs/avm_stm32/src/uart.erl:322-332 — 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 (12 lines × 2) libs/alisp/src/alisp.erl:249— libs/alisp/src/alisp.erl:249-260 | libs/estdlib/src/erlang.erl:538-549 — 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 (12 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1354— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1354-1365 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:1314-1325 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 49 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 634 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 (12 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64_asm.erl:200— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64_asm.erl:200-211 | libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64_asm.erl:555-566 — 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) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64_asm.erl:335— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64_asm.erl:335-346 | libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64_asm.erl:351-362 — 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) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1765— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1765-1776 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:2087-2098 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 124 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 1506 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 (12 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2512— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2512-2523 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:2857-2868 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 124 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 1506 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 (12 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2858— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2858-2869 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:3225-3238 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 124 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 1506 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 (12 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2941— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2941-2952 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:3322-3333 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 124 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 1506 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 (12 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32_asm.erl:419— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32_asm.erl:419-430 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32_asm.erl:448-459 — 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.
Duplicated block (12 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:4008— libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:4008-4021 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:3923-3934 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 51 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 607 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 (12 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m_asm.erl:262— libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m_asm.erl:262-273 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m_asm.erl:361-372 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (12 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:3772— libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:3772-3783 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:3801-3812 — 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) examples/erlang/esp32/epmd_disterl.erl:44— examples/erlang/esp32/epmd_disterl.erl:44-55 | examples/erlang/rp2/picow_wifi_epmd_disterl.erl:57-68 — 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 (12 lines × 2) examples/erlang/rp2/picow_tcp_server.erl:57— examples/erlang/rp2/picow_tcp_server.erl:57-68 | examples/erlang/tcp_socket_server.erl:40-51 — 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 (8 lines × 2) libs/avm_rp2/src/spi.erl:621— libs/avm_rp2/src/spi.erl:621-628 | libs/avm_stm32/src/spi.erl:627-634 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/avm_rp2/src/spi.erl` and `libs/avm_stm32/src/spi.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 6 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. 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 (8 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit.erl:655— libs/jit/src/jit.erl:655-662 | libs/jit/src/jit.erl:683-690 — 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) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1389— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1389-1396 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:1345-1352 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 49 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 634 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 × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1780— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1780-1787 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:1829-1836 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 49 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 634 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 × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64_asm.erl:1033— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64_asm.erl:1033-1040 | libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64_asm.erl:1047-1054 — 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) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:659— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:659-666 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:785-792 — 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) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1008— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1008-1015 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:1241-1248 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 124 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 1506 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 × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2065— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2065-2072 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:2388-2395 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 124 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 1506 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 × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2831— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2831-2838 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:3198-3205 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 124 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 1506 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 × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:3000— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:3000-3007 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:3043-3050 — 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) libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:466— libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:466-473 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:481-488 — 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) libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:764— libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:764-771 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:891-898 — 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) libs/jit/src/jit_wasm32.erl:653— libs/jit/src/jit_wasm32.erl:653-660 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:2591-2598 — 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) libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64_asm.erl:163— libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64_asm.erl:163-170 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64_asm.erl:222-229 — 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.
Duplicated block (16 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1434— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1434-1449 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:1392-1407 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 49 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 634 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 (16 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1758— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1758-1773 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:1805-1820 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 49 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 634 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 (16 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:2265— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:2265-2280 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:2315-2330 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 49 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 634 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 (16 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:953— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:953-968 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1011-1026 — 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) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1606— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1606-1621 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:1853-1868 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 56 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 685 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 (16 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2479— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2479-2494 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:2824-2839 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 124 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 1506 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 (16 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:3231— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:3231-3246 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:3711-3726 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 124 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 1506 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 (16 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:2652— libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:2652-2667 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:2675-2690 — 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) libs/jit/src/jit_riscv32_asm.erl:1318— libs/jit/src/jit_riscv32_asm.erl:1318-1333 | libs/jit/src/jit_riscv32_asm.erl:1349-1364 — 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) examples/erlang/hello_world_server.erl:51— examples/erlang/hello_world_server.erl:51-66 | examples/erlang/system_info_server.erl:43-58 — before extracting anything, compare `examples/erlang/hello_world_server.erl` and `examples/erlang/system_info_server.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 3 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 42 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 (16 lines × 2) examples/erlang/stm32/blink_weact_studio_blackpill.erl:27— examples/erlang/stm32/blink_weact_studio_blackpill.erl:27-42 | examples/erlang/stm32/blink_weact_studio_u585.erl:27-42 — 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) examples/erlang/stm32/blink_weact_studio_h743.erl:27— examples/erlang/stm32/blink_weact_studio_h743.erl:27-42 | examples/erlang/stm32/blink_weact_studio_wb55.erl:27-42 — 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 (8–9 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit.erl:1906— libs/jit/src/jit.erl:1906-1914 | libs/jit/src/jit.erl:2127-2134 — 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 (8–9 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1648— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1648-1656 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:2416-2423 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 36 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 426 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 (8–9 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1322— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1322-1330 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1349-1356 — 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 (8–9 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2404— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2404-2411 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2449-2457 — 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 (8–9 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:1608— libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:1608-1616 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:1633-1640 — 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 (8–9 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:2741— libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:2741-2748 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:2790-2798 — 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 (8–9 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:4041— libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:4041-4049 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:3950-3957 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 51 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 607 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 (8–9 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_wasm32.erl:533— libs/jit/src/jit_wasm32.erl:533-540 | libs/jit/src/jit_wasm32.erl:544-552 — 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 (8–9 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_wasm32.erl:566— libs/jit/src/jit_wasm32.erl:566-573 | libs/jit/src/jit_wasm32.erl:577-585 — 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 (8–9 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_wasm32.erl:588— libs/jit/src/jit_wasm32.erl:588-595 | libs/jit/src/jit_wasm32.erl:599-607 — 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 (8–9 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_wasm32.erl:673— libs/jit/src/jit_wasm32.erl:673-680 | libs/jit/src/jit_wasm32.erl:684-692 — 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 (8–9 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_wasm32.erl:695— libs/jit/src/jit_wasm32.erl:695-702 | libs/jit/src/jit_wasm32.erl:706-714 — 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) libs/estdlib/src/gen_tcp_inet.erl:195— libs/estdlib/src/gen_tcp_inet.erl:195-208 | libs/estdlib/src/gen_udp_inet.erl:132-145 — 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 (14 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit.erl:1784— libs/jit/src/jit.erl:1784-1797 | libs/jit/src/jit.erl:1866-1879 — 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) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:625— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:625-638 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:651-665 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 49 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 634 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (14 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1367— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1367-1380 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:1327-1340 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 49 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 634 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (14 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:2919— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:2919-2932 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:3774-3787 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 42 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 511 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (14 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1740— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1740-1753 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:2062-2075 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 124 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 1506 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (14 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2236— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2236-2249 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:2560-2573 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 124 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 1506 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (14 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:1414— libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:1414-1427 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:1438-1451 — 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) libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:824— libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:824-837 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:861-874 — 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) libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:1101— libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:1101-1114 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:1145-1158 — 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 × 3) libs/avm_rp2/src/spi.erl:562— libs/avm_rp2/src/spi.erl:562-566 | libs/avm_rp2/src/spi.erl:575-579 | libs/avm_stm32/src/spi.erl:562-566 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/avm_rp2/src/spi.erl` and `libs/avm_stm32/src/spi.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 6 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. 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 × 3) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1003— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1003-1007 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1026-1030 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1066-1070 — 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 (5 lines × 3) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1112— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1112-1116 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:1380-1384 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:1195-1200 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 124 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 1506 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 × 3) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2728— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2728-2732 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:3097-3101 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:2901-2905 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 124 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 1506 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 × 3) libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:1236— libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:1236-1240 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:1260-1264 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:1301-1305 — 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 (5 lines × 3) libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:3810— libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:3810-3814 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:3819-3823 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:3838-3842 — 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 (5 lines × 3) libs/jit/src/jit_riscv32_asm.erl:758— libs/jit/src/jit_riscv32_asm.erl:758-769 | libs/jit/src/jit_riscv32_asm.erl:889-900 | libs/jit/src/jit_riscv32_asm.erl:1603-1607 — 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 (5 lines × 3) libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:1455— libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:1455-1459 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:1481-1485 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:1527-1531 — 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 (5 lines × 3) libs/jit/src/jit.erl:716— libs/jit/src/jit.erl:716-721 | libs/jit/src/jit.erl:745-749 | libs/jit/src/jit.erl:778-782 — 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 (5 lines × 3) libs/jit/src/jit.erl:1929— libs/jit/src/jit.erl:1929-1933 | libs/jit/src/jit.erl:1975-1979 | libs/jit/src/jit.erl:2581-2585 — 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.
D4 · Code Duplication· Members sharing a duplicated core (4 members, 50+ identical tokens) · ×9
Members sharing a duplicated core (4 members, 50+ identical tokens) libs/avm_rp2/src/i2c.erl:605— libs/avm_rp2/src/i2c.erl:605-615 | libs/avm_rp2/src/spi.erl:454-464 | libs/avm_stm32/src/i2c.erl:443-453 | libs/avm_stm32/src/spi.erl:432-442 — 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) libs/jit/src/jit.erl:3612— libs/jit/src/jit.erl:3612-3627 | libs/jit/src/jit.erl:3662-3677 | libs/jit/src/jit.erl:3712-3725 | libs/jit/src/jit.erl:3803-3819 — 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) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:792— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:792-1117 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:935-1359 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:1167-1643 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:930-1536 — 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) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1892— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1892-1929 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2525-2563 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:2870-2911 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:2639-2689 — 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) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:2838— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:2838-2860 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:3606-3631 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:4160-4193 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:2849-2871 — 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) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64_asm.erl:178— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64_asm.erl:178-211 | libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64_asm.erl:216-228 | libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64_asm.erl:539-566 | libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64_asm.erl:587-599 — 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) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2974— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2974-3100 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:3354-3401 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:2410-2494 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:3132-3275 — 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) libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:2496— libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:2496-2519 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:2521-2544 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:2546-2566 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:2568-2588 — 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) libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64_asm.erl:311— libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64_asm.erl:311-326 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64_asm.erl:416-437 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64_asm.erl:439-449 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64_asm.erl:451-468 — 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) examples/erlang/network_console.erl:40— examples/erlang/network_console.erl:40-52 | libs/esp32devmode/src/esp32devmode.erl:182-194 — before extracting anything, compare `examples/erlang/network_console.erl` and `libs/esp32devmode/src/esp32devmode.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 3 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 37 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (13 lines × 2) libs/alisp/src/alisp.erl:231— libs/alisp/src/alisp.erl:231-243 | libs/estdlib/src/erlang.erl:573-585 — 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) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1146— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1146-1158 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1169-1181 — 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) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1262— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1262-1274 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:1545-1557 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 124 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 1506 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 (13 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1298— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1298-1310 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:1584-1596 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 124 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 1506 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 (13 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1576— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1576-1588 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:1819-1831 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 56 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 685 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 (13 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1797— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1797-1809 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:1970-1982 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 56 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 685 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 (13 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2414— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2414-2426 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:2752-2764 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 124 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 1506 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 (13 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2898— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2898-2910 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:3273-3285 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 124 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 1506 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.
D4 · Code Duplication· Members sharing a duplicated core (5 members, 50+ identical tokens) · ×8
Members sharing a duplicated core (5 members, 50+ identical tokens) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:413— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:413-426 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:433-446 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:537-550 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:382-395 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:488-501 — 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) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:435— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:435-457 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:455-477 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:559-581 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:404-426 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:510-533 — 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) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1417— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1417-1422 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1839-1844 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:2162-2167 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:1369-1374 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:2025-2030 — 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) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1521— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1521-1535 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1964-1978 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:2287-2301 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:1487-1504 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:2193-2207 — 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) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1538— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1538-1608 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1981-2130 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:2304-2453 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:1510-1671 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:2210-2381 — 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) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1941— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1941-1968 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2566-2593 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:2914-2941 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:2052-2079 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:2692-2719 — 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) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:2166— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:2166-2210 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2783-2829 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:3152-3196 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:2239-2283 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:2964-3008 — 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) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64_asm.erl:504— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64_asm.erl:504-535 | libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64_asm.erl:850-872 | libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64_asm.erl:877-899 | libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64_asm.erl:979-989 | libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64_asm.erl:1068-1072 — 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 (15 lines × 2) libs/avm_esp32/src/uart.erl:165— libs/avm_esp32/src/uart.erl:165-179 | libs/avm_rp2/src/uart.erl:526-540 — 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) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1811— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1811-1825 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:1862-1876 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 49 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 634 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 (15 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:564— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:564-578 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:665-679 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 124 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 1506 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 (15 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1590— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1590-1604 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:1833-1847 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 56 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 685 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 (15 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1932— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1932-1946 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:2255-2269 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 124 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 1506 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 (15 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2346— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2346-2360 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:2522-2536 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 56 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 685 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 (15 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:3371— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:3371-3385 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:3861-3875 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 124 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 1506 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 (15 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m_asm.erl:530— libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m_asm.erl:530-544 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m_asm.erl:561-575 — 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 × 3) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:283— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:283-293 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:257-267 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:307-317 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 49 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 634 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 (11 lines × 3) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:767— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:767-777 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:913-923 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:1127-1137 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 42 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 511 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 (11 lines × 3) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1098— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1098-1108 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1339-1349 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:1623-1633 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 42 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 511 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 (11 lines × 3) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1365— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1365-1375 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:2127-2137 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:1325-1335 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 45 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 551 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 (11 lines × 3) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:714— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:714-724 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:819-829 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:707-717 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 124 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 1506 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 (11 lines × 3) libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:3432— libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:3432-3442 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:3723-3733 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:3827-3837 — 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 (11 lines × 3) libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:3744— libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:3744-3754 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:3758-3768 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:3787-3797 — 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 (11 lines × 3) examples/erlang/esp32/tcp_client_esp32.erl:25— examples/erlang/esp32/tcp_client_esp32.erl:25-35 | examples/erlang/esp32/tcp_server_blink.erl:27-37 | examples/erlang/esp32/udp_server_blink.erl:29-39 — 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.
Duplicated block (9 lines × 3) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:955— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:955-963 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1013-1021 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1037-1045 — 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) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:994— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:994-1002 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:1227-1235 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:961-969 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 124 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 1506 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 (9 lines × 3) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1891— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1891-1899 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:2214-2222 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:2077-2085 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 124 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 1506 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 (9 lines × 3) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2084— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2084-2092 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:2407-2415 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:2327-2335 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 124 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 1506 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 (9 lines × 3) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32_asm.erl:330— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32_asm.erl:330-338 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32_asm.erl:364-372 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32_asm.erl:396-404 — 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) examples/erlang/disterl.erl:27— examples/erlang/disterl.erl:27-35 | examples/erlang/esp32/epmd_disterl.erl:42-50 | examples/erlang/rp2/picow_wifi_epmd_disterl.erl:55-63 — 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 (9 lines × 3) examples/erlang/esp32/morse_server.erl:31— examples/erlang/esp32/morse_server.erl:31-39 | examples/erlang/hello_world_server.erl:31-39 | examples/erlang/system_info_server.erl:31-39 — before extracting anything, compare `examples/erlang/hello_world_server.erl` and `examples/erlang/system_info_server.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 3 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 42 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 (6 lines × 3) libs/estdlib/src/json.erl:391— libs/estdlib/src/json.erl:391-396 | libs/estdlib/src/json.erl:427-432 | libs/estdlib/src/json.erl:719-724 — all 3 copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from every one of those sites — resolving only two of them leaves the rest to drift apart the first time one is edited.
Duplicated block (6 lines × 3) libs/jit/src/jit.erl:3646— libs/jit/src/jit.erl:3646-3651 | libs/jit/src/jit.erl:3696-3701 | libs/jit/src/jit.erl:3849-3854 — all 3 copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from every one of those sites — resolving only two of them leaves the rest to drift apart the first time one is edited.
Duplicated block (6 lines × 3) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:568— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:568-573 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:699-704 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:804-809 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 42 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 511 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 (6 lines × 3) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2125— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2125-2130 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:2448-2453 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:2376-2381 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 124 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 1506 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 (6 lines × 3) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:3315— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:3315-3320 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:3325-3330 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:3346-3351 — all 3 copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from every one of those sites — resolving only two of them leaves the rest to drift apart the first time one is edited.
Duplicated block (6 lines × 3) libs/jit/src/jit_riscv32_asm.erl:1406— libs/jit/src/jit_riscv32_asm.erl:1406-1412 | libs/jit/src/jit_riscv32_asm.erl:1433-1438 | libs/jit/src/jit_riscv32_asm.erl:1579-1584 — all 3 copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from every one of those sites — resolving only two of them leaves the rest to drift apart the first time one is edited.
Duplicated block (6 lines × 3) libs/jit/src/jit.erl:318— libs/jit/src/jit.erl:318-323 | libs/jit/src/jit.erl:1081-1086 | libs/jit/src/jit.erl:1233-1238 — 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 (18 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:2019— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:2019-2036 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:2137-2154 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 49 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 634 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 (18 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2174— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2174-2191 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:2497-2514 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 124 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 1506 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 (18 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2392— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2392-2409 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:2729-2746 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 124 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 1506 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 (18 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:2913— libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:2913-2930 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:4285-4302 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 28 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 376 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 (18 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:985— libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:985-1002 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:1039-1056 — 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 × 2) examples/erlang/esp32/ap_sta_network.erl:40— examples/erlang/esp32/ap_sta_network.erl:40-57 | examples/erlang/rp2/picow_wifi_sta.erl:27-44 — 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 (12–13 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:3028— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:3028-3039 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:3071-3083 — 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 (12–13 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:3248— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:3248-3259 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:3728-3740 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 124 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 1506 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 (12–13 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:3412— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:3412-3423 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:3469-3481 — 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 (12–13 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:3917— libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:3917-3928 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:3989-4001 — 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 (12–13 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:2653— libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:2653-2664 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:2697-2709 — 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 (10–11 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit.erl:2664— libs/jit/src/jit.erl:2664-2674 | libs/jit/src/jit.erl:2766-2775 — 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 (10–11 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1675— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1675-1685 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:2442-2451 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 36 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 426 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 (10–11 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:2587— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:2587-2596 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:2600-2610 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 49 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 634 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 (10–11 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:286— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:286-296 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:300-309 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 124 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 1506 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 (10–11 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:3692— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:3692-3702 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:4260-4269 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 124 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 1506 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 (10 lines × 3) libs/jit/src/jit.erl:1303— libs/jit/src/jit.erl:1303-1312 | libs/jit/src/jit.erl:1341-1350 | libs/jit/src/jit.erl:1464-1473 — 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) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1913— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1913-1922 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:2892-2901 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:2665-2674 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 45 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 551 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 (10 lines × 3) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:2368— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:2368-2377 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:2399-2408 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:3121-3130 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 49 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 634 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 (10 lines × 3) libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:1187— libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:1187-1196 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:1246-1255 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:1271-1280 — 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) libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m_asm.erl:276— libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m_asm.erl:276-285 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m_asm.erl:288-297 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m_asm.erl:375-384 — 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 (9–10 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1662— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1662-1671 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:2430-2438 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 36 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 426 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 (9–10 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2401— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2401-2410 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2487-2495 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (9–10 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:2738— libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:2738-2747 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:2832-2840 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (9–10 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:732— libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:732-740 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:764-773 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (9–10 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:1030— libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:1030-1039 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:1041-1049 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (7 lines × 3) libs/jit/src/jit.erl:361— libs/jit/src/jit.erl:361-367 | libs/jit/src/jit.erl:378-384 | libs/jit/src/jit.erl:2633-2639 — 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 (7 lines × 3) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:818— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:818-826 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:947-953 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:1179-1185 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 42 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 511 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) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1675— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1675-1682 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:1738-1745 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:2442-2448 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 49 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 634 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) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:2534— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:2534-2540 | libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:2544-2550 | libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:2565-2571 — 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 (7 lines × 3) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2404— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2404-2410 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2449-2456 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2488-2495 — 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.
Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) libs/etest/src/etest.erl:105— `catch _:_` 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) libs/estdlib/src/gen.erl:98— `catch _:_` 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) libs/avm_network/src/ahttp_client.erl:377— `catch error:_` 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) libs/avm_esp32/src/i2c.erl:299— `catch error:_` 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) libs/avm_esp32/src/i2c.erl:305— `catch error:_` 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.
Duplicated block (17 lines × 2) examples/erlang/network_console.erl:54— examples/erlang/network_console.erl:54-70 | libs/esp32devmode/src/esp32devmode.erl:196-212 — before extracting anything, compare `examples/erlang/network_console.erl` and `libs/esp32devmode/src/esp32devmode.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 3 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 37 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 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1615— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1615-1631 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:1678-1694 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 49 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 634 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 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:1185— libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:1185-1201 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:1244-1260 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (17 lines × 2) examples/erlang/hello_world_server.erl:25— examples/erlang/hello_world_server.erl:25-41 | examples/erlang/system_info_server.erl:25-41 — before extracting anything, compare `examples/erlang/hello_world_server.erl` and `examples/erlang/system_info_server.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 3 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 42 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 (13–14 lines × 2) libs/estdlib/src/gen_tcp_socket.erl:212— libs/estdlib/src/gen_tcp_socket.erl:212-225 | libs/estdlib/src/gen_udp_socket.erl:150-162 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/estdlib/src/gen_tcp_socket.erl` and `libs/estdlib/src/gen_udp_socket.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 8 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. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (13–14 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2639— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2639-2651 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:2989-3002 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 124 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 1506 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 (13–14 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:3661— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:3661-3674 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:4231-4243 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 124 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 1506 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 (13–14 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32_asm.erl:348— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32_asm.erl:348-361 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32_asm.erl:381-393 — 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 × 3) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1941— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1941-1948 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:2914-2921 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:2052-2059 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 45 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 551 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) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1493— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1493-1500 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:1792-1799 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:1733-1740 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 124 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 1506 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) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2075— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2075-2082 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:2398-2405 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:2318-2325 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 124 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 1506 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) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2500— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2500-2507 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:2845-2852 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:2610-2617 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 124 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 1506 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 (21 lines × 3) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:708— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:708-728 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:853-873 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:1067-1087 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 42 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 511 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 (21 lines × 3) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2042— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2042-2062 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:2365-2385 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:2283-2303 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 124 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 1506 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 (21 lines × 3) libs/jit/src/jit_wasm32.erl:372— libs/jit/src/jit_wasm32.erl:372-392 | libs/jit/src/jit_wasm32.erl:1067-1087 | libs/jit/src/jit_wasm32.erl:1104-1124 — 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 (13 lines × 3) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:2922— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:2922-2934 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:3777-3789 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:4380-4392 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 42 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 511 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 (13 lines × 3) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64_asm.erl:523— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64_asm.erl:523-535 | libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64_asm.erl:860-872 | libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64_asm.erl:887-899 — 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 (13 lines × 3) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2027— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2027-2039 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:2350-2362 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:2268-2280 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 124 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 1506 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 (12 lines × 3) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:748— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:748-759 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:893-904 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:1107-1118 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 42 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 511 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 (12 lines × 3) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:2838— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:2838-2849 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:3606-3617 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:4160-4171 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 42 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 511 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 (12 lines × 3) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64_asm.erl:628— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64_asm.erl:628-641 | libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64_asm.erl:645-656 | libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64_asm.erl:666-678 — 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 (11–12 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit.erl:2711— libs/jit/src/jit.erl:2711-2721 | libs/jit/src/jit.erl:2745-2756 — 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 (11–12 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit.erl:3313— libs/jit/src/jit.erl:3313-3324 | libs/jit/src/jit.erl:3586-3596 — 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 (11–12 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_riscv32_asm.erl:533— libs/jit/src/jit_riscv32_asm.erl:533-544 | libs/jit/src/jit_riscv64_asm.erl:305-315 — 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 (10 lines × 4) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:958— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:958-967 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1016-1025 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:1191-1200 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:1250-1259 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 124 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 1506 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 (10 lines × 4) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1148— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1148-1157 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1171-1180 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:1417-1426 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:1441-1450 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 124 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 1506 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 (10 lines × 4) libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:3298— libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:3298-3307 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:3327-3336 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:3367-3376 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:3396-3405 — 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 (9 lines × 4) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:696— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:696-704 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:841-849 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:1055-1063 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:706-714 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 42 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 511 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 (9 lines × 4) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1263— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1263-1271 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:1482-1490 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:1508-1516 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:1546-1554 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 124 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 1506 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 (9 lines × 4) libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:830— libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:830-838 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:867-875 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:937-945 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:980-988 — 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 lines × 4) libs/jit/src/jit.erl:3613— libs/jit/src/jit.erl:3613-3620 | libs/jit/src/jit.erl:3663-3670 | libs/jit/src/jit.erl:3713-3720 | libs/jit/src/jit.erl:3804-3811 — 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 lines × 4) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:2125— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:2125-2132 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2736-2743 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:3105-3112 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:2909-2916 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 42 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 511 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 × 4) libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64_asm.erl:319— libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64_asm.erl:319-326 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64_asm.erl:417-424 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64_asm.erl:442-449 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64_asm.erl:461-468 — 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 × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2993— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2993-2998 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:3151-3158 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 56 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 685 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 (6–8 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:2129— libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:2129-2134 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:2221-2228 — 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 (6–8 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:1449— libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:1449-1456 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:1505-1510 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (7–8 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:498— libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:498-504 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:934-941 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (7–8 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64_asm.erl:342— libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64_asm.erl:342-349 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64_asm.erl:452-458 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (7–8 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:2626— libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:2626-2633 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:2664-2670 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (7 lines × 4) libs/jit/src/jit.erl:4041— libs/jit/src/jit.erl:4041-4047 | libs/jit/src/jit.erl:4058-4064 | libs/jit/src/jit.erl:4087-4093 | libs/jit/src/jit.erl:4104-4110 — 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 (7 lines × 4) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:2135— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:2135-2141 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2746-2752 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:3115-3121 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:2920-2926 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 42 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 511 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 × 4) libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:469— libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:469-475 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:484-490 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:970-976 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:987-993 — 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) libs/jit/src/jit.erl:363— libs/jit/src/jit.erl:363-367 | libs/jit/src/jit.erl:380-384 | libs/jit/src/jit.erl:1733-1737 | libs/jit/src/jit.erl:2635-2639 — 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) libs/jit/src/jit.erl:1661— libs/jit/src/jit.erl:1661-1665 | libs/jit/src/jit.erl:1678-1682 | libs/jit/src/jit.erl:1692-1696 | libs/jit/src/jit.erl:1709-1713 — 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) libs/jit/src/jit.erl:951— libs/jit/src/jit.erl:951-955 | libs/jit/src/jit.erl:1176-1180 | libs/jit/src/jit.erl:1185-1189 | libs/jit/src/jit.erl:2298-2303 — 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.
HackComment libs/alisp/src/alisp.erl:26— % Hack: workaround missing code load — a workaround marked in source: record what it is compensating for and what would allow its removal (the upstream fix, the API it is waiting on, the invariant it restores), so the next reader can judge whether it is still needed rather than rediscovering why it is there.
HackComment libs/alisp/src/arepl.erl:26— % HACK: workaround missing code load — a workaround marked in source: record what it is compensating for and what would allow its removal (the upstream fix, the API it is waiting on, the invariant it restores), so the next reader can judge whether it is still needed rather than rediscovering why it is there.
Near-duplicate member pair (53 shared lines) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1648— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1648-1787 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2160-2377 — These two members are variants of one another: 53 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 (53 shared lines) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2382— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2382-2466 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:2719-2811 — These two members are variants of one another: 53 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 (28 shared lines) libs/jit/src/jit.erl:4017— libs/jit/src/jit.erl:4017-4064 | libs/jit/src/jit.erl:4066-4110 — These two members are variants of one another: 28 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 (28 shared lines) libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:1711— libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:1711-1836 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:2416-2553 — These two members are variants of one another: 28 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.
Duplicated block (24 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:3291— libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:3291-3314 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:3321-3344 — 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 × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:3360— libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:3360-3383 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:3390-3413 — 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) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1480— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1480-1501 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:1720-1741 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 56 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 685 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 (22 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2434— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2434-2455 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:2775-2796 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 124 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 1506 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 (21 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2256— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2256-2276 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:2581-2601 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 124 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 1506 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 (21 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2754— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2754-2774 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:3123-3143 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 124 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 1506 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 (19 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2213— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2213-2231 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:2537-2555 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 124 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 1506 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 (19 lines × 2) examples/erlang/rp2/picow_tcp_server.erl:71— examples/erlang/rp2/picow_tcp_server.erl:71-89 | examples/erlang/tcp_socket_server.erl:54-72 — 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 (18 lines × 3) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2000— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2000-2017 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:2323-2340 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:2235-2252 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 124 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 1506 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 (18 lines × 3) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2095— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2095-2112 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:2418-2435 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:2345-2362 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 124 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 1506 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 (17–18 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:830— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:830-847 | libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:850-866 — 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 (17–18 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:3057— libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:3057-3073 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:2859-2876 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 51 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 607 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 (16 lines × 3) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64_asm.erl:689— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64_asm.erl:689-704 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32_asm.erl:90-105 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m_asm.erl:95-110 — 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.
Duplicated block (16 lines × 3) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1874— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1874-1889 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:2197-2212 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:2060-2075 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 124 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 1506 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (14–16 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:620— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:620-633 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:722-737 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 124 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 1506 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (14–16 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2623— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2623-2636 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:2971-2986 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 124 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 1506 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (14–15 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64_asm.erl:646— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64_asm.erl:646-659 | libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64_asm.erl:667-681 — 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 (14–15 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_riscv32_asm.erl:755— libs/jit/src/jit_riscv32_asm.erl:755-769 | libs/jit/src/jit_riscv32_asm.erl:887-900 — 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 × 5) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:413— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:413-426 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:433-446 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:537-550 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:382-395 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:488-501 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 42 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 511 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (14 lines × 5) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:2185— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:2185-2198 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2803-2816 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:3171-3184 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:2258-2271 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:2983-2996 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 42 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 511 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 (12–14 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:1087— libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:1087-1098 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:1313-1326 — 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 (12–14 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:1102— libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:1102-1113 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:1334-1347 — 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 (10–13 lines × 2) libs/estdlib/src/gen_server.erl:467— libs/estdlib/src/gen_server.erl:467-476 | libs/estdlib/src/gen_server.erl:537-549 — 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 (10–13 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit.erl:3886— libs/jit/src/jit.erl:3886-3895 | libs/jit/src/jit.erl:3931-3943 — 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 (10–12 lines × 2) libs/estdlib/src/gen_server.erl:559— libs/estdlib/src/gen_server.erl:559-570 | libs/estdlib/src/gen_server.erl:577-586 — 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 (10–12 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:794— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:794-803 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:900-911 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 124 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 1506 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 (11 lines × 4) libs/avm_rp2/src/i2c.erl:605— libs/avm_rp2/src/i2c.erl:605-615 | libs/avm_rp2/src/spi.erl:454-464 | libs/avm_stm32/src/i2c.erl:443-453 | libs/avm_stm32/src/spi.erl:432-442 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/avm_rp2/src/i2c.erl` and `libs/avm_stm32/src/i2c.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 5 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.
Duplicated block (11 lines × 4) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:2200— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:2200-2210 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:3186-3196 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:2273-2283 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:2998-3008 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 45 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 551 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 (9–11 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64_asm.erl:128— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64_asm.erl:128-138 | libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64_asm.erl:1005-1013 — 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 (9–11 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:844— libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:844-852 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:854-864 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (9–10 lines × 3) libs/estdlib/src/gen_server.erl:544— libs/estdlib/src/gen_server.erl:544-552 | libs/estdlib/src/gen_server.erl:563-572 | libs/estdlib/src/gen_server.erl:580-588 — 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 (9–10 lines × 3) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1900— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1900-1909 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2533-2541 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:2878-2887 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 42 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 511 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 (7–10 lines × 3) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2186— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2186-2195 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2226-2233 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2272-2278 — 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 (7–10 lines × 3) libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:2509— libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:2509-2518 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:2550-2557 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:2597-2603 — 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 (7 lines × 5) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:2586— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:2586-2592 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:3367-3373 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:3857-3863 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:2599-2606 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:3816-3822 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 42 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 511 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 × 5) libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64_asm.erl:319— libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64_asm.erl:319-325 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64_asm.erl:417-424 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64_asm.erl:430-436 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64_asm.erl:442-448 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64_asm.erl:461-467 — 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 (3–7 lines × 5) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1661— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1661-1668 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:2494-2496 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:2524-2531 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:1724-1731 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:2429-2435 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 45 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 551 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 (3–7 lines × 5) libs/jit/src/jit.erl:764— libs/jit/src/jit.erl:764-766 | libs/jit/src/jit.erl:1544-1546 | libs/jit/src/jit.erl:4247-4252 | libs/jit/src/jit.erl:4274-4276 | libs/jit/src/jit.erl:4469-4475 — 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 (6–7 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_riscv32_asm.erl:519— libs/jit/src/jit_riscv32_asm.erl:519-524 | libs/jit/src/jit_riscv64_asm.erl:295-301 — 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 (6–7 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:1456— libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:1456-1462 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:1482-1487 — 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 × 4) libs/jit/src/jit_wasm32.erl:872— libs/jit/src/jit_wasm32.erl:872-877 | libs/jit/src/jit_wasm32.erl:887-892 | libs/jit/src/jit_wasm32.erl:905-910 | libs/jit/src/jit_wasm32.erl:919-924 — 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) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1121— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1121-1128 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1362-1369 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:1646-1651 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:1539-1544 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 42 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 511 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 × 5) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1148— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1148-1156 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1387-1395 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:1682-1690 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:1097-1105 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:1562-1566 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 42 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 511 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 × 5) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2982— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2982-2986 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:3362-3366 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:2418-2423 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:2447-2456 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:3140-3144 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 124 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 1506 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.
jit.first_pass (cyclomatic 170) libs/jit/src/jit.erl:198— jit.first_pass has cyclomatic complexity 170 (threshold 15). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Where every arm is uniform — the same kind of value, with no behaviour of its own — a table keyed by the case is the shorter form; wherever the arms carry different data or different behaviour, keep them as cases, because collapsing those trades an explicit, reviewable set of cases for nothing. This file is where this pass's cyclomatic complexity CONCENTRATES: libs/jit/src/jit.erl holds 3 of the 40 functions over the threshold — including the worst — and 192 of the 692 points over it (28%), 2.4× the next-largest file (libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl at 80). 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.
jit_xtensa.if_block_cond (cyclomatic 78) libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:930— jit_xtensa.if_block_cond has cyclomatic complexity 78 (threshold 15). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Where every arm is uniform — the same kind of value, with no behaviour of its own — a table keyed by the case is the shorter form; wherever the arms carry different data or different behaviour, keep them as cases, because collapsing those trades an explicit, reviewable set of cases for nothing.
jit_armv6m.if_block_cond (cyclomatic 69) libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:1167— jit_armv6m.if_block_cond has cyclomatic complexity 69 (threshold 15). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Where every arm is uniform — the same kind of value, with no behaviour of its own — a table keyed by the case is the shorter form; wherever the arms carry different data or different behaviour, keep them as cases, because collapsing those trades an explicit, reviewable set of cases for nothing.
jit_x86_64_asm.movq (cyclomatic 57) libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64_asm.erl:92— jit_x86_64_asm.movq has cyclomatic complexity 57 (threshold 15). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Where every arm is uniform — the same kind of value, with no behaviour of its own — a table keyed by the case is the shorter form; wherever the arms carry different data or different behaviour, keep them as cases, because collapsing those trades an explicit, reviewable set of cases for nothing.
jit_x86_64.if_block_cond0 (cyclomatic 54) libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:805— jit_x86_64.if_block_cond0 has cyclomatic complexity 54 (threshold 15). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Where every arm is uniform — the same kind of value, with no behaviour of its own — a table keyed by the case is the shorter form; wherever the arms carry different data or different behaviour, keep them as cases, because collapsing those trades an explicit, reviewable set of cases for nothing.
atomvm_stm32_config_query.get_f4dev_config (cyclomatic 52) src/platforms/stm32/tools/atomvm_stm32_config_query.erl:180— atomvm_stm32_config_query.get_f4dev_config has cyclomatic complexity 52 (threshold 15). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Where every arm is uniform — the same kind of value, with no behaviour of its own — a table keyed by the case is the shorter form; wherever the arms carry different data or different behaviour, keep them as cases, because collapsing those trades an explicit, reviewable set of cases for nothing.
jit_arm32.if_block_cond (cyclomatic 48) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:935— jit_arm32.if_block_cond has cyclomatic complexity 48 (threshold 15). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Where every arm is uniform — the same kind of value, with no behaviour of its own — a table keyed by the case is the shorter form; wherever the arms carry different data or different behaviour, keep them as cases, because collapsing those trades an explicit, reviewable set of cases for nothing.
atomvm_stm32_config_query.get_l4dev_config (cyclomatic 44) src/platforms/stm32/tools/atomvm_stm32_config_query.erl:502— atomvm_stm32_config_query.get_l4dev_config has cyclomatic complexity 44 (threshold 15). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Where every arm is uniform — the same kind of value, with no behaviour of its own — a table keyed by the case is the shorter form; wherever the arms carry different data or different behaviour, keep them as cases, because collapsing those trades an explicit, reviewable set of cases for nothing.
jit_aarch64.if_block_cond (cyclomatic 38) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:792— jit_aarch64.if_block_cond has cyclomatic complexity 38 (threshold 15). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Where every arm is uniform — the same kind of value, with no behaviour of its own — a table keyed by the case is the shorter form; wherever the arms carry different data or different behaviour, keep them as cases, because collapsing those trades an explicit, reviewable set of cases for nothing.
io_lib.format_spw (cyclomatic 37) libs/estdlib/src/io_lib.erl:270— io_lib.format_spw has cyclomatic complexity 37 (threshold 15). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Where every arm is uniform — the same kind of value, with no behaviour of its own — a table keyed by the case is the shorter form; wherever the arms carry different data or different behaviour, keep them as cases, because collapsing those trades an explicit, reviewable set of cases for nothing.
jit.first_pass_bs_create_bin_compute_size (cyclomatic 35) libs/jit/src/jit.erl:2651— jit.first_pass_bs_create_bin_compute_size has cyclomatic complexity 35 (threshold 15). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Where every arm is uniform — the same kind of value, with no behaviour of its own — a table keyed by the case is the shorter form; wherever the arms carry different data or different behaviour, keep them as cases, because collapsing those trades an explicit, reviewable set of cases for nothing. This file is where this pass's cyclomatic complexity CONCENTRATES: libs/jit/src/jit.erl holds 3 of the 40 functions over the threshold — including the worst — and 192 of the 692 points over it (28%), 2.4× the next-largest file (libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl at 80). 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.
jit.op_gc_bif2 (cyclomatic 32) libs/jit/src/jit.erl:3347— jit.op_gc_bif2 has cyclomatic complexity 32 (threshold 15). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Where every arm is uniform — the same kind of value, with no behaviour of its own — a table keyed by the case is the shorter form; wherever the arms carry different data or different behaviour, keep them as cases, because collapsing those trades an explicit, reviewable set of cases for nothing. This file is where this pass's cyclomatic complexity CONCENTRATES: libs/jit/src/jit.erl holds 3 of the 40 functions over the threshold — including the worst — and 192 of the 692 points over it (28%), 2.4× the next-largest file (libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl at 80). 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.
jit_precompile.compile (cyclomatic 32) libs/jit/src/jit_precompile.erl:63— jit_precompile.compile has cyclomatic complexity 32 (threshold 15). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Where every arm is uniform — the same kind of value, with no behaviour of its own — a table keyed by the case is the shorter form; wherever the arms carry different data or different behaviour, keep them as cases, because collapsing those trades an explicit, reviewable set of cases for nothing.
eunit.test (cyclomatic 30) libs/etest/src/eunit.erl:85— eunit.test has cyclomatic complexity 30 (threshold 15). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Where every arm is uniform — the same kind of value, with no behaviour of its own — a table keyed by the case is the shorter form; wherever the arms carry different data or different behaviour, keep them as cases, because collapsing those trades an explicit, reviewable set of cases for nothing.
ahttp_client.parse_line (cyclomatic 28) libs/avm_network/src/ahttp_client.erl:421— ahttp_client.parse_line has cyclomatic complexity 28 (threshold 15). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Where every arm is uniform — the same kind of value, with no behaviour of its own — a table keyed by the case is the shorter form; wherever the arms carry different data or different behaviour, keep them as cases, because collapsing those trades an explicit, reviewable set of cases for nothing.
jit_armv6m.call_func_ptr (cyclomatic 26) libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:1781— jit_armv6m.call_func_ptr has cyclomatic complexity 26 (threshold 15). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Where every arm is uniform — the same kind of value, with no behaviour of its own — a table keyed by the case is the shorter form; wherever the arms carry different data or different behaviour, keep them as cases, because collapsing those trades an explicit, reviewable set of cases for nothing.
gen_tcp_socket.handle_call (cyclomatic 25) libs/estdlib/src/gen_tcp_socket.erl:240— gen_tcp_socket.handle_call has cyclomatic complexity 25 (threshold 15). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Where every arm is uniform — the same kind of value, with no behaviour of its own — a table keyed by the case is the shorter form; wherever the arms carry different data or different behaviour, keep them as cases, because collapsing those trades an explicit, reviewable set of cases for nothing.
atomvm_stm32_config_query.get_dev_config (cyclomatic 25) src/platforms/stm32/tools/atomvm_stm32_config_query.erl:63— atomvm_stm32_config_query.get_dev_config has cyclomatic complexity 25 (threshold 15). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Where every arm is uniform — the same kind of value, with no behaviour of its own — a table keyed by the case is the shorter form; wherever the arms carry different data or different behaviour, keep them as cases, because collapsing those trades an explicit, reviewable set of cases for nothing.
spi.handle_request (cyclomatic 23) libs/avm_stm32/src/spi.erl:507— spi.handle_request has cyclomatic complexity 23 (threshold 15). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Where every arm is uniform — the same kind of value, with no behaviour of its own — a table keyed by the case is the shorter form; wherever the arms carry different data or different behaviour, keep them as cases, because collapsing those trades an explicit, reviewable set of cases for nothing.
inet.getaddr (cyclomatic 22) libs/estdlib/src/inet.erl:100— inet.getaddr has cyclomatic complexity 22 (threshold 15). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Where every arm is uniform — the same kind of value, with no behaviour of its own — a table keyed by the case is the shorter form; wherever the arms carry different data or different behaviour, keep them as cases, because collapsing those trades an explicit, reviewable set of cases for nothing.
jit_xtensa.mul (cyclomatic 22) libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:3742— jit_xtensa.mul has cyclomatic complexity 22 (threshold 15). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Where every arm is uniform — the same kind of value, with no behaviour of its own — a table keyed by the case is the shorter form; wherever the arms carry different data or different behaviour, keep them as cases, because collapsing those trades an explicit, reviewable set of cases for nothing.
gen_server.handle_msg (cyclomatic 21) libs/estdlib/src/gen_server.erl:494— gen_server.handle_msg has cyclomatic complexity 21 (threshold 15). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Where every arm is uniform — the same kind of value, with no behaviour of its own — a table keyed by the case is the shorter form; wherever the arms carry different data or different behaviour, keep them as cases, because collapsing those trades an explicit, reviewable set of cases for nothing.
jit_arm32.call_func_ptr (cyclomatic 21) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1480— jit_arm32.call_func_ptr has cyclomatic complexity 21 (threshold 15). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Where every arm is uniform — the same kind of value, with no behaviour of its own — a table keyed by the case is the shorter form; wherever the arms carry different data or different behaviour, keep them as cases, because collapsing those trades an explicit, reviewable set of cases for nothing.
jit_riscv64_asm.li (cyclomatic 21) libs/jit/src/jit_riscv64_asm.erl:338— jit_riscv64_asm.li has cyclomatic complexity 21 (threshold 15). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Where every arm is uniform — the same kind of value, with no behaviour of its own — a table keyed by the case is the shorter form; wherever the arms carry different data or different behaviour, keep them as cases, because collapsing those trades an explicit, reviewable set of cases for nothing.
jit_xtensa.move_to_vm_register_emit (cyclomatic 21) libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:2210— jit_xtensa.move_to_vm_register_emit has cyclomatic complexity 21 (threshold 15). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Where every arm is uniform — the same kind of value, with no behaviour of its own — a table keyed by the case is the shorter form; wherever the arms carry different data or different behaviour, keep them as cases, because collapsing those trades an explicit, reviewable set of cases for nothing.
proc_lib.start0 (cyclomatic 19) libs/estdlib/src/proc_lib.erl:194— proc_lib.start0 has cyclomatic complexity 19 (threshold 15). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Where every arm is uniform — the same kind of value, with no behaviour of its own — a table keyed by the case is the shorter form; wherever the arms carry different data or different behaviour, keep them as cases, because collapsing those trades an explicit, reviewable set of cases for nothing.
jit_x86_64.and_ (cyclomatic 19) libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:2410— jit_x86_64.and_ has cyclomatic complexity 19 (threshold 15). To reduce it, name the conditions — but note WHERE they are: these tests sit in guard sequences, and a guard is a restricted expression sublanguage that allows neither binding a local nor calling a function you wrote, so neither of those moves is available in place. Move the decision out of the guard instead: keep one clause with a permissive guard, compute the compound test in the body through named predicate functions, and dispatch on their result. Where the clauses genuinely differ by pattern rather than by test, keep the patterns and lift only the comma-conjunctions. This is NOT this file's highest cyclomatic complexity: jit_x86_64.move_to_vm_register_emit (cyclomatic 28) 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 function is counted neither in this dimension's figures nor in its score.
jit_x86_64.move_to_array_element (cyclomatic 19) libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:1986— jit_x86_64.move_to_array_element has cyclomatic complexity 19 (threshold 15). To reduce it, name the conditions — but note WHERE they are: these tests sit in guard sequences, and a guard is a restricted expression sublanguage that allows neither binding a local nor calling a function you wrote, so neither of those moves is available in place. Move the decision out of the guard instead: keep one clause with a permissive guard, compute the compound test in the body through named predicate functions, and dispatch on their result. Where the clauses genuinely differ by pattern rather than by test, keep the patterns and lift only the comma-conjunctions. This is NOT this file's highest cyclomatic complexity: jit_x86_64.move_to_vm_register_emit (cyclomatic 28) 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 function is counted neither in this dimension's figures nor in its score.
jit_xtensa.call_func_ptr (cyclomatic 19) libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:1720— jit_xtensa.call_func_ptr has cyclomatic complexity 19 (threshold 15). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Where every arm is uniform — the same kind of value, with no behaviour of its own — a table keyed by the case is the shorter form; wherever the arms carry different data or different behaviour, keep them as cases, because collapsing those trades an explicit, reviewable set of cases for nothing.
network.handle_call (cyclomatic 18) libs/avm_network/src/network.erl:721— network.handle_call has cyclomatic complexity 18 (threshold 15). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Where every arm is uniform — the same kind of value, with no behaviour of its own — a table keyed by the case is the shorter form; wherever the arms carry different data or different behaviour, keep them as cases, because collapsing those trades an explicit, reviewable set of cases for nothing. This is NOT this file's highest cyclomatic complexity: network.handle_info (cyclomatic 20) 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 function is counted neither in this dimension's figures nor in its score.
json.reduce_value (cyclomatic 18) libs/estdlib/src/json.erl:305— json.reduce_value has cyclomatic complexity 18 (threshold 15). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Where every arm is uniform — the same kind of value, with no behaviour of its own — a table keyed by the case is the shorter form; wherever the arms carry different data or different behaviour, keep them as cases, because collapsing those trades an explicit, reviewable set of cases for nothing. This is NOT this file's highest cyclomatic complexity: json.scan_value (cyclomatic 22) 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 function is counted neither in this dimension's figures nor in its score.
gen_udp_socket.handle_call (cyclomatic 17) libs/estdlib/src/gen_udp_socket.erl:172— gen_udp_socket.handle_call has cyclomatic complexity 17 (threshold 15). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Where every arm is uniform — the same kind of value, with no behaviour of its own — a table keyed by the case is the shorter form; wherever the arms carry different data or different behaviour, keep them as cases, because collapsing those trades an explicit, reviewable set of cases for nothing.
serial_dist.coordinator_loop (cyclomatic 17) libs/estdlib/src/serial_dist.erl:229— serial_dist.coordinator_loop has cyclomatic complexity 17 (threshold 15). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Where every arm is uniform — the same kind of value, with no behaviour of its own — a table keyed by the case is the shorter form; wherever the arms carry different data or different behaviour, keep them as cases, because collapsing those trades an explicit, reviewable set of cases for nothing.
supervisor.handle_info (cyclomatic 17) libs/estdlib/src/supervisor.erl:384— supervisor.handle_info has cyclomatic complexity 17 (threshold 15). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Where every arm is uniform — the same kind of value, with no behaviour of its own — a table keyed by the case is the shorter form; wherever the arms carry different data or different behaviour, keep them as cases, because collapsing those trades an explicit, reviewable set of cases for nothing. This is NOT this file's highest cyclomatic complexity: supervisor.handle_call (cyclomatic 25) 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 function is counted neither in this dimension's figures nor in its score.
jit_arm32.move_to_array_element (cyclomatic 17) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2472— jit_arm32.move_to_array_element has cyclomatic complexity 17 (threshold 15). To reduce it, name the conditions — but note WHERE they are: these tests sit in guard sequences, and a guard is a restricted expression sublanguage that allows neither binding a local nor calling a function you wrote, so neither of those moves is available in place. Move the decision out of the guard instead: keep one clause with a permissive guard, compute the compound test in the body through named predicate functions, and dispatch on their result. Where the clauses genuinely differ by pattern rather than by test, keep the patterns and lift only the comma-conjunctions. This is NOT this file's highest cyclomatic complexity: jit_arm32.move_array_element (cyclomatic 19) 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 function is counted neither in this dimension's figures nor in its score.
jit_armv6m.move_to_array_element (cyclomatic 17) libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:2817— jit_armv6m.move_to_array_element has cyclomatic complexity 17 (threshold 15). To reduce it, name the conditions — but note WHERE they are: these tests sit in guard sequences, and a guard is a restricted expression sublanguage that allows neither binding a local nor calling a function you wrote, so neither of those moves is available in place. Move the decision out of the guard instead: keep one clause with a permissive guard, compute the compound test in the body through named predicate functions, and dispatch on their result. Where the clauses genuinely differ by pattern rather than by test, keep the patterns and lift only the comma-conjunctions. This is NOT this file's highest cyclomatic complexity: jit_armv6m.move_array_element (cyclomatic 19) 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 function is counted neither in this dimension's figures nor in its score.
jit_aarch64_asm.try_encode_single_pattern (cyclomatic 16) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64_asm.erl:430— jit_aarch64_asm.try_encode_single_pattern has cyclomatic complexity 16 (threshold 15). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Where every arm is uniform — the same kind of value, with no behaviour of its own — a table keyed by the case is the shorter form; wherever the arms carry different data or different behaviour, keep them as cases, because collapsing those trades an explicit, reviewable set of cases for nothing. This is NOT this file's highest cyclomatic complexity: jit_aarch64_asm.reg_to_num (cyclomatic 33) 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 function is counted neither in this dimension's figures nor in its score.
jit_armv6m_asm.adds (cyclomatic 16) libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m_asm.erl:197— jit_armv6m_asm.adds has cyclomatic complexity 16 (threshold 15). To reduce it, name the conditions — but note WHERE they are: these tests sit in guard sequences, and a guard is a restricted expression sublanguage that allows neither binding a local nor calling a function you wrote, so neither of those moves is available in place. Move the decision out of the guard instead: keep one clause with a permissive guard, compute the compound test in the body through named predicate functions, and dispatch on their result. Where the clauses genuinely differ by pattern rather than by test, keep the patterns and lift only the comma-conjunctions. This shape REPEATS in the file: one other method here (jit_armv6m_asm.subs) 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. This is NOT this file's highest cyclomatic complexity: jit_armv6m_asm.reg_to_num (cyclomatic 19) 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 function is counted neither in this dimension's figures nor in its score.
jit_armv6m_asm.subs (cyclomatic 16) libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m_asm.erl:595— jit_armv6m_asm.subs has cyclomatic complexity 16 (threshold 15). To reduce it, name the conditions — but note WHERE they are: these tests sit in guard sequences, and a guard is a restricted expression sublanguage that allows neither binding a local nor calling a function you wrote, so neither of those moves is available in place. Move the decision out of the guard instead: keep one clause with a permissive guard, compute the compound test in the body through named predicate functions, and dispatch on their result. Where the clauses genuinely differ by pattern rather than by test, keep the patterns and lift only the comma-conjunctions. This shape REPEATS in the file: one other method here (jit_armv6m_asm.adds) 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. This is NOT this file's highest cyclomatic complexity: jit_armv6m_asm.reg_to_num (cyclomatic 19) 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 function is counted neither in this dimension's figures nor in its score.
jit_x86_64.call_func_ptr (cyclomatic 16) libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:1199— jit_x86_64.call_func_ptr has cyclomatic complexity 16 (threshold 15). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Where every arm is uniform — the same kind of value, with no behaviour of its own — a table keyed by the case is the shorter form; wherever the arms carry different data or different behaviour, keep them as cases, because collapsing those trades an explicit, reviewable set of cases for nothing. This is NOT this file's highest cyclomatic complexity: jit_x86_64.move_to_vm_register_emit (cyclomatic 28) 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 function is counted neither in this dimension's figures nor in its score.
No assertions: should list examples src/platforms/emscripten/tests/cypress/e2e/examples.spec.cy.js:21— This method's body runs code, and no assertion call was recognised in it. Recognised by name: Assert*, *Should*/ShouldBe*, Verify, Expect, Throws, Record, Received/DidNotReceive, MustHaveHappened/MustNotHaveHappened, EnsureSuccessStatusCode and *AndEnsure* — so verification routed through a helper of your own naming, through a base-class or callback object whose members hold the assertions, or through a harness that fails by throwing under some other name, is not visible to this check and is not counted here. Read it as 'no assertion this check knows how to see', and if that is right, add one.
Hotspot: libs/estdlib/src/supervisor.erl libs/estdlib/src/supervisor.erl:384— libs/estdlib/src/supervisor.erl changed 2 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 17 in supervisor.handle_info at line 384. 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 2026-06-30..2026-09-28, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-06-30 22:48:33 +02:00' --until='2026-09-28 22:48:33 +02:00' --full-history --no-merges -- libs/estdlib/src/supervisor.erl`: 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.
jit_xtensa.if_block_cond (cognitive 85) libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:930— jit_xtensa.if_block_cond has cognitive complexity 85 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: match/switch 68 (69 pts), boolean chains 16 (nesting depth added 1). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.
jit_armv6m.if_block_cond (cognitive 58) libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:1167— jit_armv6m.if_block_cond has cognitive complexity 58 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: match/switch 35, boolean chains 23. To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.
jit_x86_64.if_block_cond0 (cognitive 50) libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:805— jit_x86_64.if_block_cond0 has cognitive complexity 50 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: match/switch 38, boolean chains 12. To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.
atomvm_stm32_config_query.get_f4dev_config (cognitive 50) src/platforms/stm32/tools/atomvm_stm32_config_query.erl:180— atomvm_stm32_config_query.get_f4dev_config has cognitive complexity 50 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: match/switch 34 (50 pts) (nesting depth added 16). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.
atomvm_stm32_config_query.get_l4dev_config (cognitive 50) src/platforms/stm32/tools/atomvm_stm32_config_query.erl:502— atomvm_stm32_config_query.get_l4dev_config has cognitive complexity 50 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: match/switch 34 (50 pts) (nesting depth added 16). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.
jit.first_pass (cognitive 42) libs/jit/src/jit.erl:198— jit.first_pass has cognitive complexity 42 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: match/switch 26 (28 pts), if/else 11, boolean chains 3 (nesting depth added 2). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.
jit_arm32.if_block_cond (cognitive 41) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:935— jit_arm32.if_block_cond has cognitive complexity 41 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: match/switch 32, boolean chains 9. To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.
atomvm_stm32_config_query.get_dev_config (cognitive 38) src/platforms/stm32/tools/atomvm_stm32_config_query.erl:63— atomvm_stm32_config_query.get_dev_config has cognitive complexity 38 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: match/switch 26 (38 pts) (nesting depth added 12). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.
inet.getaddr (cognitive 36) libs/estdlib/src/inet.erl:100— inet.getaddr has cognitive complexity 36 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: match/switch 7 (14 pts), if/else 3 (13 pts), loops 2 (6 pts), boolean chains 2, error handling 1 (nesting depth added 21). 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.
jit_aarch64.if_block_cond (cognitive 35) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:792— jit_aarch64.if_block_cond has cognitive complexity 35 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: match/switch 30, boolean chains 4, error handling 1. To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.
jit_precompile.compile (cognitive 32) libs/jit/src/jit_precompile.erl:63— jit_precompile.compile has cognitive complexity 32 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: match/switch 15 (30 pts), error handling 2 (nesting depth added 15). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.
jit_riscv64_asm.li (cognitive 32) libs/jit/src/jit_riscv64_asm.erl:338— jit_riscv64_asm.li has cognitive complexity 32 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: match/switch 13 (18 pts), if/else 9, boolean chains 5 (nesting depth added 5). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.
jit.first_pass_bs_create_bin_compute_size (cognitive 30) libs/jit/src/jit.erl:2651— jit.first_pass_bs_create_bin_compute_size has cognitive complexity 30 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: match/switch 15 (17 pts), boolean chains 11, if/else 2 (nesting depth added 2). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.
jit_armv6m.call_func_ptr (cognitive 28) libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:1781— jit_armv6m.call_func_ptr has cognitive complexity 28 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: match/switch 21 (28 pts) (nesting depth added 7). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.
network.update_config (cognitive 26) libs/avm_network/src/network.erl:1077— network.update_config has cognitive complexity 26 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: match/switch 14 (25 pts), error handling 1 (nesting depth added 11). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.
serial_dist_controller.scan_frame (cognitive 24) libs/estdlib/src/serial_dist_controller.erl:332— serial_dist_controller.scan_frame has cognitive complexity 24 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: match/switch 9 (24 pts) (nesting depth added 15). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.
proc_lib.start0 (cognitive 23) libs/estdlib/src/proc_lib.erl:194— proc_lib.start0 has cognitive complexity 23 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: match/switch 13 (22 pts), if/else 1 (nesting depth added 9). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.
jit_x86_64_asm.movq (cognitive 23) libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64_asm.erl:92— jit_x86_64_asm.movq has cognitive complexity 23 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: boolean chains 18, match/switch 5. The drivers above price the dispatch low by construction — a dispatch is charged once however many cases it lists, while each branch inside an arm is charged in full — so most of this count is what the case bodies hold, and the arms are where it can be reduced. To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.
socket.recv0_r (cognitive 22) libs/estdlib/src/socket.erl:428— socket.recv0_r has cognitive complexity 22 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: match/switch 10 (22 pts) (nesting depth added 12). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.
spi.handle_request (cognitive 21) libs/avm_stm32/src/spi.erl:507— spi.handle_request has cognitive complexity 21 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: match/switch 12 (20 pts), if/else 1 (nesting depth added 8). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.
gen_tcp_socket.handle_call (cognitive 21) libs/estdlib/src/gen_tcp_socket.erl:240— gen_tcp_socket.handle_call has cognitive complexity 21 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: match/switch 16 (19 pts), boolean chains 2 (nesting depth added 3). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.
io_lib.format_spw (cognitive 21) libs/estdlib/src/io_lib.erl:270— io_lib.format_spw has cognitive complexity 21 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: match/switch 10 (11 pts), loops 6 (10 pts) (nesting depth added 5). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.
jit_arm32.call_func_ptr (cognitive 20) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1480— jit_arm32.call_func_ptr has cognitive complexity 20 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: match/switch 17 (20 pts) (nesting depth added 3). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.
atomvm_stm32_config_query.get_g4dev_config (cognitive 20) src/platforms/stm32/tools/atomvm_stm32_config_query.erl:464— atomvm_stm32_config_query.get_g4dev_config has cognitive complexity 20 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: match/switch 14 (20 pts) (nesting depth added 6). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.
jit_xtensa.call_func_ptr (cognitive 19) libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:1720— jit_xtensa.call_func_ptr has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: match/switch 10 (15 pts), if/else 2 (3 pts), loops 1 (nesting depth added 6). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.
erl_epmd.receive_port2_resp (cognitive 16) libs/estdlib/src/erl_epmd.erl:285— erl_epmd.receive_port2_resp has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: match/switch 6 (16 pts) (nesting depth added 10). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.
gen_udp_socket.handle_call (cognitive 16) libs/estdlib/src/gen_udp_socket.erl:172— gen_udp_socket.handle_call has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: match/switch 12 (15 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 3). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.
jit_xtensa.move_to_vm_register_emit (cognitive 16) libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:2210— jit_xtensa.move_to_vm_register_emit has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: match/switch 14, boolean chains 2. To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.
Change coupling: jit.erl ↔ jit_x86_64_asm.erl libs/jit/src/jit.erl:1— `libs/jit/src/jit.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64_asm.erl` change together 53% of the time (17 of the 32 commits that touched whichever of the two files changed less often, counting a file under its earlier names as well — a repo-wide or module-wide sweep is evidence about the sweep rather than about any pair inside it and is left out of BOTH sides of this ratio, while a dependency bump, a formatter/rename sweep, or a commit whose edit to one of the two files was a tool directive such as //go:generate or whitespace only is left out of the shared count ONLY, so the two sides are not taken over identical commit sets) with no explicit dependency between them. They sit in the same directory, but in this ecosystem each file is its own module — a sibling reference still needs an import — so the missing import edge is real: the coupling runs through shared behaviour, not a declared dependency. If they duplicate structure, extract the common part into one unit; otherwise the coupling is hidden and worth breaking. You can check this without leaving the row: of the 17 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `a6254027` JIT: optimize op_gc_bif2 with band/bor/bxor; `27f0b8ac` JIT: make imported functions available to compiler; `d066709f` Fix JIT bs_get_binary2 with compile-time integer size — run `git show` on any of them.
D4 · Code Duplication· Near-duplicate member family (4 members, 32 shared lines) · ×1
Near-duplicate member family (4 members, 32 shared lines) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1970— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1970-2094 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:2943-3085 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:2081-2212 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:2721-2889 — These 4 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 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, 25 shared lines) · ×1
Near-duplicate member family (4 members, 25 shared lines) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1970— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1970-2094 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2595-2716 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:2943-3085 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:2081-2212 — These 4 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 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) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:2532— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:2532-2611 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:3313-3401 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:3808-3890 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:3742-3852 — 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) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:687— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:687-734 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:832-879 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:1046-1093 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:696-748 — 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, 15 shared lines) · ×1
Near-duplicate member family (4 members, 15 shared lines) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:2106— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:2106-2154 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2719-2780 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:3088-3149 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:2892-2961 — These 4 members are variants of one another: a block of 15 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, 48 shared lines) · ×1
Near-duplicate member family (3 members, 48 shared lines) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1846— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1846-1899 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:2169-2222 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:2032-2085 — These 3 members are variants of one another: a block of 48 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 (114 shared lines) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2160— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2160-2377 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:2483-2714 — These two members are variants of one another: 114 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 (80 shared lines) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1480— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1480-1696 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:1720-1923 — These two members are variants of one another: 80 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 (75 shared lines) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1648— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1648-1787 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:1711-1836 — These two members are variants of one another: 75 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 (55 shared lines) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:564— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:564-633 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:665-737 — These two members are variants of one another: 55 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 (51 shared lines) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1648— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1648-1787 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:2416-2553 — These two members are variants of one another: 51 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 (47 shared lines) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2160— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2160-2377 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:2416-2553 — These two members are variants of one another: 47 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 (46 shared lines) libs/estdlib/src/gen_tcp_socket.erl:240— libs/estdlib/src/gen_tcp_socket.erl:240-346 | libs/estdlib/src/gen_udp_socket.erl:172-238 — These two members are variants of one another: 46 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) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2472— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2472-2523 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:2817-2868 — 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 (31 shared lines) libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m_asm.erl:261— libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m_asm.erl:261-308 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m_asm.erl:360-395 — These two members are variants of one another: 31 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) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:3651— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:3651-3711 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:4221-4278 — 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.
Near-duplicate member pair (27 shared lines) libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:3508— libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:3508-3544 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:3562-3598 — These two members are variants of one another: 27 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 (17 shared lines) libs/avm_rp2/src/i2c.erl:631— libs/avm_rp2/src/i2c.erl:631-681 | libs/avm_stm32/src/i2c.erl:469-517 — These two members are variants of one another: 17 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 (20 corresponding lines) · ×1
Edited copy of a member (20 corresponding lines) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1389— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1389-1408 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:1345-1364 — 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 (15 corresponding lines) · ×1
Edited copy of a member (15 corresponding lines) libs/jit/src/jit.erl:3312— libs/jit/src/jit.erl:3312-3326 | libs/jit/src/jit.erl:3585-3599 — 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 (10 members, 50+ identical tokens) · ×1
Members sharing a duplicated core (10 members, 50+ identical tokens) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1142— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1142-1174 | libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1178-1210 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1381-1413 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1417-1449 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:1676-1711 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:1715-1750 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:1091-1124 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:1135-1168 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:1556-1633 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:1655-1687 — 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 (9 members, 50+ identical tokens) · ×1
Members sharing a duplicated core (9 members, 50+ identical tokens) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:3102— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:3102-3124 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:3126-3150 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:3152-3170 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:3293-3311 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:3600-3621 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:3784-3805 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:3132-3275 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:3277-3344 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:3346-3413 — 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.
D4 · Code Duplication· Members sharing a duplicated core (8 members, 50+ identical tokens) · ×1
Members sharing a duplicated core (8 members, 50+ identical tokens) libs/jit/src/jit_riscv32_asm.erl:753— libs/jit/src/jit_riscv32_asm.erl:753-776 | libs/jit/src/jit_riscv32_asm.erl:886-905 | libs/jit/src/jit_riscv32_asm.erl:1317-1333 | libs/jit/src/jit_riscv32_asm.erl:1348-1364 | libs/jit/src/jit_riscv32_asm.erl:1403-1421 | libs/jit/src/jit_riscv32_asm.erl:1431-1455 | libs/jit/src/jit_riscv32_asm.erl:1575-1592 | libs/jit/src/jit_riscv32_asm.erl:1599-1615 — 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.
Duplicated block (27–35 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2676— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2676-2702 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:3034-3068 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 124 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 1506 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (29–30 lines × 3) libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:3160— libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:3160-3189 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:3193-3221 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:3225-3253 — 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 (26–29 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:586— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:586-611 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:685-713 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 124 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 1506 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (29 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2084— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2084-2112 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:2407-2435 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 124 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 1506 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 (27 lines × 3) libs/avm_esp32/src/usb_cdc.erl:101— libs/avm_esp32/src/usb_cdc.erl:101-127 | libs/avm_rp2/src/usb_cdc.erl:100-126 | libs/avm_stm32/src/usb_cdc.erl:98-124 — 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 (15–27 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32_asm.erl:111— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32_asm.erl:111-125 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m_asm.erl:121-147 — 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 (26 lines × 2) libs/estdlib/src/gen_tcp_socket.erl:292— libs/estdlib/src/gen_tcp_socket.erl:292-317 | libs/estdlib/src/gen_udp_socket.erl:195-220 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/estdlib/src/gen_tcp_socket.erl` and `libs/estdlib/src/gen_udp_socket.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 8 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. 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 (25 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1944— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1944-1968 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:2917-2941 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 45 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 551 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 (23–24 lines × 5) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:435— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:435-457 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:455-477 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:559-581 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:404-426 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:510-533 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 42 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 511 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 (24 lines × 3) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2570— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2570-2593 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:2056-2079 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:2696-2719 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 24 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 319 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 (23 lines × 3) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1850— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1850-1872 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:2173-2195 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:2036-2058 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 124 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 1506 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 (22–23 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_riscv64_asm.erl:348— libs/jit/src/jit_riscv64_asm.erl:348-370 | libs/jit/src/jit_riscv64_asm.erl:448-469 — 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 (17–22 lines × 2) libs/estdlib/src/json.erl:268— libs/estdlib/src/json.erl:268-284 | libs/estdlib/src/json.erl:335-356 — 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 (21–22 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1517— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1517-1537 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:1829-1850 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 124 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 1506 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 (20–21 lines × 3) libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64_asm.erl:139— libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64_asm.erl:139-159 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64_asm.erl:168-187 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64_asm.erl:197-216 — 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 (17–21 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_wasm32.erl:1044— libs/jit/src/jit_wasm32.erl:1044-1060 | libs/jit/src/jit_wasm32.erl:1127-1147 — 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 × 4) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:2178— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:2178-2197 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:3164-3183 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:2251-2270 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:2976-2995 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 45 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 551 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 × 3) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:687— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:687-706 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:832-851 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:1046-1065 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 42 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 511 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) libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64_asm.erl:227— libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64_asm.erl:227-246 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64_asm.erl:256-275 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (18–19 lines × 4) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:2041— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:2041-2058 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:3007-3024 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:2159-2176 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:2795-2813 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 45 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 551 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 (18–19 lines × 3) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:2063— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:2063-2080 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:2181-2198 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:2822-2840 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 49 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 634 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 (17–19 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1998— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1998-2014 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:2109-2127 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 49 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 634 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 (18–19 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:526— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:526-544 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:562-579 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 56 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 685 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (14–17 lines × 5) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1151— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1151-1164 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1390-1403 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:1685-1698 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:1100-1113 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:1605-1621 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 42 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 511 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 lines × 5) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1184— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1184-1200 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1423-1439 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:1721-1737 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:1141-1157 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:1661-1677 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 42 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 511 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (14–17 lines × 4) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:2044— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:2044-2060 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2657-2670 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:3010-3026 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:2162-2178 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 42 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 511 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 (16–17 lines × 3) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1892— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1892-1908 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2525-2540 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:2639-2655 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 42 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 511 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (14–17 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1683— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1683-1696 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:1907-1923 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 56 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 685 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 (16–17 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:2985— libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:2985-3000 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:2768-2784 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 51 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 607 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 (4–16 lines × 8) libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:978— libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:978-981 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:992-1007 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:1019-1034 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:1046-1061 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:1156-1171 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:1218-1233 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:1257-1271 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:1284-1298 — 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 (14–16 lines × 5) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:709— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:709-722 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:854-867 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:1068-1081 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:720-735 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:844-857 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 42 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 511 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 (15–16 lines × 3) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:2862— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:2862-2876 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:3713-3728 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:4280-4295 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 42 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 511 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 (11–15 lines × 14) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1983— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1983-1993 | libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:2016-2030 | libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:2038-2052 | libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:2062-2076 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2608-2618 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:2956-2966 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:3004-3018 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:2094-2104 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:2134-2148 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:2156-2170 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:2180-2194 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:2735-2745 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:2792-2806 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:2821-2835 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 42 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 511 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 (13–15 lines × 5) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1523— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1523-1535 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1966-1978 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:2289-2301 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:1490-1504 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:2195-2207 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 42 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 511 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 (15 lines × 3) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1737— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1737-1751 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2324-2338 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:1782-1796 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 42 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 511 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 (13–15 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:794— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:794-806 | libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1028-1042 — 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 × 4) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1739— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1739-1752 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2326-2339 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:1784-1797 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:2502-2515 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 42 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 511 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (14 lines × 3) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1757— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1757-1770 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2345-2358 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:1804-1817 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 42 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 511 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 (11–14 lines × 3) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2623— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2623-2633 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:2971-2983 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:2750-2763 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 124 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 1506 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 (10–14 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit.erl:2694— libs/jit/src/jit.erl:2694-2707 | libs/jit/src/jit.erl:2733-2742 — 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 × 10) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1152— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1152-1164 | libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1188-1200 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1391-1403 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1427-1439 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:1686-1698 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:1725-1737 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:1101-1113 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:1145-1157 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:1609-1621 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:1665-1677 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 42 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 511 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 (13 lines × 6) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1738— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1738-1750 | libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1757-1769 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2325-2337 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2345-2357 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:1783-1795 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:1804-1816 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 42 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 511 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 (13 lines × 4) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1720— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1720-1732 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2306-2318 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:2633-2645 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:1763-1775 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 42 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 511 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 (12–13 lines × 4) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64_asm.erl:179— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64_asm.erl:179-191 | libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64_asm.erl:217-228 | libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64_asm.erl:540-552 | libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64_asm.erl:588-599 — 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 (11–13 lines × 3) libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:3472— libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:3472-3484 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:3528-3538 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:3582-3592 — 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 (4–13 lines × 3) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1087— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1087-1090 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1110-1122 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:1378-1390 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 124 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 1506 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 (9–12 lines × 4) libs/jit/src/jit_riscv32_asm.erl:760— libs/jit/src/jit_riscv32_asm.erl:760-771 | libs/jit/src/jit_riscv32_asm.erl:891-902 | libs/jit/src/jit_riscv32_asm.erl:1408-1416 | libs/jit/src/jit_riscv32_asm.erl:1438-1446 — 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 (8–12 lines × 3) libs/estdlib/src/gen_server.erl:467— libs/estdlib/src/gen_server.erl:467-474 | libs/estdlib/src/gen_server.erl:515-526 | libs/estdlib/src/gen_server.erl:537-548 — 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 (11–12 lines × 3) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:3368— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:3368-3378 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:3858-3868 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:3817-3828 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 124 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 1506 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 (9–11 lines × 6) libs/jit/src/jit_riscv32_asm.erl:762— libs/jit/src/jit_riscv32_asm.erl:762-772 | libs/jit/src/jit_riscv32_asm.erl:893-903 | libs/jit/src/jit_riscv32_asm.erl:1322-1330 | libs/jit/src/jit_riscv32_asm.erl:1353-1361 | libs/jit/src/jit_riscv32_asm.erl:1409-1417 | libs/jit/src/jit_riscv32_asm.erl:1439-1447 — 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.
Duplicated block (7–11 lines × 4) libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:2504— libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:2504-2510 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:2529-2535 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:2547-2557 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:2569-2579 — 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 (7–11 lines × 3) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:2325— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:2325-2335 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:2369-2379 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:3091-3097 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 49 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 634 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 (9–11 lines × 3) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2260— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2260-2270 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:2585-2595 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:2446-2454 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 124 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 1506 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 (8–11 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit.erl:1937— libs/jit/src/jit.erl:1937-1944 | libs/jit/src/jit.erl:1952-1962 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (7–11 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32_asm.erl:159— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32_asm.erl:159-165 | libs/jit/src/jit_riscv32_asm.erl:291-301 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from both call sites, so a change lands once.
Duplicated block (7–10 lines × 8) libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:982— libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:982-988 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:1009-1015 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:1036-1042 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:1063-1069 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:1173-1179 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:1235-1241 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:1274-1280 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:1301-1310 — 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 (7–10 lines × 6) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:3111— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:3111-3120 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:3137-3146 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:3160-3166 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:3301-3307 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:3608-3614 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:3792-3798 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 124 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 1506 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 (9–10 lines × 4) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1697— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1697-1706 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2284-2293 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:2610-2619 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:2461-2469 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 42 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 511 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 (6–9 lines × 5) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1548— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1548-1555 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1991-1998 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:2314-2321 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:1614-1619 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:2222-2230 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 42 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 511 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 (2–9 lines × 6) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:2562— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:2562-2563 | libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:2584-2592 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:3365-3373 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:3855-3863 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:3784-3785 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:3814-3822 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 42 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 511 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 (8–9 lines × 4) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:3028— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:3028-3036 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:3071-3079 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:3417-3424 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:3440-3447 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 124 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 1506 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 (5–8 lines × 9) libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:941— libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:941-945 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:957-961 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:1081-1085 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:1096-1100 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:1111-1115 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:1148-1152 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:1210-1214 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:1324-1331 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:1345-1351 — 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.
Duplicated block (8 lines × 5) libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:3746— libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:3746-3753 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:3760-3767 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:3775-3782 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:3789-3796 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:3804-3811 — 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 (6–8 lines × 4) libs/jit/src/jit_wasm32.erl:740— libs/jit/src/jit_wasm32.erl:740-745 | libs/jit/src/jit_wasm32.erl:804-811 | libs/jit/src/jit_wasm32.erl:846-851 | libs/jit/src/jit_wasm32.erl:899-904 — 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 (4–8 lines × 5) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64_asm.erl:514— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64_asm.erl:514-521 | libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64_asm.erl:851-858 | libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64_asm.erl:878-885 | libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64_asm.erl:985-989 | libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64_asm.erl:1069-1072 — 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 (7–8 lines × 3) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2512— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2512-2519 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:2857-2864 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:2891-2897 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 124 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 1506 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 (3–8 lines × 4) libs/jit/src/jit.erl:2763— libs/jit/src/jit.erl:2763-2765 | libs/jit/src/jit.erl:2789-2791 | libs/jit/src/jit.erl:3201-3208 | libs/jit/src/jit.erl:3244-3251 — 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 (4–7 lines × 11) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:990— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:990-994 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1007-1011 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1070-1074 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1085-1088 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1126-1130 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1206-1212 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1227-1233 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:1223-1227 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:1240-1244 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:1305-1309 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:1394-1398 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 124 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 1506 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 × 7) libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:3170— libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:3170-3176 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:3202-3208 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:3234-3240 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:3301-3307 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:3330-3336 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:3370-3376 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:3399-3405 — 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 (5–7 lines × 5) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1053— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1053-1057 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1262-1268 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:1481-1487 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:1507-1513 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:1545-1551 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 124 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 1506 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 (6–7 lines × 4) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2982— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2982-2987 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:3362-3367 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:2418-2424 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:3140-3145 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 124 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 1506 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 (5–6 lines × 11) libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:940— libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:940-945 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:956-961 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:1080-1085 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:1095-1100 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:1110-1115 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:1126-1130 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:1147-1152 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:1190-1194 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:1209-1214 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:1323-1328 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:1344-1349 — 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.
Duplicated block (2–6 lines × 13) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:2541— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:2541-2542 | libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:2552-2557 | libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:2573-2578 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:3322-3323 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:3333-3338 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:3343-3344 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:3354-3359 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:3815-3817 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:3826-3831 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:3845-3850 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:3755-3756 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:3770-3775 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:3799-3804 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 42 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 511 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 (5–6 lines × 6) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:2543— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:2543-2547 | libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:2564-2568 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:3324-3328 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:3345-3349 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:3757-3762 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:3786-3791 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 42 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 511 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 (5–6 lines × 5) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1694— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1694-1698 | libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1712-1716 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:2578-2583 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:2625-2629 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:1755-1759 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 45 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 551 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 (4–6 lines × 4) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:2855— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:2855-2860 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:3626-3631 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:4186-4189 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:2866-2871 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 42 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 511 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 (5–6 lines × 3) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1031— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1031-1035 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1162-1166 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1185-1190 — all 3 copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from every one of those sites — resolving only two of them leaves the rest to drift apart the first time one is edited.
Duplicated block (3–5 lines × 3) libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1094— libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1094-1098 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:1335-1337 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:1134-1138 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 124 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 1506 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 (249 lines × 2) libs/avm_esp32/src/gpio.erl:85— libs/avm_esp32/src/gpio.erl:85-434 | libs/avm_stm32/src/gpio.erl:90-338 — 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 (74 lines × 2) libs/jit/src/jit_stream_flash.erl:50— libs/jit/src/jit_stream_flash.erl:50-123 | libs/jit/src/jit_stream_mmap.erl:50-123 — 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 (4–6 lines × 5) libs/jit/src/jit.erl:585— libs/jit/src/jit.erl:585-588 | libs/jit/src/jit.erl:611-614 | libs/jit/src/jit.erl:630-633 | libs/jit/src/jit.erl:647-653 | libs/jit/src/jit.erl:676-681 — 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 (4–5 lines × 5) libs/jit/src/jit.erl:759— libs/jit/src/jit.erl:759-763 | libs/jit/src/jit.erl:1539-1543 | libs/jit/src/jit.erl:2038-2041 | libs/jit/src/jit.erl:4196-4199 | libs/jit/src/jit.erl:4337-4340 — 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 (6 lines × 5) libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1417— libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1417-1422 | libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1839-1844 | libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:2162-2167 | libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl:1369-1374 | libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:2025-2030 — before extracting anything, compare `libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl` and `libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 42 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 511 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.
M1 · Documentation (README)· README may be stale · ×1
README may be stale — 63 code files changed in the last 6 months but the README was not touched — it may no longer reflect the system.
Swallowed exception (empty catch) src/platforms/emscripten/src/atomvm.pre.js:89— 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 predicate libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1907— `?IS_GPR(ValueReg) andalso ?IS_GPR(IndexReg) andalso is_integer(Offset)` appears character-identically in 5 files — libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl, libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl, libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl, libs/jit/src/jit_riscv_impl.hrl. 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 libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1864— `?IS_GPR(ValueReg) andalso ?IS_GPR(Reg) andalso ?IS_GPR(IndexReg)` appears character-identically in 5 files — libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl, libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl, libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl, libs/jit/src/jit_riscv_impl.hrl. 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 libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1855— `?IS_GPR(ValueReg) andalso ?IS_GPR(Reg) andalso is_integer(Index)` appears character-identically in 5 files — libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl, libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl, libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl, libs/jit/src/jit_riscv_impl.hrl. 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 libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2477— `?IS_GPR(ValueReg) andalso ?IS_GPR(Reg) andalso is_integer(Index) andalso Index < 32` appears character-identically in 2 files — libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl, libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl. 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 libs/jit/src/jit_riscv32.erl:160— `Reg =:= a0 orelse Reg =:= a1 orelse Reg =:= a2 orelse Reg =:= a3 orelse Reg =:= a4 orelse Reg =:= a5 orelse Reg =:= a6 orelse Reg =:= a7 ore…` appears character-identically in 2 files — libs/jit/src/jit_riscv32.erl, libs/jit/src/jit_riscv64.erl. 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 libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl:152— `Reg =:= r0 orelse Reg =:= r1 orelse Reg =:= r2 orelse Reg =:= r3 orelse Reg =:= r4 orelse Reg =:= r5 orelse Reg =:= r6 orelse Reg =:= r7` appears character-identically in 2 files — libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl, libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m_asm.erl. 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 libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:145— `Reg =:= r0 orelse Reg =:= r1 orelse Reg =:= r2 orelse Reg =:= r3 orelse Reg =:= r4 orelse Reg =:= r5 orelse Reg =:= r6 orelse Reg =:= r7 ore…` appears character-identically in 3 files — libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl, libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl, libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl. 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 libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:3239— `ShiftedDown >= 0 andalso ShiftedDown =< 255` appears character-identically in 2 files — libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl, libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl. 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 libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1392— `Special =:= ctx orelse Special =:= jit_state orelse Special =:= offset` appears character-identically in 2 files — libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl, libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl. 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 libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:1654— `X < ?MAX_REG andalso is_atom(Reg) andalso is_integer(Index)` appears character-identically in 5 files — libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl, libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl, libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl, libs/jit/src/jit_riscv_impl.hrl. 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 libs/estdlib/src/gen_tcp_inet.erl:231— `is_integer(A) andalso A >= 0 andalso A < 256 andalso is_integer(B) andalso B >= 0 andalso B < 256 andalso is_integer(C) andalso C >= 0 andal…` appears character-identically in 2 files — libs/estdlib/src/gen_tcp_inet.erl, libs/estdlib/src/inet.erl. 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 libs/avm_esp32/src/uart.erl:169— `is_integer(I) andalso 0 =< I andalso I =< 255` appears character-identically in 2 files — libs/avm_esp32/src/uart.erl, libs/avm_rp2/src/uart.erl. 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 libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:2531— `is_integer(IndexReg) andalso is_integer(Offset)` appears character-identically in 2 files — libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl, libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl. 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 libs/estdlib/src/gen_tcp_socket.erl:246— `is_integer(TimeoutMs) andalso TimeoutMs >= 0` appears character-identically in 2 files — libs/estdlib/src/gen_tcp_socket.erl, libs/estdlib/src/gen_udp_socket.erl. 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 libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl:1099— `is_integer(Val) andalso Val >= 0 andalso Val =< 255` appears character-identically in 4 files — libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl, libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl, libs/jit/src/jit_riscv_impl.hrl, libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl. 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 libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:216— `is_integer(X) andalso X >= -128 andalso X =< 127` appears character-identically in 8 files — libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl, libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl, libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl, libs/jit/src/jit_riscv32.erl. 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 libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl:218— `is_integer(X) andalso X >= 0 andalso X =< 255` appears character-identically in 8 files — libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl, libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl, libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl, libs/jit/src/jit_riscv32.erl. 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.
Orphaned file libs/estdlib/src/gen_udp_socket.erl:1— No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for.
Orphaned file libs/avm_esp32/src/i2c.erl:1— No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for.
Orphaned file libs/eavmlib/src/logger_manager.erl:1— No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for.
Orphaned file libs/estdlib/src/gen_udp.erl:1— No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for.
Orphaned file libs/estdlib/src/calendar.erl:1— No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for.
Orphaned file libs/estdlib/src/gen_tcp_inet.erl:1— No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for.
Orphaned file libs/exavmlib/lib/I2C.ex:1— No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for.
Orphaned file libs/exavmlib/lib/Bitwise.ex:1— No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for.
Orphaned file libs/estdlib/src/gen_event.erl:1— No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for.
Orphaned file libs/estdlib/src/gen_udp_inet.erl:1— No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for.
Orphaned file libs/estdlib/src/net.erl:1— No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for.
Orphaned file libs/estdlib/src/math.erl:1— No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for.
Orphaned file libs/exavmlib/lib/Integer.ex:1— No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for.
Orphaned file libs/estdlib/src/logger_std_h.erl:1— No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for.
X31 · Test-only surface in a production module· Test-only surface in a production module · ×9
Test-only surface in a production module libs/avm_network/src/mdns.erl:38— `mdns:parse_dns_message/1` is exported unconditionally, and the comment directly above the `-export` on this line says the exports below it are for testing. Erlang has no visibility below `-export`, so this is part of the module's public contract: it cannot be changed without a compatibility argument. This arm read the comment, not the call graph: if the comment is right and only tests call it, wrapping the attribute in `-ifdef(TEST). … -endif.` keeps the test's access and removes it from the shipped module. If production code calls it, the comment is stale and wrapping the export would break the build — delete the comment and document the function as part of the module's API.
Test-only surface in a production module libs/avm_network/src/mdns.erl:38— `mdns:parse_dns_name/2` is exported unconditionally, and the comment directly above the `-export` on this line says the exports below it are for testing. Erlang has no visibility below `-export`, so this is part of the module's public contract: it cannot be changed without a compatibility argument. This arm read the comment, not the call graph: if the comment is right and only tests call it, wrapping the attribute in `-ifdef(TEST). … -endif.` keeps the test's access and removes it from the shipped module. If production code calls it, the comment is stale and wrapping the export would break the build — delete the comment and document the function as part of the module's API.
Test-only surface in a production module libs/avm_network/src/mdns.erl:38— `mdns:serialize_dns_message/1` is exported unconditionally, and the comment directly above the `-export` on this line says the exports below it are for testing. Erlang has no visibility below `-export`, so this is part of the module's public contract: it cannot be changed without a compatibility argument. This arm read the comment, not the call graph: if the comment is right and only tests call it, wrapping the attribute in `-ifdef(TEST). … -endif.` keeps the test's access and removes it from the shipped module. If production code calls it, the comment is stale and wrapping the export would break the build — delete the comment and document the function as part of the module's API.
Test-only surface in a production module libs/avm_network/src/mdns.erl:38— `mdns:serialize_dns_name/1` is exported unconditionally, and the comment directly above the `-export` on this line says the exports below it are for testing. Erlang has no visibility below `-export`, so this is part of the module's public contract: it cannot be changed without a compatibility argument. This arm read the comment, not the call graph: if the comment is right and only tests call it, wrapping the attribute in `-ifdef(TEST). … -endif.` keeps the test's access and removes it from the shipped module. If production code calls it, the comment is stale and wrapping the export would break the build — delete the comment and document the function as part of the module's API.
Test-only surface in a production module libs/etest/src/etest.erl:28— `etest:test/1` is exported unconditionally and its name IS the test marker, so the shipped module publishes a function named for the test tree. No other module in this repository calls it at any arity. Erlang has no visibility below `-export`, so this is part of the module's public contract: it cannot be changed without a compatibility argument. Nothing tells the next maintainer that its only caller is a test. Wrapping the attribute in `-ifdef(TEST). … -endif.` keeps the test's access and removes it from the shipped module.
Test-only surface in a production module libs/etest/src/eunit.erl:28— `eunit:test/1` is exported unconditionally and its name IS the test marker, so the shipped module publishes a function named for the test tree. No other module in this repository calls it at any arity. Erlang has no visibility below `-export`, so this is part of the module's public contract: it cannot be changed without a compatibility argument. Nothing tells the next maintainer that its only caller is a test. Wrapping the attribute in `-ifdef(TEST). … -endif.` keeps the test's access and removes it from the shipped module.
Test-only surface in a production module libs/etest/src/eunit.erl:28— `eunit:test/2` is exported unconditionally and its name IS the test marker, so the shipped module publishes a function named for the test tree. No other module in this repository calls it at any arity. Erlang has no visibility below `-export`, so this is part of the module's public contract: it cannot be changed without a compatibility argument. Nothing tells the next maintainer that its only caller is a test. Wrapping the attribute in `-ifdef(TEST). … -endif.` keeps the test's access and removes it from the shipped module.
Test-only surface in a production module libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:94— `jit_xtensa:mov_immediate/2` is exported unconditionally, and the comment directly above the `-export` on this line says the exports below it are for testing. Erlang has no visibility below `-export`, so this is part of the module's public contract: it cannot be changed without a compatibility argument. This arm read the comment, not the call graph: if the comment is right and only tests call it, wrapping the attribute in `-ifdef(TEST). … -endif.` keeps the test's access and removes it from the shipped module. If production code calls it, the comment is stale and wrapping the export would break the build — delete the comment and document the function as part of the module's API.
Test-only surface in a production module libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl:94— `jit_xtensa:mov_immediate_large/2` is exported unconditionally, and the comment directly above the `-export` on this line says the exports below it are for testing. Erlang has no visibility below `-export`, so this is part of the module's public contract: it cannot be changed without a compatibility argument. This arm read the comment, not the call graph: if the comment is right and only tests call it, wrapping the attribute in `-ifdef(TEST). … -endif.` keeps the test's access and removes it from the shipped module. If production code calls it, the comment is stale and wrapping the export would break the build — delete the comment and document the function as part of the module's API.
Off-boarding risk: anonymized user #1 — If anonymized user #1 becomes unavailable, 42 significant file(s) lose their only recent owner: libs/jit/src/jit.erl, libs/jit/src/jit_armv6m.erl, libs/jit/src/jit_xtensa.erl, libs/jit/src/jit_arm32.erl, libs/jit/src/jit_riscv_impl.hrl, libs/jit/src/jit_aarch64.erl, libs/jit/src/jit_x86_64.erl, libs/jit/src/jit_wasm32.erl (+34 more). Pair on, review, or document these before any departure.
Off-boarding risk: anonymized user #2 — If anonymized user #2 becomes unavailable, 12 significant file(s) lose their only recent owner: libs/avm_emscripten/src/emscripten.erl, libs/avm_network/src/ahttp_client.erl, libs/estdlib/src/crypto.erl, libs/avm_esp32/src/esp_adc.erl, libs/exavmlib/lib/GPIO.ex, libs/estdlib/src/base64.erl, tools/supported_api/extract_instructions.erl, tools/supported_api/extract_gperf_registrations.erl (+4 more). Pair on, review, or document these before any departure.
D16 · Bus Factor· Further sole-owners (lower concentration) · ×1
Further sole-owners (lower concentration) — 1 other contributor(s) are each the sole owner of a small amount of code below the off-boarding threshold — folded into the bus-factor score and metrics (55 single-owned of 164 analysed files in total, counted over production source files of roughly 2,400 bytes or more, excluding vendored, generated, example/demo and scaffolding-template trees and test files identified by path convention, largest first; 164 of the 224 production source files in this repository met that bar). They are anonymized user #3 (1 file(s)) — spread or document their files in the same way, at lower priority than the named off-boarding risks above. The files folded here: libs/estdlib/src/timer.erl.
D34 · Knowledge Freshness· Further orphaned files (smaller) · ×1
Further orphaned files (smaller) — 14 smaller file(s) also have no living knowledge — folded into the freshness score and metrics rather than raised one row each — most significant first: libs/estdlib/src/gen_udp_socket.erl, libs/avm_esp32/src/i2c.erl, libs/eavmlib/src/logger_manager.erl, libs/estdlib/src/gen_udp.erl, libs/estdlib/src/calendar.erl, libs/estdlib/src/gen_tcp_inet.erl, libs/exavmlib/lib/I2C.ex, libs/exavmlib/lib/Bitwise.ex (and 6 more) (16 orphaned of 165 analysed files in total, counted over production source files of roughly 2,400 bytes or more, excluding vendored, generated, example/demo and scaffolding-template trees and test files identified by path convention, largest first; 165 of the 224 production source files in this repository met that bar). Attach the read to the next change that touches one of them: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for, so the knowledge comes back at the cost of a change you were making anyway.
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.
Outdated: ex_doc — `:ex_doc` is locked at 0.40.1 but 0.40.4 is the current stable release on hex.pm, and it already satisfies the `">= 0.0.0"` requirement declared in libs/exavmlib/mix.exs — so the lockfile is behind this repository's own declared range. Run `mix deps.update ex_doc` and commit the updated REDACTED.
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.
trivy: not applicable — No Infrastructure-as-Code or container manifests found (Dockerfile, Docker Compose, Terraform, Kubernetes/Helm, CloudFormation, ARM, Bicep, Ansible); nothing to scan.
semgrep: not applicable — No personal data was found crossing a boundary the PII/GDPR ruleset checks — nothing written to a log or console sink, placed in a URL or query string, or persisted to browser storage. That is a clean result for the LEAK surface only: this ruleset detects personal data escaping, it does not inventory the personal data a repository holds, so it is not evidence that this repository has no personal-data surface. The personal-data map (Appendix C) and the C1-C5 compliance cards are what speak to that.
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 01a17e3d-69e4-7518-bf62-ab1a0e6aac8d · every finding is also locatable in findings.md, and the complete scoring record (with exit codes + durations) in sidecar.json.
Issues: 134 · Warnings: 704 · Recommendations: 49 · Info: 1 — Appendix A · all findings · full markdown report.
Generated by Watchdog — deterministic code-health analysis. 27-10-2026 @ 16:41 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.