Public report of chenglou/pretext, published 26 October 2026. It has the same score, grades and number of
findings as the full report. The details of security findings (where they are in the code, which known
vulnerabilities and which passwords or keys were found) are left out, so nobody can use them against the project.
Public
Executive reportMeasured under the Code Assurance Index, an open standard for code quality, using its published scoring rules (rubric version 2026.10.5). Watchdog signed this survey and filed it in the standard's public register, where anyone can look it up by its survey ID. Check this survey →
Signed and filed in the standard's public register, 26 October 2026, 13:17 UTC · Survey ID cd_ebf94fd753154f6abe169386fbacc2d7
chenglou/pretext
Measured 26 October 2026, 12:59 UTC, at code version 0d102a5
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 scoreWeak
CriticalWeakAdequateStrongExemplary
Down 1 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: 23,063 lines of product code in 1 project, tests not counted · Estimated rebuild effort: about 0.2 person-years · Weakest lens: Code Health, 34
Findings by how serious they are
9 critical311 serious20 minor
16 dimensions are left out of the score. For each one, Watchdog either couldn't measure it in this code, or found no evidence of the safeguard it looks for, such as a tested backup restore. They count neither for nor against the score, and Limitations lists each one with its reason.
This survey was produced by
Watchdog
Producer
Canine Development
Analyzer
Watchdog engine 1.0.0
Measured
26 October 2026, 12:59 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 ▸
65of 65 dimensions measured by tools.
326of 340 findings point to an exact file and line, so you can open each one in the code. The other 14 concern the repository as a whole, such as missing documentation.
65dimensions across 6 lenses, read from 23,063 lines of product code in 1 project.
chenglou/pretext falls short of our standard for production, held back most by its Code Health lens, the quality of the code itself. It scores 45 out of 100 and is rated Weak, and all nine of its critical findings are security problems.
Code Health, at 34, is the weakest lens and counts most in the score. The best first step is simplifying the hardest methods, worth about 8 points. Splitting the oversized files would lift Code Health itself, worth about 4 points. Raising Code Health to 70 would lift the score to about 54.
Five pipeline tools are referenced by a changeable name, so the build pipeline can be tampered with. Two known security holes in the packages the code depends on can be used by attackers, and two passwords or keys are open to anyone who can read the repository. Pinning each tool to an exact version, updating the vulnerable packages and replacing each exposed password or key would close these risks.
The product code is 23,063 lines, about €30,000 to rebuild.
A lens is capped at Adequate while one of its dimensions scores below 4 out of 10, however well the rest of the lens does. That way a serious problem in one place always shows in the lens's rating.
How the score is built: what each lens counts forThe lenses don't count equally. The weakest lens counts most, the next weakest a little less, and so on, so a weak area pulls the score down instead of being averaged away. In the bar below, each part's width shows how much that lens counts and its colour shows its rating. Improving the widest part moves the score most, and as that lens improves, it counts for less, because another lens becomes the weakest.
Watchdog compares every finding with the previous survey's. A finding that has only moved to another line in the same file counts as the same finding, so only new findings appear here. Advisory notes from the AI model are left out, because the model words them afresh in every survey.
Fixed since the last survey: 31 findings
These 31 critical or serious findings were in the previous survey, on 12 October 2026, and are gone from this one.
€9,800 to €49,000, for 164 to 521 hours of work, about 0.2 person-years for one engineer
Difficulty of the problem
Standard, judged from the kind of software and how it is built. Code that solves a harder problem, such as payments or medical bookings, costs more per line to write.
Quality factor
×0.7 at a score of 45. 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: 23,063 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
Bring the 91 bodies over 15 down to 15 or less in Cognitive Complexity — start with line-break.walkPreparedComplexLines (cognitive 599), rich-inline.prepareRichInline (cognitive 302), prepare.measureAnalysis (cognitive 180).
Split each oversized file along the responsibilities already in it, into smaller focused modules in the same package.
Raises the score by about 4 points · Medium effort · Large Files
3
Adopt pino (or winston) and log at meaningful points in the services you run.
Raises the score by about 4 points · Medium effort · Observability
Diagnosis: what the measurements show together
Each conclusion below combines several dimensions into one point that no single dimension shows, and lists the measurements it rests on.
Where the investment is most exposed · Value at risk
This code would cost about €30,000 to build again, about 0.2 person-years of work. Its weakest lens is Code Health, at 34 (Weak). Code Health is about how easy the code is to read and change safely, and code that is hard to read is slow and risky to change, so every future change costs more than it should. Because the weakest lens counts most in the score, work on Code Health also moves the score most.
Based on: the rebuild estimate · the Code Health grade · how much each lens counts
What to do: Start with the Code Health actions in Top priorities.
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 2.0 out of 10. Code at that level is slower to change than clean code, and Watchdog estimates the extra work at 15% to 34% on every change. The history of the code shows how much it changes: about 542,922 lines over the last 90 days, which is about 2,201,850 lines a year. At that pace, the extra work comes to an estimated 825.7 to 4954.2 engineer-days a year, and it grows as more code changes.
How this is estimated: The number of changed lines is measured from the history of the code. The rest rests on two assumptions of Watchdog's own: code scoring 8 out of 10 or more adds no extra work, and each point below 8 adds 2.5% to 5.6% to every change, 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 · 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.
If you do one thing first · First action
Bring the 91 bodies over 15 down to 15 or less in Cognitive Complexity. Of all the actions in this report, it raises the score most for the work it takes: about 8 points for high effort. The next survey will show the change in the score.
Based on: the ranked actions in Top priorities, by score gain and effort
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.
18 modules, with 11 dependencies between them. Every module uses only modules listed above it, so there are no loops.
Which modules use which. The module on each row uses the module in each column, and the number counts the pairs of types that connect them. A cell above the diagonal is part of a loop.
harness.sets uses harness.sets.sample, so a change to harness.sets.sample can break harness.sets, while a change to harness.sets can't break harness.sets.sample.
Position
Below the diagonal: harness.sets uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
scripts.grapheme-check uses src.generated.engine-break-data, so a change to src.generated.engine-break-data can break scripts.grapheme-check, while a change to scripts.grapheme-check can't break src.generated.engine-break-data.
Position
Below the diagonal: scripts.grapheme-check uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
src uses src.generated.engine-break-data, so a change to src.generated.engine-break-data can break src, while a change to src can't break src.generated.engine-break-data.
Position
Below the diagonal: src uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
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
10
High / Critical
A03:2025 — Software Supply Chain Failures
7
High / Critical
A07:2025 — Authentication Failures
3
High / Critical
Roadmap
First, reduce cognitive complexity by refactoring the most intricate functions, such as line-break and rich-inline handlers, to simplify logic and improve maintainability. Second, split the largest source files into smaller, focused modules to align with single-responsibility principles and ease navigation. Third, implement structured logging using a standard library like pino to enhance observability and debugging capabilities across services. Fourth, integrate static application security testing into the CI pipeline to automatically catch security regressions before they merge. Finally, lower cyclomatic complexity in branch-heavy functions to ensure code paths remain simple and predictable.
Ranked by impact ÷ effort. "Helps" is the estimated gain on the 0–100 health score.
Do this
Helps
Effort
Dimension
Bring the 91 bodies over 15 down to 15 or less in Cognitive Complexity — start with line-break.walkPreparedComplexLines (cognitive 599), rich-inline.prepareRichInline (cognitive 302), prepare.measureAnalysis (cognitive 180).
Add a SAST step to CI running what this repository's stack ships: CodeQL's javascript-typescript pack, `semgrep --config=p/typescript`, or eslint-plugin-security — so a security regression fails the build instead of landing.
TypeScript/JavaScript: use the promise APIs (fs/promises, a promisified child_process.execFile, the async zlib/crypto functions) and await them instead of the *Sync variants.
Every finding carries one of four grades. Three say how serious it is. The fourth says this
survey could not settle it — and it is a grade, not a gap.
Critical — 9
A definite problem that already costs you something and drags the score down: a
missing authorisation check, a dependency with a known exploit, a build that does not reproduce. Failure here
tends to cause failures elsewhere.
Serious — 311
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 — 20
Recorded, with no effect on how the codebase functions.
Present so the survey is complete, not because it needs doing.
Could not be resolved — 16
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. 65 of 65 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 — 65 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, 326 of 340 do; the remainder are repo-wide signals — a dimension-level measurement, not a single line. (Every path in this report is repo-relative by construction: paths are normalized at the producer and the report is rejected if any rooted path leaks through.)
Is there a tool behind the number? Every score below names the method that produced it — Roslyn, git, a scanner, or (for a handful of documentation/naming dimensions) an LLM labelled sampled · advisory — not a narrative.
Does re-running give the same result? Run it again on the same commit and the score — and this report, byte for byte — is identical. A report whose numbers move between runs is describing the run, not the code.
This report answers yes to all three. That's the bar to hold any assessment to.
Tools & methods
The actual versions used this run (captured at analysis time) — re-run on the same commit for the identical score.
Method
Backs
Version
Evaluator
Roslyn static analysis
Complexity, cohesion, coupling, dead code, API surface, layering
What ran differently this time — a tool absent, degraded, or that fell back to an estimate. Named openly, not folded silently into the scores. A degraded run also records its exact cause in diagnostics.md.
D8 Code Coverage — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. Coverage NOT MEASURED: test source is present (.ts) and the coverage collector does support this ecosystem — it drives jest, vitest and mocha — but no package.json in this repository has a `scripts.test`, and none declares a runner the analyzer could start on its own, so it could not tell how this suite is run. Not scored — this is a gap in the analyzer's reading of how the suite is run, not a missing .ts runner and not a verdict that this repository runs no tests. To have real coverage read, produce a coverage report in a standard format (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 (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 — a committed report is read whatever runner produced it.
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 (.ts) and the reliability runner does support this ecosystem — it drives jest, vitest, mocha and egg-bin — but no package.json in this repository has a `scripts.test`, and none declares a runner the analyzer could start on its own, so it could not tell how this suite is run. Not scored — this is a gap in the analyzer's reading of how the suite is run, not a missing .ts runner and not a verdict that this repository runs no tests.
D12 Dependency Hygiene — not measured this run — This is a true statement about the repository that carries nothing for its owner to act on, so it is reported here rather than as a defect in their code. This repository's 1 package.json manifest(s) and its 1 committed lockfile(s) WERE read; what went unanswered is the currency half, because it grades the production `dependencies` a lockfile resolves and these manifests declare none — only 6 devDependencies, which D12 does not grade. So registry.npmjs.org was never asked, and there was nothing here for it to grade. This is a true statement about the repository and NOT a gap on our side: the lockfile was resolved, and no reader we could write would find a production dependency in it.
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 committed lockfile was read and it resolves no production dependency: everything it installs is declared under `devDependencies`, or is a workspace-internal package with no registry release behind it. Licences are resolved from registry.npmjs.org, because an npm checkout does not contain its dependencies' licences. NOT a finding that this repository's licences are compliant: this dimension asserts nothing about its licensing in either direction.
D16 Bus Factor — not measured this run — This is a true statement about the repository that carries nothing for its owner to act on, so it is reported here rather than as a defect in their code. Single-maintainer repository — bus factor is not applicable (9 contributor(s) across 2349 commit(s) sampled, automation and bot accounts excluded). One of them holds 100% of the history; the other 8 hold 0% each on average, below the 5% at which there is somebody to hand the work to. That is a single maintainer with drive-by contributors, not a team whose knowledge has concentrated — so the bus factor is not applicable and there is nothing here for the owner to act on.
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 (package.json), 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 — 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. Project size and spread are measured over build units whose source a code model reads. This repository's .cpp source is a material share of its production lines and was read by none, so the score is a verdict about the units that were read. Not a finding that the unread source is cohesive — it is unmeasured.
D27 Navigability — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. Navigability is taken over call sites whose callee resolved. For C# that population includes calls into referenced assemblies; for this language only calls declared inside the repository count, so the abstention threshold reads the repository's use of its standard library as a resolution failure. That is a limit of this analyzer, not a build problem in this repository.
D32 Data Compliance (PII/GDPR) — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. `harness/bench/run.ts`, `harness/store.ts`, `pages/demos/markdown-chat.data.ts`, `pages/demos/rich-note.model.ts`, `src/layout.ts`, … (+2 more) produced a parse error, so every rule in this engine's `gdpr.yml` was absent there. That absence is NOT a clean result: these rules detect personal data crossing a boundary into a log sink, a URL or browser storage, and a file that was never parsed cannot report any of the three. The rest of the tree analysed normally and its rows above stand; only these files are unaccounted for. You can widen what we reach: fix the syntax error (or exclude the file deliberately) and re-scan to cover it.
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.
AXR1 Runtime accessibility — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. Render strategy: boot via DevServer (start). the dev server did not expose a crawlable HTTP endpoint in time — no runtime evidence.
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.
M3 Folder & project structure — 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. Whether the tests sit apart from production code is not visible here, because the suite is not in a form this pass reads. The test-separation credit is granted rather than withheld: this is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about the repository's tests. You can widen what we reach: keep the test surface somewhere a reader can find it without opening a binary — an exported/checked-in test source tree beside the production code makes the suite reviewable, diffable and discoverable by tooling.
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.
P1 CI/CD gates — 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. A CI pipeline exists and the word "test" appears, but no explicit test-runner invocation (your stack's test command, or a test job) was matched — so either the gate runs tests through a step this pass could not recognise, or "test" is incidental here (a path, "latest", a reporter). Which of the two it is cannot be settled from this dimension's evidence; the coverage dimensions report whether a suite exists at all. You can widen what we reach: name the test runner explicitly in the pipeline step (your stack's test command, or a job named for the suite) so the gate is unambiguous to a reader and to this pass.
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 none applies: this repository publishes a library and deploys nothing (no container, IaC or deployment manifest), so it holds no runtime state of its own. Any data-access dependency it declares is the store it is a CLIENT for, not one it operates. The DR control belongs to whoever runs that data.
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.
X27 Collection changed while being enumerated — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check reads C# syntax, and Java, Rust, Erlang, F#, Python, Dart, Ruby, Scala and Kotlin source only, and no C# was loaded, no Java, Rust, Erlang, F#, Python, Dart, Ruby, Scala or Kotlin 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.
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.
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.
D13 REDACTED Scanning: REDACTED detection is signature- and entropy-based on the current tree — a secret that does not match a known pattern, or one already rotated, will not be flagged (a clean scan is "nothing matched", not "no secrets exist").
D15 Churn × Complexity Hotspots: Churn hotspots come from git history — a freshly imported or squashed repository has no churn signal, and recent rewrites can mask a historically risky file.
D17 Explicit Debt: Acknowledged-debt signals (TODO/FIXME, suppressions, dead code) are textual — undocumented debt that nobody marked, and debt that lives in design rather than annotations, is invisible. Committed machine-written code (scaffolded migrations, designer/codegen output, generated stubs) is excluded — it is never the team's dead code to delete.
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.
D20 ADR Quality: ADR quality is an LLM read of the decision records present — it cannot know about decisions made and never recorded, and its verdict is sampled and advisory.
D26 Project Cohesion: Project focus is sized from members/namespaces per project — a project that is broad by deliberate design reads the same as one that has sprawled.
D28 Secrets (history): Secret-history scanning sweeps the git log for known patterns — a secret that predates the available history, or never matched a signature, is not found (clean means "nothing matched in the history we can see").
D29 Static Analysis (SAST): SAST findings are pattern-based (semgrep) — it finds classes of bug it has rules for; logic flaws, auth/authorization gaps and issues needing runtime context are out of reach (and clean means "no rule matched").
D30 Dependency Vulnerabilities: CVE matching depends on accurate package/version metadata and on the advisory databases — a vulnerability with no published advisory, or in code not declared as a dependency, is not seen. Coverage needs a RESOLVED graph: an unpinned requirements.txt, or a pom without a resolved build, yields partial coverage rather than a clean verdict. An ecosystem the analyzer cannot scan is reported as unmeasured, never as clean.
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.
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.
+ 53 more group(s) — more in Appendix A; the complete list is findings.md.
What to do
Bring the 7 bodies over 60 down to 60 or less in Cyclomatic Complexity — start with line-break.walkPreparedComplexLines (cyclomatic 263), rich-inline.prepareRichInline (cyclomatic 187), prepare.measureAnalysis (cyclomatic 113). — This score is capped by its worst body, so a finding fixed alone moves it by almost nothing — the next one down takes its place. Refactoring these 7 together lifts Cyclomatic Complexity from 2.0 to about 3.2/10, projected with the scoring formula itself and assuming each lands exactly at 60; a cleaner split scores higher.
Enforce Cyclomatic Complexity in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.
Detailed fixes: d1_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.
What it measures: How hard the code is for a person to follow, beyond raw branching.
Method: Cognitive complexity per method (Sonar-style nesting-penalized score), computed exhaustively over production code, excluding test projects. Deterministic.
+ 85 more group(s) — more in Appendix A; the complete list is findings.md.
What to do
Bring the 91 bodies over 15 down to 15 or less in Cognitive Complexity — start with line-break.walkPreparedComplexLines (cognitive 599), rich-inline.prepareRichInline (cognitive 302), prepare.measureAnalysis (cognitive 180). — This score is capped by its worst body, so a finding fixed alone moves it by almost nothing — the next one down takes its place. Refactoring these 91 together lifts Cognitive Complexity from 2.0 to about 10.0/10, projected with the scoring formula itself and assuming each lands exactly at 15.
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 7 FunctionTooLong finding(s) in God Classes — start with rich-inline.ts (2), line-break.ts, invariants.ts. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (7 warning-level).
Resolve the 7 FileTooLong finding(s) in God Classes — start with rich-inline.ts, line-break.ts, measurement.ts. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (7 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.
Do you agree with this assessment?
D9 · Test Distribution10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified
What it measures: Whether the test suite has a healthy mix of unit / integration / end-to-end tests.
Method: Test projects classified (Unit/Integration/BDD/E2E) from compiled metadata; test methods counted exhaustively across projects with placement-agnostic disk fallback. Deterministic.
323 test methods: 323 unit, 0 integration, 0 BDD, 0 e2e. The JavaScript/TypeScript suite contributes 323 `it`/`test` case(s) across 9 test file(s) declaring at least one; its tier split is read from package names and paths only.
✓ On the Gold path — maintain.
Detailed fixes: d9_recommendation.md.
Do you agree with this assessment?
D10 · Test Quality10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ 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.
4 skipped (4 with a documented reason), 0 zero-assertion, no mocking-framework packages referenced (hand-written doubles or no mocking) across 323 tests.
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 24 Hotspot finding(s) in Churn × Complexity Hotspots — start with run.ts (2), line-break.ts, rich-inline.ts. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (24 warning-level).
Detailed fixes: d15_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.
What it measures: Acknowledged debt left in the code — TODOs, dead code, suppressed warnings.
Method: Roslyn syntactic debt markers (suppressions/TODO/FIXME/HACK/empty-catch/commented-code/Obsolete) plus SymbolFinder dead-code analysis; weighted-debt-per-KLoC density deducted 2.0x per unit. Deterministic, exhaustive.
0 deducted task-comment markers across 22982 LoC (0.0/KLoC) → score 10.0. Task comments only: this repository's language is read without a compiler, so D17's suppression, dead-code and commented-out-code arms did not run and this score counts fewer marker kinds than a .NET repository's would.
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.
1 of 1 documentation facets pass in full. 6 document(s) read across 1 unit(s).
✓ On the Gold path — maintain.
Detailed fixes: d19_recommendation.md.
Do you agree with this assessment?
D20 · ADR Quality0.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified
What it measures: Whether architecture decisions are recorded well (context, decision, consequences).
Method: Per-ADR judgment by language model at low temperature with two-pass stability; confidence is share of ADRs evaluated; enforcement-field presence detected deterministically. Advisory.
0 of 1 build units (npm) flagged as possibly oversized/incoherent. This repository's .cpp source was read by no build unit, so this covers part of the tree, not all of it.
What it measures: Whether any secrets were ever committed — scanned across the full git history, not just now.
Method: REDACTED scan via TWO gitleaks detect passes in an isolated checkout — the full git history, then a second --no-git pass over the working tree as it stands — merged and de-duplicated by (rule, file, line); each match flagged High. Both invocations are recorded in the audit trail. Exhaustive; when the tool is absent, or when its output cannot be parsed into the expected shape, the dimension is WITHHELD as an explicit measurement gap on our side — unscored and excluded from the lens, never a hedged middling score.
2 finding(s): 0 critical, 2 high, 0 medium, 0 low. Remediation for historically-committed secrets is credential rotation — they remain in history regardless of later deletion.
REDACTED
REDACTED
What to do
Resolve the 2 REDACTED finding(s) in Secrets (history) — start with REDACTED, REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 issue-level).
Resolve the 1 Rotate the exposed credentials finding(s) in Secrets (history). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 recommendation-level).
Detailed fixes: d28_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.
What it measures: Real static-analysis (SAST) findings — likely security bugs in the code, any language.
Method: Polyglot static analysis via semgrep across the repo using the pinned, image-baked p/security-audit + p/owasp-top-ten rulesets (no scan-time registry fetch); severity rules (ERROR/WARNING/INFO) map to a full-band severity-weighted score. Exhaustive, deterministic; degrades on parse failure.
Coverage: semgrep pattern rules over all files — exhaustive for the rule set, blind to classes of bug without a rule (clean = no rule matched).
10 finding(s): 0 critical, 5 high, 5 medium, 0 low. 5 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 9 file(s) — `harness/bench/run.ts` (line 181), `harness/icu.test.ts` (line 141), `harness/store.ts` (line 148), `pages/demos/markdown-chat.data.ts` (line 1, line 2, line 3, …), `pages/demos/rich-note.model.ts` (lines 117–136, lines 136–149), … (+4 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.
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
What to do
Resolve the 2 REDACTED finding(s) in Static Analysis (SAST) — start with REDACTED (2). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 warning-level).
Resolve the 2 REDACTED finding(s) in Static Analysis (SAST) — start with REDACTED, REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 warning-level).
No action in Static Analysis (SAST) — all 5 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 (5 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 2 High CVE finding(s) in Dependency Vulnerabilities — start with REDACTED (2). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 issue-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.
Every significant source file has living knowledge — recently and meaningfully worked. Counted over 62 of the 68 production source files in this repository: the rest are under the ~2,400-byte size floor this dimension measures over.
What it measures: Whether files that change together actually belong together — pairs that repeatedly co-change in git history despite having no explicit code dependency, surfacing the hidden/logical coupling (and boundaries in the wrong place) a static scan can't see.
Method: Pairwise co-occurrence over the per-commit file sets in git history (production source only — tests and generated dropped): Degree-of-Coupling = shared ÷ min individual revisions, reported above noise floors (each file ≥10 revisions, ≥5 shared commits, ≥50% strength); sweeping commits excluded. Deterministic over fixed history.
Coverage: Population: PRODUCTION source files only — test and generated files are dropped before pairing, so a class co-changing with its own test (trivially ~100%) can't drown the real production↔production coupling. Pairs ranked by Degree-of-Coupling. A non-source file is never a coupling PARTICIPANT either: documentation, schemas, config and data files are dropped with the rest, so a code↔docs pair — a command and the reference page that restates it — is not reported however strongly the two co-change; nor is coupling that runs THROUGH a build step or config file.
Resolve the 1 Change coupling finding(s) in Change Coupling — start with han-kerning.ts. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
Detailed fixes: d35_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.
What it measures: Whether 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.
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.
Other · Code Health — Unreviewed-generation residue in this repository's JavaScript/TypeScript: functions whose whole body still throws a "not implemented" error, and placeholder text (lorem ipsum, changeme/replace_me…) left in strings and JSX of non-test, non-generated code. Scored as a quality signature, never as a claim about authorship.
Method: Roslyn syntax scan: NotImplementedException throws and placeholder string literals in non-test, non-generated shipped code. Deterministic, code-shape signature.
Other · Code Health — Unfinished work detected by code SHAPE, not keywords, in this repository's JavaScript/TypeScript: functions that only throw a "not implemented" error, functions that take inputs and return a constant or do nothing, async functions that never await, dead `if (false)` branches, and skeleton classes most of whose methods are holes.
Method: Roslyn syntax scan: incompleteness by code shape (constant-returning methods, async-never-await, #if false branches, guards that return what the code already falls through to, tests an earlier guard already decided, comparisons against NaN, skeleton types), not keyword-gated. Deterministic, code-shape heuristic.
`resolveReport` has an empty body — confirm it's an intentional no-op and not an unfinished method. — scripts/grapheme-check/run.ts:18
`failReport` has an empty body — confirm it's an intentional no-op and not an unfinished method. — scripts/grapheme-check/run.ts:19
What to do
Clear the softer debt: re-enable or delete skipped tests, decide whether each empty function is a deliberate no-op (and say so in a comment), and replace blanket `eslint-disable` / `@ts-nocheck` with targeted, justified suppressions.
Maturity · Maturity — Whether the repo and its projects have a README, and whether it's substantive and current.
Method: Filesystem scan: README presence, word count, and headings for depth; git history for staleness. Exhaustive across root and project dirs, deterministic.
What to do
Explain in the README how to run the tests. Add a section called Testing to the README in the repository's top folder, saying how to run the test suite.
Add an 'Architecture' / 'How it works' section to the root README — the high-level shape.
Maturity · Maturity — Whether key decisions (ADRs) and the high-level shape (C4/diagrams) are written down.
Method: Filesystem scan: ADR folder/naming conventions or content, plus Mermaid/PlantUML/C4/architecture.md discovery. Exhaustive, deterministic.
No Architecture Decision Records found — no conventional ADR directory, no numbered `NNNN-title` documents in any markup this check reads, and nothing ADR-shaped by content. Design rationale recorded elsewhere (a design-notes tree, a mailing list, pull-request discussion) is not visible to this check and is not re-findable per decision, so a future maintainer cannot ask why one choice was made and get an answer.
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.
Do you agree with this assessment?
P1 · CI/CD gates8.5 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified
Readiness · Readiness — Whether an automated pipeline builds and tests every change.
Method: Filesystem scan: CI workflow files (.github/workflows, .gitlab-ci.yml, etc.) for build and test stages. Exhaustive, deterministic.
What to do
Run the test suite in CI via an explicit runner step for your stack, and gate merges on it.
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 · Observability0.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified
Readiness · Readiness — Whether the code is diagnosable in production — structured logging, tracing/metrics, health checks.
No logging call was found in the 34 JavaScript/TypeScript, Swift production file(s) this check read across 2 module(s). Each was searched for its ecosystem's logging libraries (JavaScript/TypeScript: pino, winston, bunyan, log4js, loglevel, consola, the NestJS Logger; Swift: os.Logger/os_log/NSLog, swift-log, CocoaLumberjack, SwiftyBeaver, XCGLogger) and for a call on a receiver named `log`/`logger` (or ending in `Logger`/`_logger`) with a level verb. It cannot see logging through a repo-local wrapper named otherwise, or in source it did not read — this is 'no logging found by this walk', not a verdict that nothing here logs. If it is right, production issues will be hard to diagnose.
What to do
Adopt pino (or winston) and log at meaningful points in the services you run.
Consider OpenTelemetry tracing/metrics (@opentelemetry/sdk-node) and a health-check endpoint (@godaddy/terminus or a /health route) for operability.
Readiness · Readiness — Whether SAST, secret/dependency scanning and performance benchmarking are wired in (presence, not runtime).
Method: Filesystem scan: SAST configuration, dependency-update automation, secret scanning, and a benchmark harness or benchmark step — in this repository's own ecosystem. Exhaustive, deterministic.
No static application security testing detected. For this repository's stack, add CodeQL's javascript-typescript pack, `semgrep --config=p/typescript`, or eslint-plugin-security as a CI step. What was searched, so you can tell an absence from a miss: the 833 CI workflow file(s) in this repository, and the scanner and linter configuration checked in beside them. A scan that runs outside CI, one configured in your forge's web UI rather than in a committed file, or a tool whose name is none of those this check carries, is not seen — if that is your case the row is wrong, and saying so is more useful than adding a second scanner.
What to do
Add a SAST step to CI running what this repository's stack ships: CodeQL's javascript-typescript pack, `semgrep --config=p/typescript`, or eslint-plugin-security — so a security regression fails the build instead of landing.
Enable Dependabot/Renovate or a dependency-review gate.
Add gitleaks/trufflehog in CI to block PRs that introduce committed secrets.
Readiness · Readiness — Whether releases are automated and safely reversible (probes, rolling updates, approval gates) — from manifests/pipeline files, not the live environment.
Method: Filesystem scan: deployment manifests/IaC (K8s YAML, Helm, Terraform) for rolling updates, probes, approval gates, migration hooks. Exhaustive, deterministic.
What to do
Make sure a person approves each release. The release job names an environment, but its approval rules live in the code host's settings, where Watchdog can't see them. Check that a reviewer must approve each release, or publish releases as drafts first, so a bad build can be stopped before anyone downloads it.
Readiness · Performance — Whether asynchronous code stays responsive — it avoids sync-over-async blocking (a .NET .Wait()/.GetAwaiter().GetResult(), a time.sleep or blocking HTTP call inside a Python coroutine, a *Sync call inside an async JavaScript function, block_on inside a Rust async fn, runBlocking inside a Kotlin suspend function, block() inside a Reactor publisher) that stalls a thread or event loop and risks deadlock, and, where the code is a reusable library on .NET, awaits with ConfigureAwait(false) so it never captures and stalls its caller's context.
Method: Production-source scan: sync-over-async blocking counted everywhere — .Wait()/.GetAwaiter().GetResult() in .NET; off .NET, read from the language model, a blocking call inside an async function (Python, TS/JS, Rust, Kotlin, Swift, Dart) or inside a Java method returning a Reactor Mono/Flux or a Scala method returning a Future or effect — and, for a .NET library with ≥5 awaits, the share of awaits using ConfigureAwait(false). Deterministic, syntax/text detection.
`mkdirSync` in `benchBundle` blocks the event loop until it finishes — a blocking call inside async code stalls the event loop — every other request waits for as long as it runs. — harness/bench/lib.ts:86
`writeFileSync` in `benchBundle` blocks the event loop until it finishes — a blocking call inside async code stalls the event loop — every other request waits for as long as it runs. — harness/bench/lib.ts:88
`Bun.gzipSync` in `benchBundle` blocks the event loop until it finishes — a blocking call inside async code stalls the event loop — every other request waits for as long as it runs. — harness/bench/lib.ts:92
`mkdirSync` in `bench` blocks the event loop until it finishes — a blocking call inside async code stalls the event loop — every other request waits for as long as it runs. — harness/bench/run.ts:296
`writeFileSync` in `bench` blocks the event loop until it finishes — a blocking call inside async code stalls the event loop — every other request waits for as long as it runs. — harness/bench/run.ts:298
`writeFileSync` in `save` blocks the event loop until it finishes — a blocking call inside async code stalls the event loop — every other request waits for as long as it runs. — harness/bench/run.ts:302
`rmSync` in `same` blocks the event loop until it finishes — a blocking call inside async code stalls the event loop — every other request waits for as long as it runs. — harness/browsers.ts:363
`execFileSync` in `openApp` blocks the event loop until it finishes — a blocking call inside async code stalls the event loop — every other request waits for as long as it runs. — harness/browsers.ts:369
`rmSync` in `cleanup` blocks the event loop until it finishes — a blocking call inside async code stalls the event loop — every other request waits for as long as it runs. — harness/browsers.ts:381
`mkdirSync` in `launchChrome` blocks the event loop until it finishes — a blocking call inside async code stalls the event loop — every other request waits for as long as it runs. — harness/browsers.ts:396
`writeFileSync` in `launchChrome` blocks the event loop until it finishes — a blocking call inside async code stalls the event loop — every other request waits for as long as it runs. — harness/browsers.ts:397
`readFileSync` in `launchChrome` blocks the event loop until it finishes — a blocking call inside async code stalls the event loop — every other request waits for as long as it runs. — harness/browsers.ts:412
`readFileSync` in `launchWebKitHost` blocks the event loop until it finishes — a blocking call inside async code stalls the event loop — every other request waits for as long as it runs. — harness/browsers.ts:469
`execFileSync` in `remove` blocks the event loop until it finishes — a blocking call inside async code stalls the event loop — every other request waits for as long as it runs. — harness/browsers.ts:515
`mkdirSync` in `record` blocks the event loop until it finishes — a blocking call inside async code stalls the event loop — every other request waits for as long as it runs. — harness/cli.ts:220
`mkdirSync` in `check` blocks the event loop until it finishes — a blocking call inside async code stalls the event loop — every other request waits for as long as it runs. — harness/cli.ts:353
`mkdirSync` in `drift` blocks the event loop until it finishes — a blocking call inside async code stalls the event loop — every other request waits for as long as it runs. — harness/cli.ts:519
`rmSync` in `drift` blocks the event loop until it finishes — a blocking call inside async code stalls the event loop — every other request waits for as long as it runs. — harness/cli.ts:521
`existsSync` in `drift` blocks the event loop until it finishes — a blocking call inside async code stalls the event loop — every other request waits for as long as it runs. — harness/cli.ts:522
`copyFileSync` in `drift` blocks the event loop until it finishes — a blocking call inside async code stalls the event loop — every other request waits for as long as it runs. (×2) — harness/cli.ts:522, harness/cli.ts:560
`readdirSync` in `main` blocks the event loop until it finishes — a blocking call inside async code stalls the event loop — every other request waits for as long as it runs. — harness/cli.ts:722
`execFileSync` in `main` blocks the event loop until it finishes — a blocking call inside async code stalls the event loop — every other request waits for as long as it runs. — harness/cli.ts:739
`existsSync` in `bundle` blocks the event loop until it finishes — a blocking call inside async code stalls the event loop — every other request waits for as long as it runs. — harness/run.ts:42
`existsSync` in `fetch` blocks the event loop until it finishes — a blocking call inside async code stalls the event loop — every other request waits for as long as it runs. — scripts/grapheme-check/run.ts:36
`readFileSync` in `fetch` blocks the event loop until it finishes — a blocking call inside async code stalls the event loop — every other request waits for as long as it runs. — scripts/grapheme-check/run.ts:38
What to do
TypeScript/JavaScript: use the promise APIs (fs/promises, a promisified child_process.execFile, the async zlib/crypto functions) and await them instead of the *Sync variants.
Do you agree with this assessment?
R1 · Type Safety10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified
React / JS · Code Health — How much of the frontend is typed TypeScript vs untyped JavaScript.
Method: Frontend file inventory: the share of typed TypeScript vs untyped JavaScript across the source tree. Deterministic, exhaustive over frontend files.
React / JS · Code Health — Near-exact copy-pasted blocks of substantial extent across the frontend (the D4 clone algorithm over JS/TS tokens, D-386): a block is reported only where its copies still agree on most of their own identifiers and literals, or were renamed as they were pasted but kept most of their constants, and where the copies carry enough code to stand on their own or the copied extent reaches 30 lines — so a re-implementation sharing neither names nor values, and a small pasted declaration, are both found and deliberately not reported, and a clean R10 is not a claim that nothing was copied.
Method: Near-exact copy-pasted blocks of substantial extent across the frontend (the D4 clone algorithm run over JS/TS tokens). Masking finds the candidates; a block is reported when its copies still agree on most of their own identifiers and literals, or when a renamed copy still agrees on most of its constants, AND the copies carry enough code to stand on their own — or when the copied extent reaches 30 lines. So a re-implementation sharing neither names nor values, and a small pasted declaration, are deliberately not counted. Deterministic.
harness/invariants.ts:250 · harness/invariants.ts:336 — the two spans are one implementation copied and then locally edited — 200 tokens are still identical, in the same order in both spans, with only local edits between them. The copies have already begun to drift, which is this row's finding: an edit made to one and not the other changes behaviour silently. Diff the two spans first to learn what genuinely differs, then extract the shared core into one module both sites use, passing the differences in as parameters — or, if one copy exists only because the other could not be imported from its context, make one of them the single source the other is generated or re-exported from. If one copy is no longer reachable, delete it rather than letting it shadow the live one. — harness/invariants.ts:250
src/rich-inline.ts:993 · src/rich-inline.ts:1017 — all 2 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — src/rich-inline.ts:993
scripts/package-smoke-test.ts:40 · scripts/package-smoke-test.ts:69 — all 2 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — scripts/package-smoke-test.ts:40
src/layout.ts:300 · src/layout.ts:323 — all 2 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — src/layout.ts:300
REDACTED:891 · scripts/generate-webkit-generic-families.ts:200 — the 2 copies sit in sibling files in one directory, so check first whether one of them (or an existing module there) already owns this behaviour and the others should call it; otherwise extract it into one module in that directory and have each site call it. — REDACTED:891
harness/store.ts:150 · harness/store.ts:165 — all 2 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — harness/store.ts:150
REDACTED:89 · scripts/generate-webkit-generic-families.ts:36 — the two spans are one implementation copied and then locally edited — 61 tokens are still identical, in the same order in both files, with only local edits between them. The copies have already begun to drift, which is this row's finding: an edit made to one and not the other changes behaviour silently. Diff the two spans first to learn what genuinely differs, then extract the shared core into one module both sites use, passing the differences in as parameters — or, if one copy exists only because the other could not be imported from its context, make one of them the single source the other is generated or re-exported from. If one copy is no longer reachable, delete it rather than letting it shadow the live one. — REDACTED:89
src/gecko-line-breaks.ts:484 · src/gecko-line-breaks.ts: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. — src/gecko-line-breaks.ts:484
harness/invariants.ts:284 · harness/invariants.ts:306 — all 2 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — harness/invariants.ts:284
harness/predict.ts:206 · harness/predict.ts:267 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. — harness/predict.ts:206
harness/predict.ts:399 · harness/predict.ts:413 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. — harness/predict.ts:399
harness/sets/rich.ts:401 · harness/sets/rich.ts:523 — all 2 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — harness/sets/rich.ts:401
REDACTED:809 · scripts/grapheme-check/check.ts:85 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — REDACTED:809
scripts/grapheme-check/check.ts:69 · scripts/grapheme-check/check.ts:112 — all 2 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — scripts/grapheme-check/check.ts:69
src/gecko-line-breaks.ts:69 · src/gecko-line-breaks.ts:75 — the two spans are one implementation copied and then locally edited — 53 tokens are still identical, in the same order in both spans, with only local edits between them. The copies have already begun to drift, which is this row's finding: an edit made to one and not the other changes behaviour silently. Diff the two spans first to learn what genuinely differs, then extract the shared core into one module both sites use, passing the differences in as parameters — or, if one copy exists only because the other could not be imported from its context, make one of them the single source the other is generated or re-exported from. If one copy is no longer reachable, delete it rather than letting it shadow the live one. — src/gecko-line-breaks.ts:69
What to do
Act on each finding's own remediation rather than one rule: the move depends on what recurs. Where the copies are executable blocks, give the shared part one home and call it from each site; where they are declarations, a listing, a specialisation already delegating to its base, or one shape repeated per entity, there is no call site and the move is a shared type, a generated set or a factory — sometimes there is nothing to extract.
React / JS · Code Health — Per-function cyclomatic/cognitive complexity from the token-level function scanner (D-386) — real branching, not a regex heuristic.
Method: Per-function cyclomatic/cognitive complexity from a token-level function scanner (real branching, not a regex heuristic), computed over every frontend function. Deterministic.
walkPreparedComplexLines has cyclomatic complexity 264 and cognitive complexity 749; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — src/line-break.ts:464
prepareRichInline has cyclomatic complexity 196 and cognitive complexity 350; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — src/rich-inline.ts:186
measureAnalysis has cyclomatic complexity 114 and cognitive complexity 194; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — src/prepare.ts:352
classify has cyclomatic complexity 98 and cognitive complexity 110; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — REDACTED:586
(anonymous) has cyclomatic complexity 65 and cognitive complexity 130; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — harness/invariants.ts:318
segmentAtLineBreaks has cyclomatic complexity 65 and cognitive complexity 94; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — src/analysis.ts:334
render has cyclomatic complexity 64 and cognitive complexity 98; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — pages/demos/editorial-engine.ts:623
markWordBreaks has cyclomatic complexity 62 and cognitive complexity 163; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — src/gecko-line-breaks.ts:448
caseProblem has cyclomatic complexity 61 and cognitive complexity 53; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive sits below cyclomatic here, so much of the count is breadth — arms side by side rather than stacked — and splitting per arm would leave a function per arm; group the work between the checks into named steps instead. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — harness/store.ts:206
createLine has cyclomatic complexity 52 and cognitive complexity 108; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — src/rich-inline.ts:959
analyzeText has cyclomatic complexity 51 and cognitive complexity 121; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — src/analysis.ts:439
richTemplates has cyclomatic complexity 46 and cognitive complexity 68; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — harness/sets/rich.ts:226
check has cyclomatic complexity 45 and cognitive complexity 68; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — harness/cli.ts:274
transformText has cyclomatic complexity 41 and cognitive complexity 96; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — src/gecko-line-breaks.ts:181
nextBreakablePosition has cyclomatic complexity 41 and cognitive complexity 69; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — REDACTED:695
build has cyclomatic complexity 40 and cognitive complexity 69; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — harness/sets/sample.ts:349
setEmptyObjectFacts has cyclomatic complexity 39 and cognitive complexity 68; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — src/rich-inline.ts:732
plainDisagreement has cyclomatic complexity 39 and cognitive complexity 54; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — harness/predict.ts:203
(anonymous) has cyclomatic complexity 38 and cognitive complexity 64; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — src/layout.test.ts:6110
isWideCharacter has cyclomatic complexity 38 and cognitive complexity 37; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive sits below cyclomatic here, so much of the count is breadth — arms side by side rather than stacked — and splitting per arm would leave a function per arm; group the work between the checks into named steps instead. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — src/layout.test.ts:95
What to do
Break down the listed branch-heavy functions; aim P95 cyclomatic ≤ 5.
Do you agree with this assessment?
R3 · Large Files0.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified
React / JS · Code Health — How many source files exceed the large-file threshold.
Method: Components/modules exceeding the large-file threshold, counted exhaustively across the frontend source tree. Deterministic.
src/measurement.ts has 1386 significant lines (blank lines excluded), over the 400-line bar, and contains logic — a file this long is usually several responsibilities in one module. — src/measurement.ts:1
src/rich-inline.ts has 1218 significant lines (blank lines excluded), over the 400-line bar, and contains logic — a file this long is usually several responsibilities in one module. — src/rich-inline.ts:1
src/line-break.ts has 1134 significant lines (blank lines excluded), over the 400-line bar, and contains logic — a file this long is usually several responsibilities in one module. — src/line-break.ts:1
REDACTED has 852 significant lines (blank lines excluded), over the 400-line bar, and contains logic — a file this long is usually several responsibilities in one module. — REDACTED:1
REDACTED has 823 significant lines (blank lines excluded), over the 400-line bar, and contains logic — a file this long is usually several responsibilities in one module. — REDACTED:1
harness/cli.ts has 757 significant lines (blank lines excluded), over the 400-line bar, and contains logic — a file this long is usually several responsibilities in one module. — harness/cli.ts:1
src/prepare.ts has 694 significant lines (blank lines excluded), over the 400-line bar, and contains logic — a file this long is usually several responsibilities in one module. — src/prepare.ts:1
src/analysis.ts has 674 significant lines (blank lines excluded), over the 400-line bar, and contains logic — a file this long is usually several responsibilities in one module. — src/analysis.ts:1
harness/sets/sample.ts has 650 significant lines (blank lines excluded), over the 400-line bar, and contains logic — a file this long is usually several responsibilities in one module. — harness/sets/sample.ts:1
src/gecko-line-breaks.ts has 636 significant lines (blank lines excluded), over the 400-line bar, and contains logic — a file this long is usually several responsibilities in one module. — src/gecko-line-breaks.ts:1
harness/invariants.ts has 615 significant lines (blank lines excluded), over the 400-line bar, and contains logic — a file this long is usually several responsibilities in one module. — harness/invariants.ts:1
harness/browsers.ts has 564 significant lines (blank lines excluded), over the 400-line bar, and contains logic — a file this long is usually several responsibilities in one module. — harness/browsers.ts:1
harness/score.ts has 531 significant lines (blank lines excluded), over the 400-line bar, and contains logic — a file this long is usually several responsibilities in one module. — harness/score.ts:1
harness/sets/rich.ts has 525 significant lines (blank lines excluded), over the 400-line bar, and contains logic — a file this long is usually several responsibilities in one module. — harness/sets/rich.ts:1
harness/sets/widths.ts has 487 significant lines (blank lines excluded), over the 400-line bar, and contains logic — a file this long is usually several responsibilities in one module. — harness/sets/widths.ts:1
harness/predict.ts has 449 significant lines (blank lines excluded), over the 400-line bar, and contains logic — a file this long is usually several responsibilities in one module. — harness/predict.ts:1
What to do
Split each oversized file along the responsibilities already in it, into smaller focused modules in the same package.
Do you agree with this assessment?
R4 · Test Coverage5.3 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified
React / JS · Readiness — Static test reachability (D-386): the share of production files reachable from any test via the import graph — measured without running anything.
Method: Static test reachability: the share of production files reachable from any test via the import graph — measured without running anything. Deterministic.
No test imports this module directly or transitively. Import reachability cannot see a test that executes a file by path instead of importing it, nor one that drives it through a running browser by navigating to a URL — if neither does, no test reaches this one. (×29) — pages/demos/markdown-chat.model.ts:1, pages/demos/editorial-engine.ts:1, pages/demos/dynamic-layout.ts:1, …
What to do
Add tests that import the unreached modules (directly or through their public entry).
Do you agree with this assessment?
R6 · Tooling10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified
React / JS · Readiness — Whether the project wires up test, lint and typecheck — detected from each package.json script's COMMAND (eslint / tsc / vitest / jest / playwright), not just its name, and corroborated against CI-workflow invocations so a tool run only in CI still counts.
Method: package.json scanned for test/lint/typecheck script wiring. Deterministic presence check.
Do you agree with this assessment?
R7 · Dead Code10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified
React / JS · Code Health — Files unreachable from every application/tooling/test entry point, and exports nothing imports (module-graph reachability, D-386).
Method: Dead code: files unreachable from every application/tooling/test entry point plus exports nothing imports, via module-graph reachability. Deterministic, exhaustive over the import graph.
React / JS · Readiness — npm dependency truthfulness (D-386): unused dependencies, imports not declared anywhere, and type-/test-only packages shipped as production deps.
Method: npm dependency truthfulness: unused dependencies, imports declared nowhere, and type-/test-only packages shipped as production deps — from the manifest + import graph. Deterministic.
Declared in the root package.json but never imported anywhere in that package or its workspace members — no static import reaches it. Usually that is dead weight and attack surface, but two shapes are indistinguishable from source and are NOT dead: an optional or native peer that another dependency loads dynamically at runtime, and a package a build, docs or test step installs and invokes separately. Confirm which of the three this is before removing it.
What to do
Remove unused dependencies, declare unlisted imports explicitly, and demote type-/test-only packages to devDependencies.
React / JS · Architecture — Import cycles in the module graph (D-386) — files that can only be understood and changed together.
Method: Import cycles in the module graph, detected exhaustively over JS/TS imports (the same cycle detection as the .NET coupling dimension). Deterministic.
Other · Code Health — Whether the code avoids sync-over-async (deadlock-prone blocking on tasks) and async void.
Method: Roslyn syntax scan: async methods scanned for .Wait()/.GetAwaiter().GetResult() and async-void outside event handlers. Deterministic, hard fact per invocation.
Other · Code Health — Whether any branch is dead by construction — a switch arm whose label can never equal a case-normalised subject, or an `else if` whose predicate the arm above has already swallowed.
Method: Roslyn syntax + semantics: switch labels compared against the subject's own case normaliser, and if/else-if chains checked for a literal an earlier arm's containment test already swallows. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.
Do you agree with this assessment?
X13 · Undrained process stream10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged
Other · Code Health — Whether a child process that has BOTH standard streams redirected drains both — reading one to the end while the other is never read deadlocks once the child fills the unread pipe.
Method: Roslyn syntax + semantics: ProcessStartInfo launches with both streams redirected, checked for a drain of each stream across the enclosing type. On a repository with no .NET source it reads JavaScript/TypeScript off the engine’s own token stream (test, vendored and minified paths not) with the same rule: a `spawn` imported from `child_process` whose stdout and stderr are both pipes (no options, no `stdio`, or `stdio` of `'pipe'`), bound to a local that never leaves its scope, where exactly one of the two streams is read, the other never, and the child’s `close`/`exit` (or the read stream’s end) is awaited; a shell redirect in the call’s arguments or a `kill` of the child suppresses it. The same rule reads Python’s `subprocess.Popen`, Dart’s `Process.start`, Ruby’s `Open3.popen3`, and Scala’s JDK process starts (`new ProcessBuilder(…).start()` with no `redirectErrorStream`/`redirectError`/`redirectOutput`/`inheritIO`, `Runtime.getRuntime.exec`) where one of `getInputStream`/`getErrorStream` is read and the other never while `waitFor()` is called or the read stream is read to its end. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.
Other · Security — Whether a hand-rolled public/private IP check can be walked past — a method that unwraps IPv4-mapped IPv6 but returns the opposite verdict for the same host written as IPv4-compatible, 6to4 or NAT64.
Method: Roslyn syntax + semantics: methods that unwrap IPv4-mapped IPv6 and hand-roll IPv4 range carve-outs, checked for whether the IPv6 branch also accounts for the IPv4-compatible, 6to4 and NAT64 embeddings. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.
Do you agree with this assessment?
X15 · Unvalidated length from an untrusted reader10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged
Other · Security — Whether a length read out of the stream being parsed is bounded before it is allocated or read — an unchecked count taken from the input lets the input choose the allocation.
Method: Roslyn syntax + semantics: integer lengths read from a BinaryReader and spent on a bulk read or an array allocation, checked for any comparison or bounding call on the value anywhere in the method. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.
Other · Code Health — Whether a loop that shortens a string until it fits a length budget has a floor — one with none grinds the value down to the empty string, or past it into a negative-length `Substring`.
Method: Roslyn syntax + semantics: while/do loops whose body's only effect on a string is to drop its last character, checked for whether anything — a direct comparison on the length, a body guard, a break — bounds that length below. On a repository with no .NET source it reads JavaScript/TypeScript off the engine’s own token stream (test, vendored and minified paths not) with the same rule: a `while`/`do` loop whose body’s one assignment to a value is `x = x.slice(0, -1)` or `x = x.slice|substring|substr(0, x.length - 1)`, driven by a condition that reads `x.length` only as a term of a larger expression — never compared directly, never tested for truthiness, and with no other read of `x` — and whose body has no `break`, `return`, `throw` or `if` naming `x`. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.
Do you agree with this assessment?
X17 · Uncapped recursion over a caller-supplied document3.5 / 10Weak✓ Tool-verified
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.
`canonical` is exported and takes `value: unknown` from its caller, and it calls itself at line 177 (`canonical`) with a piece of `value` (and at line 183) — and nowhere in `canonical` is there a depth parameter, a descent counter, or any other cap. The walk therefore spends one stack frame per LEVEL of the value it is handed, so the nesting of the caller's document — not this code — decides how deep the stack goes. JavaScript sets no limit of its own on that nesting: `JSON.parse` accepts any depth, so a 100,000-byte body — inside Express's default 100kb limit — parses to 50,000 levels, and a walk like this one throws `RangeError: Maximum call stack size exceeded` long before it reaches the bottom. Wherever that throw lands, the work fails: a request errors, and a walk running outside any `try` — an event handler, a timer, a promise nobody awaits — takes the Node process down with every other request in flight. Thread a depth argument through `canonical` and reject the value past a fixed maximum, or rewrite the descent with an explicit stack. — harness/sets/build.ts:177
What to do
Each finding names the externally-callable member that accepts the document and the self-call that descends, and states that no depth parameter or counter exists anywhere in the walk. Confirm from the two, then thread a depth argument through the walk and reject documents past a fixed maximum, or rewrite it with an explicit stack.
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 async functions that make a cancellable request accept or pass on an AbortSignal (adoption curve).
Method: Roslyn scan: every async method (excluding framework-fixed overrides/Blazor handlers) checked for CancellationToken parameter presence. Deterministic, adoption percentage. On a repository with no .NET source it reads JavaScript/TypeScript off the engine’s own token stream (test, vendored and minified paths not) with the same question: every named async function that itself makes a request an AbortSignal can cancel (global `fetch`, axios and its file-local instances, ky, ofetch) counts, and it is compliant when its parameters or body name a signal or it hands one of its own parameters to the request as options; signatures a framework fixes (JSX event handlers, route and lifecycle exports, request-first handlers, `override`, `'use server'` modules, TanStack `mutationFn`) are exempt unless they take a signal. Deterministic, adoption percentage.
Only 0/1 async functions that make a cancellable request (fetch, axios, ky, ofetch) accept an AbortSignal or pass one on, so a request keeps running after whatever wanted it has given up — a page navigated away from, an unmounted component, a timed-out job. Take a `signal` (or an options object that carries one) and hand it to the request; where nothing could ever cancel the call, omitting it is a deliberate choice — judge against how the function is used.
`post` awaits `fetch(…)` but neither accepts an AbortSignal nor passes one on, so its caller cannot stop the request once it has started. Accept `{ signal }` and pass it through: `fetch(url, { signal })`. — REDACTED:16
What to do
Thread an AbortSignal through async functions that make requests, so the work stops when its caller gives up.
Other · Code Health — Whether a `when` guard is free of side effects — a guard that increments a counter or assigns while deciding whether its arm matches applies that change during PATTERN MATCHING, on an arm that may not be selected, and skips it entirely when a short-circuit to its left answers first.
Method: Roslyn syntax: `when` guards on case labels and switch-expression arms, read for a mutation (`++`/`--`/assignment) sitting in a position the guard's own `&&`/`||`/`??`/`?:`/`?.` can skip. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.
Other · Code Health — Whether a method that TAKES a lock or semaphore and gives it back from a flag-guarded `finally` returns the value that flag implies — reporting success while the guard hands the primitive back admits a second caller the exclusion was there to keep out, and reporting failure while the guard keeps it leaves nothing to ever give it back.
Method: Roslyn syntax: `try` statements whose `finally` releases a synchronisation primitive under a bare local-bool guard, where the method also TOOK that same primitive before the `try`, checked for a `return` of a bool literal whose value disagrees with the flag state the method's own straight-line assignments put it in. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.
Other · Code Health — Whether the work a diagnostic log line costs is paid only when that line is wanted — C# evaluates a call's arguments BEFORE the call, so a trace/debug message joined or projected out of a collection is built in full on every pass, and then discarded by a sink the shipped configuration leaves switched off.
Method: Roslyn syntax: log calls at a diagnostic level (a `Log`-prefixed method naming Trace/Debug/Verbose, or a bare `Debug`/`Trace`/`Verbose` on a receiver named for a logger), whose argument list is read for a call whose cost scales with a sequence — a LINQ operator, a materialisation, `string.Join`, a serializer — with no enclosing level check or conditional-compilation region. On a repository with no .NET source it reads JavaScript/TypeScript off the engine’s own token stream (test, vendored and minified paths not) with the same rule: a `debug`/`trace`/`verbose` call on a receiver named for a logger, or a `log`-prefixed method naming the level, whose argument calls an array operator (`map`/`filter`/`reduce`/`sort`/…), `Array.from`, `Object.keys/values/entries`, `JSON.stringify`/`util.inspect` over anything but a literal, or an array `join` — outside any arrow or function passed as an argument, which the logger calls only when the level is on — with no enclosing `if`, `&&` or `?:` whose condition names a level, a level string, or the `NODE_ENV`/`__DEV__`/`DEV` build switch. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.
Do you agree with this assessment?
X24 · Document value interpolated into markup unescaped10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged
Other · Security — Whether text read out of the document being converted is escaped before it is written into generated markup — a value the document's author chose, interpolated into an attribute the surrounding literal delimits, can close that attribute and open another.
Method: Roslyn semantic model over the whole compilation: a string-typed `Value`/`InnerText`/`InnerXml`/`Text` member declared inside `DocumentFormat.OpenXml` or `System.Xml` is a taint SOURCE, propagated through assignments, returns, arguments, tuple elements and string composition to its transitive closure, then read at interpolated-string holes that sit in a markup position the surrounding literal itself delimits. Escaper/encoder calls and enclosing validator conditions cut the flow. Flow- and container-insensitive by construction. A second arm needs no provenance at all and reports a type that CONTRADICTS ITSELF — the same expression escaped at one delimited markup hole and interpolated raw at another hole in the same markup position of the same type, which the type's own escaping proves is a defect without knowing where the value came from. On a repository with no .NET source it reads JavaScript/TypeScript off the token stream with the same rule: a DOM read of raw document text (`getAttribute`, `textContent`, `innerText`, `nodeValue`) is the source, propagated through local bindings and string composition, and judged at template-literal and concatenation holes in the same two delimited markup positions; escapers and validating conditions cut it, and documentation-site, test, vendored and minified scripts are not read. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.
Other · Code Health — Whether a value the caller is invited to supply is the value the type actually uses — a constructor parameter stored in a private field that nothing ever reads while the default it was given is spelled out a second time at the site that should have read it, a keyed lookup that falls back to a different setting than the one its key names while the same type falls back to the matching one for that same key, or a culture-sensitive parse given no format provider by a type that feeds its own settable culture to the same kind of parse elsewhere, or a number an entry point writes to standard output under the host's culture while the same entry point formats with the invariant culture elsewhere. Either way, every caller who supplies a value silently gets something else.
Method: Roslyn syntax: private instance fields of a non-partial type assigned in a constructor from one of its own parameters with a `??` fallback, checked for whether anything in the type body reads the field and whether that same fallback expression is spelled out again outside the constructor; and `??` fallbacks onto a member access from a lookup call carrying exactly one string literal, grouped by that key across the type and checked for a fallback member whose folded name disagrees with the key while a sibling site for the same key agrees with it. On a repository with no .NET source the first two arms read JavaScript/TypeScript off the engine’s own token stream (tests included, bundles and vendored paths not): a `#x`, `private` or `private` parameter-property instance field filled in the constructor from a parameter (or one member of one) through `??`/`||` or a parameter default, never read anywhere in the file by name, whose constructed default is spelled again in the class body; and `lookup("key") ?? s.member` grouped by key per class, or per module outside every class. The culture arm has no JavaScript counterpart: its parses take no locale. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.
Other · Code Health — Whether a value handed from a callback to the body that waits on it crosses on something built to be crossed — a `Queue<T>`/`List<T>`/`Dictionary<K,V>` written inside an event handler and read back outside it is mutated by two flows at once, and the semaphore or completion source beside it orders how MANY items exist while leaving the collection's own head, tail and backing array unprotected.
Method: Roslyn syntax: method, accessor, local-function and lambda bodies that declare BOTH a non-thread-safe generic collection (`Queue`/`Stack`/`List`/`Dictionary`/`HashSet`/`Sorted*`/`LinkedList`) and a synchronisation primitive (`SemaphoreSlim`/`TaskCompletionSource`/`ManualResetEvent(Slim)`/`AutoResetEvent`/`CountdownEvent`) as locals, then read for a `+=`-registered lambda that raises that primitive while the body outside every lambda waits on it — and, in that scope, a mutating call on the collection inside the lambda paired with a mention of it outside. Any `lock` in the scope abstains it. On a repository with no .NET source the same handoff is read in Java off the engine’s own token stream (test source sets, vendored and demonstration paths not): an `ArrayList`/`LinkedList`/`ArrayDeque`/`PriorityQueue`/`Hash*`/`LinkedHash*`/`Tree*` local and a `CountDownLatch`/`Semaphore`/`CompletableFuture` local, a lambda or anonymous class that raises the primitive and mutates the collection, and a wait outside it; any `synchronized` or `lock()` abstains the body. Because each of those primitives orders what the callback wrote before raising it, only a touch that provably overlaps the callback is convicted: one after the registration and before the next wait, or one in a loop registered-before, waiting on every pass and not declaring the collection. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.
Do you agree with this assessment?
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. (×5) — harness/browsers.ts:229, harness/browsers.ts:253, harness/browsers.ts:414, …
`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. — harness/browsers.ts:288
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.
Other · Code Health — Whether strict null checking is enabled and not undermined by heavy `!` assertion — TypeScript's `strictNullChecks` (which `strict` turns on) is what makes `string` exclude `null` and `undefined`, and the postfix `!` is the operator that silences it.
Method: Roslyn compiler-options scan: NullableContextOptions per project; null-forgiving (!) suppression density per 1k syntax nodes. Deterministic, adoption plus suppression penalty.
~76.2 `!` null assertions per 1k TypeScript source lines — 1237 assertion(s) across the 16223 source line(s) of the 40 TypeScript file(s) read, which is the only code the operator asserts anything in (a `!` in a `.js` file is not this operator and was not counted, and one in a file whose null checking is off silences nothing). Densest: src/rich-inline.ts (157), src/line-break.ts (99), REDACTED (98). Each one tells the compiler to trust the author about null, suppressing the very diagnostic `strictNullChecks` exists to produce.
What to do
The findings name the configuration each number was taken from and, for the assertions, the files that hold them. Turn null checking on where it is off — `"strict": true` in the base tsconfig that the others extend switches `strictNullChecks` on with the rest of the family — and then resolve the assertions rather than adding to them. A `!` on a value the checker could show to be null is a promise the author cannot check from where they are standing, and each one is a `TypeError: Cannot read properties of null` waiting for the path that makes it true; where the value genuinely cannot be null, say something the checker can see instead (narrow it with a test, make the property required, drop the `?`).
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 — 1 check(s) recorded observations but carry no score
These checks ran and found something, but they do not carry a score — either by design (an advisory check reports evidence rather than grading it) or because they could not be scored here. They are excluded from the score for that reason, not because there was nothing to see.
X10 Duplicated predicate — 3 observation(s) recorded · Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score.
Not evidenced — 2 control(s) we could not find positive evidence for
These checks grade a working control, and the repository shows no evidence of one. That is deliberately not scored as a zero: a repository cannot show an ops runbook, a database TTL or an infrastructure-side audit log, so absence of evidence here is not evidence the control is missing. It is also not a statement that the check is irrelevant to this codebase — the thing it grades applies; we just could not see it. Excluded from the score either way.
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.
P5 DR & Backup — not evidenced — repo shows no backup/RTO/RPO controls; absence of evidence is not evidence of a working control
Not included — 64 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 — Frontend below the scale floor (7 DOM element(s) < 25) — too little surface to assess accessibility.
AC2 Forms & labels — Frontend below the scale floor (7 DOM element(s) < 25) — too little surface to assess accessibility.
AC3 Page structure — Frontend below the scale floor (7 DOM element(s) < 25) — too little surface to assess accessibility.
AC4 Keyboard semantics — Frontend below the scale floor (7 DOM element(s) < 25) — too little surface to assess accessibility.
AC5 ARIA correctness — Frontend below the scale floor (7 DOM element(s) < 25) — too little surface to assess accessibility.
AC6 Visual & motion safety — Frontend below the scale floor (7 DOM element(s) < 25) — too little surface to assess accessibility.
AC7 A11y enforcement — Frontend below the scale floor (7 DOM element(s) < 25) — too little surface to assess accessibility.
AX1 Captive dependencies — Not applicable: this repository's Swift imports no dependency-injection container and defines no container of its own — nothing that both registers and resolves bindings, and nothing that names two lifetimes — so nothing holds one lifetime's instance while handing out another's; this repository's TypeScript imports no dependency-injection container and defines no container of its own — nothing that both registers and resolves bindings, and nothing that names two lifetimes — so nothing holds one lifetime's instance while handing out another's.
AX2 Stateful singletons — No container singleton was found, so there is no shared instance for concurrent requests to race on. No Swift request handler (a Vapor, Hummingbird, Kitura, Swifter or Perfect route handler, as a method or a registered closure) is declared, so no state is shared between request threads. TypeScript/JavaScript runs each process's requests on one event loop, so no two requests write a shared object at the same instant (interleaving across an await is a different defect).
AX5 Architecture & structure — not assessed — architecture style/structure is computed from a project graph (projects, types, module namespaces) that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
AX6 Interface segregation — no exported interface declares behaviour
AX7 Slice cohesion — not applicable — not a vertical-slice architecture
AX8 Test isolation — no test/production split to check
AX9 CQS / query purity — no CQRS query handlers detected — query purity is not applicable to this codebase
AXB2 Runtime readiness — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
AXR1 Runtime accessibility — the dev server did not expose a crawlable HTTP endpoint in time — no runtime evidence This is a statement about this run, not a statement about your application: nothing here says the surface is inaccessible, only that it was never rendered.
C1 Data Protection — Not assessed: these personal data controls are read from a source model (declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names, guard methods) that was not loaded for this repository — because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. Absence of an idiom this check recognises is NOT evidence that this repository lacks personal data controls: it may implement them entirely in its own ecosystem. This is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
C2 Access Controls — 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.
C4 Data Retention — No personal data detected in a persisted data model — no PII-named property (email, firstName, dateOfBirth, phoneNumber, …) or stored credential on a SwiftData @Model, a Core Data, Realm, GRDB or Fluent type, a GRDB or SQLite.swift column, or in a SQL CREATE TABLE or ALTER TABLE — and no database or data-store client (CoreData, SwiftData, GRDB, RealmSwift, SQLite, Firebase, …) imported either, so this repository keeps no personal data whose lifetime a retention limit would bound.
C5 Data-Subject Rights — No personal data detected in a persisted data model — no PII-named property (email, firstName, dateOfBirth, phoneNumber, …) or stored credential on a SwiftData @Model, a Core Data, Realm, GRDB or Fluent type, a GRDB or SQLite.swift column, or in a SQL CREATE TABLE or ALTER TABLE — and no database or data-store client (CoreData, SwiftData, GRDB, RealmSwift, SQLite, Firebase, …) imported either, so this repository keeps no personal data for a data subject to erase, export or consent over.
D11 Test Reliability — Test reliability not included — no test command the analyzer could start
D12 Dependency Hygiene — Dependency currency not established — this repository declares no production dependency to grade
D14 License Compliance — npm licences not graded — this repository's lockfile resolves no production dependency
D16 Bus Factor — single-maintainer repository — bus factor is not applicable
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.
D21 Naming Consistency — Naming consistency is measured on C# only; Swift, TypeScript 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 .swift, .ts, 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
D27 Navigability — D27 counts a call into the standard library or a dependency as unresolved for this repository's language (.ts), so too few call sites counted as resolved to assess navigability. Not scored: this is a gap in the analyzer, not a verdict about this repository.
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) — 7 file(s) were not parsed by semgrep — the PII/GDPR ruleset never ran over them
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.
D4 Code Duplication — This repository's production source (.ts) is not read by D4's token comparison, which compares .NET source: duplication in it is measured by R10 Code Duplication, the frontend lens's card running the same clone algorithm over the JS/TS token stream. Not scored here — read the R10 card for this repository's duplication. The rest — .cpp (876 lines, 3.7% of production source) — is compared by neither card, so duplication there is unmeasured; it is a corner of this repository, not its product.
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
D5 Coupling — Not applicable — this npm build ships 1 production module(s), so there is no coupling BETWEEN modules to measure. (Its test and non-production modules are not part of the shipped graph.)
D6 Cohesion (LCOM4) — No production classes were analyzable, so cohesion (LCOM4) was not measured (the solution likely failed to load or has no production code).
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 measured — no test command the analyzer could start
DM1 Domain Modelling — not scored — this repository shows none of the 3 signals this lens looks for
ED2 Event/command shape — not scored — deciding whether a command has more than one competing handler requires resolving the call graph, and this analysis resolves a call's owner only where the receiver's type is written down in the source. Reported as guidance rather than measured
ED5 Idempotency — no mutating command handlers or message consumers detected — idempotency check not applicable
ES1 Event Sourcing — not scored — this repository shows none of the 3 signals this lens looks for
P12 CI test-gate honesty — 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 — not applicable — no HTTP server, API framework or worker entry point was found in the JavaScript/TypeScript, Swift source, so there is no service whose uptime a failing dependency could take down
P8 Schema migrations — no ORM, schema-migration tool or schema auto-create was found in this repository's dependency manifests or source, so there is no database schema for this check to judge
P9 Domain vs controller coverage — no coverage report found on disk — produce a coverage report in a standard format (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, 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 tinybench, mitata, benchmark.js, benny or vitest `bench(...)` calls in files that import them (or `*.bench.*` files), or one of those in a package.json, and for a `*benchmark*` script that this repository's CI runs. Benchmarks are credited as a bonus, so their absence is neither scored nor deducted.
PF2 Allocation hygiene — Not applicable: allocation awareness is rated where code engineers for it — at least 400 production lines that ship benchmarks or already use allocation-aware idioms (8 or more). This repository's Swift code has 135 production line(s), 0 such use(s) and no benchmarks, so there is no allocation work to rate. The card is reward-only: its absence costs nothing.
R11 Import Boundaries — No recognizable feature-sliced/layered src layout — boundary rules not applicable.
R5 Dependency Freshness — uses a bun lockfile — dependency freshness not measured here; JS/npm CVEs are scored in D30 (Dependency Vulnerabilities), which answers every ecosystem
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.
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.
X27 Collection changed while being enumerated — 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
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.
R4 · Test Coverage· No test reaches this file · ×29
No test reaches this file pages/demos/markdown-chat.model.ts:1— No test imports this module directly or transitively. Import reachability cannot see a test that executes a file by path instead of importing it, nor one that drives it through a running browser by navigating to a URL — if neither does, no test reaches this one.
No test reaches this file pages/demos/editorial-engine.ts:1— No test imports this module directly or transitively. Import reachability cannot see a test that executes a file by path instead of importing it, nor one that drives it through a running browser by navigating to a URL — if neither does, no test reaches this one.
No test reaches this file pages/demos/dynamic-layout.ts:1— No test imports this module directly or transitively. Import reachability cannot see a test that executes a file by path instead of importing it, nor one that drives it through a running browser by navigating to a URL — if neither does, no test reaches this one.
No test reaches this file harness/sets/rich.ts:1— No test imports this module directly or transitively. Import reachability cannot see a test that executes a file by path instead of importing it, nor one that drives it through a running browser by navigating to a URL — if neither does, no test reaches this one.
No test reaches this file pages/demos/markdown-chat.ts:1— No test imports this module directly or transitively. Import reachability cannot see a test that executes a file by path instead of importing it, nor one that drives it through a running browser by navigating to a URL — if neither does, no test reaches this one.
No test reaches this file pages/demos/variable-typographic-ascii.ts:1— No test imports this module directly or transitively. Import reachability cannot see a test that executes a file by path instead of importing it, nor one that drives it through a running browser by navigating to a URL — if neither does, no test reaches this one.
No test reaches this file pages/demos/justification-comparison.ui.ts:1— No test imports this module directly or transitively. Import reachability cannot see a test that executes a file by path instead of importing it, nor one that drives it through a running browser by navigating to a URL — if neither does, no test reaches this one.
No test reaches this file harness/sets/catalog.ts:1— No test imports this module directly or transitively. Import reachability cannot see a test that executes a file by path instead of importing it, nor one that drives it through a running browser by navigating to a URL — if neither does, no test reaches this one.
No test reaches this file pages/demos/wrap-geometry.ts:1— No test imports this module directly or transitively. Import reachability cannot see a test that executes a file by path instead of importing it, nor one that drives it through a running browser by navigating to a URL — if neither does, no test reaches this one.
No test reaches this file pages/demos/ellipsis.ts:1— No test imports this module directly or transitively. Import reachability cannot see a test that executes a file by path instead of importing it, nor one that drives it through a running browser by navigating to a URL — if neither does, no test reaches this one.
No test reaches this file pages/demos/rich-note.model.ts:1— No test imports this module directly or transitively. Import reachability cannot see a test that executes a file by path instead of importing it, nor one that drives it through a running browser by navigating to a URL — if neither does, no test reaches this one.
No test reaches this file pages/demos/ellipsis.model.ts:1— No test imports this module directly or transitively. Import reachability cannot see a test that executes a file by path instead of importing it, nor one that drives it through a running browser by navigating to a URL — if neither does, no test reaches this one.
No test reaches this file pages/demos/accordion.ts:1— No test imports this module directly or transitively. Import reachability cannot see a test that executes a file by path instead of importing it, nor one that drives it through a running browser by navigating to a URL — if neither does, no test reaches this one.
No test reaches this file scripts/generate-webkit-generic-families.ts:1— No test imports this module directly or transitively. Import reachability cannot see a test that executes a file by path instead of importing it, nor one that drives it through a running browser by navigating to a URL — if neither does, no test reaches this one.
No test reaches this file pages/demos/rich-note.ts:1— No test imports this module directly or transitively. Import reachability cannot see a test that executes a file by path instead of importing it, nor one that drives it through a running browser by navigating to a URL — if neither does, no test reaches this one.
No test reaches this file pages/demos/masonry/index.ts:1— No test imports this module directly or transitively. Import reachability cannot see a test that executes a file by path instead of importing it, nor one that drives it through a running browser by navigating to a URL — if neither does, no test reaches this one.
No test reaches this file scripts/grapheme-check/check.ts:1— No test imports this module directly or transitively. Import reachability cannot see a test that executes a file by path instead of importing it, nor one that drives it through a running browser by navigating to a URL — if neither does, no test reaches this one.
No test reaches this file pages/demos/bubbles.model.ts:1— No test imports this module directly or transitively. Import reachability cannot see a test that executes a file by path instead of importing it, nor one that drives it through a running browser by navigating to a URL — if neither does, no test reaches this one.
No test reaches this file harness/sets/make.ts:1— No test imports this module directly or transitively. Import reachability cannot see a test that executes a file by path instead of importing it, nor one that drives it through a running browser by navigating to a URL — if neither does, no test reaches this one.
No test reaches this file pages/demos/bubbles.ts:1— No test imports this module directly or transitively. Import reachability cannot see a test that executes a file by path instead of importing it, nor one that drives it through a running browser by navigating to a URL — if neither does, no test reaches this one.
No test reaches this file scripts/build-demo-site.ts:1— No test imports this module directly or transitively. Import reachability cannot see a test that executes a file by path instead of importing it, nor one that drives it through a running browser by navigating to a URL — if neither does, no test reaches this one.
No test reaches this file pages/demos/justification-comparison.ts:1— No test imports this module directly or transitively. Import reachability cannot see a test that executes a file by path instead of importing it, nor one that drives it through a running browser by navigating to a URL — if neither does, no test reaches this one.
No test reaches this file pages/demos/line-nodes.ts:1— No test imports this module directly or transitively. Import reachability cannot see a test that executes a file by path instead of importing it, nor one that drives it through a running browser by navigating to a URL — if neither does, no test reaches this one.
No test reaches this file scripts/grapheme-check/run.ts:1— No test imports this module directly or transitively. Import reachability cannot see a test that executes a file by path instead of importing it, nor one that drives it through a running browser by navigating to a URL — if neither does, no test reaches this one.
No test reaches this file harness/sets/facts.ts:1— No test imports this module directly or transitively. Import reachability cannot see a test that executes a file by path instead of importing it, nor one that drives it through a running browser by navigating to a URL — if neither does, no test reaches this one.
Sync-over-async blocking harness/bench/lib.ts:86— `mkdirSync` in `benchBundle` blocks the event loop until it finishes — a blocking call inside async code stalls the event loop — every other request waits for as long as it runs.
Sync-over-async blocking harness/bench/lib.ts:88— `writeFileSync` in `benchBundle` blocks the event loop until it finishes — a blocking call inside async code stalls the event loop — every other request waits for as long as it runs.
Sync-over-async blocking harness/bench/lib.ts:92— `Bun.gzipSync` in `benchBundle` blocks the event loop until it finishes — a blocking call inside async code stalls the event loop — every other request waits for as long as it runs.
Sync-over-async blocking harness/bench/run.ts:296— `mkdirSync` in `bench` blocks the event loop until it finishes — a blocking call inside async code stalls the event loop — every other request waits for as long as it runs.
Sync-over-async blocking harness/bench/run.ts:298— `writeFileSync` in `bench` blocks the event loop until it finishes — a blocking call inside async code stalls the event loop — every other request waits for as long as it runs.
Sync-over-async blocking harness/bench/run.ts:302— `writeFileSync` in `save` blocks the event loop until it finishes — a blocking call inside async code stalls the event loop — every other request waits for as long as it runs.
Sync-over-async blocking harness/browsers.ts:363— `rmSync` in `same` blocks the event loop until it finishes — a blocking call inside async code stalls the event loop — every other request waits for as long as it runs.
Sync-over-async blocking harness/browsers.ts:369— `execFileSync` in `openApp` blocks the event loop until it finishes — a blocking call inside async code stalls the event loop — every other request waits for as long as it runs.
Sync-over-async blocking harness/browsers.ts:381— `rmSync` in `cleanup` blocks the event loop until it finishes — a blocking call inside async code stalls the event loop — every other request waits for as long as it runs.
Sync-over-async blocking harness/browsers.ts:396— `mkdirSync` in `launchChrome` blocks the event loop until it finishes — a blocking call inside async code stalls the event loop — every other request waits for as long as it runs.
Sync-over-async blocking harness/browsers.ts:397— `writeFileSync` in `launchChrome` blocks the event loop until it finishes — a blocking call inside async code stalls the event loop — every other request waits for as long as it runs.
Sync-over-async blocking harness/browsers.ts:412— `readFileSync` in `launchChrome` blocks the event loop until it finishes — a blocking call inside async code stalls the event loop — every other request waits for as long as it runs.
Sync-over-async blocking harness/browsers.ts:469— `readFileSync` in `launchWebKitHost` blocks the event loop until it finishes — a blocking call inside async code stalls the event loop — every other request waits for as long as it runs.
Sync-over-async blocking harness/browsers.ts:515— `execFileSync` in `remove` blocks the event loop until it finishes — a blocking call inside async code stalls the event loop — every other request waits for as long as it runs.
Sync-over-async blocking harness/cli.ts:220— `mkdirSync` in `record` blocks the event loop until it finishes — a blocking call inside async code stalls the event loop — every other request waits for as long as it runs.
Sync-over-async blocking harness/cli.ts:353— `mkdirSync` in `check` blocks the event loop until it finishes — a blocking call inside async code stalls the event loop — every other request waits for as long as it runs.
Sync-over-async blocking harness/cli.ts:519— `mkdirSync` in `drift` blocks the event loop until it finishes — a blocking call inside async code stalls the event loop — every other request waits for as long as it runs.
Sync-over-async blocking harness/cli.ts:521— `rmSync` in `drift` blocks the event loop until it finishes — a blocking call inside async code stalls the event loop — every other request waits for as long as it runs.
Sync-over-async blocking harness/cli.ts:522— `existsSync` in `drift` blocks the event loop until it finishes — a blocking call inside async code stalls the event loop — every other request waits for as long as it runs.
Sync-over-async blocking harness/cli.ts:522— `copyFileSync` in `drift` blocks the event loop until it finishes — a blocking call inside async code stalls the event loop — every other request waits for as long as it runs.
Sync-over-async blocking harness/cli.ts:560— `copyFileSync` in `drift` blocks the event loop until it finishes — a blocking call inside async code stalls the event loop — every other request waits for as long as it runs.
Sync-over-async blocking harness/cli.ts:722— `readdirSync` in `main` blocks the event loop until it finishes — a blocking call inside async code stalls the event loop — every other request waits for as long as it runs.
Sync-over-async blocking harness/cli.ts:739— `execFileSync` in `main` blocks the event loop until it finishes — a blocking call inside async code stalls the event loop — every other request waits for as long as it runs.
Sync-over-async blocking harness/run.ts:42— `existsSync` in `bundle` blocks the event loop until it finishes — a blocking call inside async code stalls the event loop — every other request waits for as long as it runs.
Sync-over-async blocking scripts/grapheme-check/run.ts:36— `existsSync` in `fetch` blocks the event loop until it finishes — a blocking call inside async code stalls the event loop — every other request waits for as long as it runs.
Hotspot: src/line-break.ts src/line-break.ts:464— src/line-break.ts changed 109 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 263 in line-break.walkPreparedComplexLines at line 464. 2 of those changes were fix/bug commits, and the other 107 changed it for other reasons — this file is under both repair and feature pressure. Before the next change lands here, make sure the area it touches is under test, then split that area out of the file so the following change is smaller than this one — a file this often edited pays the complexity back every time. Counted over 2026-07-17..2026-10-15, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-07-17 10:02:17 -07:00' --until='2026-10-15 10:02:17 -07:00' --full-history --no-merges -- src/line-break.ts`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Hotspot: src/rich-inline.ts src/rich-inline.ts:186— src/rich-inline.ts changed 143 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 187 in rich-inline.prepareRichInline at line 186. 2 of those changes were fix/bug commits, and the other 141 changed it for other reasons — this file is under both repair and feature pressure. Before the next change lands here, make sure the area it touches is under test, then split that area out of the file so the following change is smaller than this one — a file this often edited pays the complexity back every time. Counted over 2026-07-17..2026-10-15, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-07-17 10:02:17 -07:00' --until='2026-10-15 10:02:17 -07:00' --full-history --no-merges -- src/rich-inline.ts`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Hotspot: src/prepare.ts src/prepare.ts:352— src/prepare.ts changed 88 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 113 in prepare.measureAnalysis at line 352. 1 of those changes was a fix/bug commit, and the other 87 changed it for other reasons — this file is under both repair and feature pressure. Before the next change lands here, make sure the area it touches is under test, then split that area out of the file so the following change is smaller than this one — a file this often edited pays the complexity back every time. Counted over 2026-07-17..2026-10-15, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-07-17 10:02:17 -07:00' --until='2026-10-15 10:02:17 -07:00' --full-history --no-merges -- src/prepare.ts`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Hotspot: src/analysis.ts src/analysis.ts:334— src/analysis.ts changed 100 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 65 in analysis.segmentAtLineBreaks at line 334. 5 of those changes were fix/bug commits, and the other 95 changed it for other reasons — this file is under both repair and feature pressure. Before the next change lands here, make sure the area it touches is under test, then split that area out of the file so the following change is smaller than this one — a file this often edited pays the complexity back every time. Counted over 2026-07-17..2026-10-15, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-07-17 10:02:17 -07:00' --until='2026-10-15 10:02:17 -07:00' --full-history --no-merges -- src/analysis.ts`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Hotspot: harness/invariants.ts harness/invariants.ts:213— harness/invariants.ts changed 33 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 146 in invariants.runInvariants at line 213. Frequent change and high complexity in one file compound: schedule the next change to it to include carving out the part being edited, with the area under test before it moves. Counted over 2026-07-17..2026-10-15, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-07-17 10:02:17 -07:00' --until='2026-10-15 10:02:17 -07:00' --full-history --no-merges -- harness/invariants.ts`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Hotspot: src/measurement.ts src/measurement.ts:1193— src/measurement.ts changed 139 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 23 in measurement.getSegmentFit at line 1193. 3 of those changes were fix/bug commits, and the other 136 changed it for other reasons — this file is under both repair and feature pressure. Before the next change lands here, make sure the area it touches is under test, then split that area out of the file so the following change is smaller than this one — a file this often edited pays the complexity back every time. Counted over 2026-07-17..2026-10-15, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-07-17 10:02:17 -07:00' --until='2026-10-15 10:02:17 -07:00' --full-history --no-merges -- src/measurement.ts`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Hotspot: harness/cli.ts harness/cli.ts:274— harness/cli.ts changed 52 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 46 in cli.check at line 274. 1 of those changes was a fix/bug commit, and the other 51 changed it for other reasons — this file is under both repair and feature pressure. Before the next change lands here, make sure the area it touches is under test, then split that area out of the file so the following change is smaller than this one — a file this often edited pays the complexity back every time. Counted over 2026-07-17..2026-10-15, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-07-17 10:02:17 -07:00' --until='2026-10-15 10:02:17 -07:00' --full-history --no-merges -- harness/cli.ts`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Hotspot: src/gecko-line-breaks.ts src/gecko-line-breaks.ts:448— src/gecko-line-breaks.ts changed 37 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 62 in gecko-line-breaks.markWordBreaks at line 448. 1 of those changes was a fix/bug commit, and the other 36 changed it for other reasons — this file is under both repair and feature pressure. Before the next change lands here, make sure the area it touches is under test, then split that area out of the file so the following change is smaller than this one — a file this often edited pays the complexity back every time. Counted over 2026-07-17..2026-10-15, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-07-17 10:02:17 -07:00' --until='2026-10-15 10:02:17 -07:00' --full-history --no-merges -- src/gecko-line-breaks.ts`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Hotspot: harness/sets/rich.ts harness/sets/rich.ts:226— harness/sets/rich.ts changed 48 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 42 in rich.richTemplates at line 226. Frequent change and high complexity in one file compound: schedule the next change to it to include carving out the part being edited, with the area under test before it moves. Counted over 2026-07-17..2026-10-15, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-07-17 10:02:17 -07:00' --until='2026-10-15 10:02:17 -07:00' --full-history --no-merges -- harness/sets/rich.ts`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Hotspot: harness/store.ts harness/store.ts:206— harness/store.ts changed 16 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 61 in store.caseProblem at line 206. 1 of those changes was a fix/bug commit, and the other 15 changed it for other reasons — this file is under both repair and feature pressure. Before the next change lands here, make sure the area it touches is under test, then split that area out of the file so the following change is smaller than this one — a file this often edited pays the complexity back every time. Counted over 2026-07-17..2026-10-15, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-07-17 10:02:17 -07:00' --until='2026-10-15 10:02:17 -07:00' --full-history --no-merges -- harness/store.ts`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Hotspot: harness/predict.ts harness/predict.ts:203— harness/predict.ts changed 23 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 39 in predict.plainDisagreement at line 203. Frequent change and high complexity in one file compound: schedule the next change to it to include carving out the part being edited, with the area under test before it moves. Counted over 2026-07-17..2026-10-15, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-07-17 10:02:17 -07:00' --until='2026-10-15 10:02:17 -07:00' --full-history --no-merges -- harness/predict.ts`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Hotspot: pages/demos/editorial-engine.ts pages/demos/editorial-engine.ts:623— pages/demos/editorial-engine.ts changed 14 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 62 in editorial-engine.render at line 623. Frequent change and high complexity in one file compound: schedule the next change to it to include carving out the part being edited, with the area under test before it moves. Counted over 2026-07-17..2026-10-15, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-07-17 10:02:17 -07:00' --until='2026-10-15 10:02:17 -07:00' --full-history --no-merges -- pages/demos/editorial-engine.ts`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Hotspot: REDACTED REDACTED:328— REDACTED changed 26 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 28 in line-breaks.markRuleBoundaries at line 328. Frequent change and high complexity in one file compound: schedule the next change to it to include carving out the part being edited, with the area under test before it moves. Counted over 2026-07-17..2026-10-15, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-07-17 10:02:17 -07:00' --until='2026-10-15 10:02:17 -07:00' --full-history --no-merges -- REDACTED`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Hotspot: pages/demos/markdown-chat.model.ts pages/demos/markdown-chat.model.ts:343— pages/demos/markdown-chat.model.ts changed 28 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 22 in markdown-chat.model.parseBlockTokens at line 343. Frequent change and high complexity in one file compound: schedule the next change to it to include carving out the part being edited, with the area under test before it moves. Counted over 2026-07-17..2026-10-15, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-07-17 10:02:17 -07:00' --until='2026-10-15 10:02:17 -07:00' --full-history --no-merges -- pages/demos/markdown-chat.model.ts`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Hotspot: harness/run.ts harness/run.ts:153— harness/run.ts changed 19 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 32 in run.runJob at line 153. Frequent change and high complexity in one file compound: schedule the next change to it to include carving out the part being edited, with the area under test before it moves. Counted over 2026-07-17..2026-10-15, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-07-17 10:02:17 -07:00' --until='2026-10-15 10:02:17 -07:00' --full-history --no-merges -- harness/run.ts`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Hotspot: harness/bench/run.ts harness/bench/run.ts:48— harness/bench/run.ts changed 21 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 26 in run.documents at line 48. Frequent change and high complexity in one file compound: schedule the next change to it to include carving out the part being edited, with the area under test before it moves. Counted over 2026-07-17..2026-10-15, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-07-17 10:02:17 -07:00' --until='2026-10-15 10:02:17 -07:00' --full-history --no-merges -- harness/bench/run.ts`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Hotspot: src/han-kerning.ts src/han-kerning.ts:60— src/han-kerning.ts changed 18 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 26 in han-kerning.getStaticCharType at line 60. Frequent change and high complexity in one file compound: schedule the next change to it to include carving out the part being edited, with the area under test before it moves. Counted over 2026-07-17..2026-10-15, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-07-17 10:02:17 -07:00' --until='2026-10-15 10:02:17 -07:00' --full-history --no-merges -- src/han-kerning.ts`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Hotspot: harness/sets/widths.ts harness/sets/widths.ts:431— harness/sets/widths.ts changed 11 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 34 in widths.cut at line 431. Frequent change and high complexity in one file compound: schedule the next change to it to include carving out the part being edited, with the area under test before it moves. Counted over 2026-07-17..2026-10-15, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-07-17 10:02:17 -07:00' --until='2026-10-15 10:02:17 -07:00' --full-history --no-merges -- harness/sets/widths.ts`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Hotspot: REDACTED REDACTED:110— REDACTED changed 24 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 15 in generate-engine-break-data.packTable at line 110. Frequent change and high complexity in one file compound: schedule the next change to it to include carving out the part being edited, with the area under test before it moves. Counted over 2026-07-17..2026-10-15, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-07-17 10:02:17 -07:00' --until='2026-10-15 10:02:17 -07:00' --full-history --no-merges -- REDACTED`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Hotspot: harness/score.ts harness/score.ts:408— harness/score.ts changed 19 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 18 in score.judge at line 408. Frequent change and high complexity in one file compound: schedule the next change to it to include carving out the part being edited, with the area under test before it moves. Counted over 2026-07-17..2026-10-15, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-07-17 10:02:17 -07:00' --until='2026-10-15 10:02:17 -07:00' --full-history --no-merges -- harness/score.ts`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Hotspot: harness/bench/report.ts harness/bench/report.ts:156— harness/bench/report.ts changed 14 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 15 in report.report at line 156. Frequent change and high complexity in one file compound: schedule the next change to it to include carving out the part being edited, with the area under test before it moves. Counted over 2026-07-17..2026-10-15, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-07-17 10:02:17 -07:00' --until='2026-10-15 10:02:17 -07:00' --full-history --no-merges -- harness/bench/report.ts`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Hotspot: harness/offline-equal.ts harness/offline-equal.ts:90— harness/offline-equal.ts changed 9 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 15 in offline-equal.outputs at line 90. Frequent change and high complexity in one file compound: schedule the next change to it to include carving out the part being edited, with the area under test before it moves. Counted over 2026-07-17..2026-10-15, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-07-17 10:02:17 -07:00' --until='2026-10-15 10:02:17 -07:00' --full-history --no-merges -- harness/offline-equal.ts`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Hotspot: pages/demos/ellipsis.ts pages/demos/ellipsis.ts:240— pages/demos/ellipsis.ts changed 5 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 19 in ellipsis.render at line 240. Frequent change and high complexity in one file compound: schedule the next change to it to include carving out the part being edited, with the area under test before it moves. Counted over 2026-07-17..2026-10-15, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-07-17 10:02:17 -07:00' --until='2026-10-15 10:02:17 -07:00' --full-history --no-merges -- pages/demos/ellipsis.ts`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Hotspot: harness/sets/sample.ts harness/sets/sample.ts:106— harness/sets/sample.ts changed 4 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 15 in sample.checkSources at line 106. Frequent change and high complexity in one file compound: schedule the next change to it to include carving out the part being edited, with the area under test before it moves. Counted over 2026-07-17..2026-10-15, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-07-17 10:02:17 -07:00' --until='2026-10-15 10:02:17 -07:00' --full-history --no-merges -- harness/sets/sample.ts`: 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.
FunctionTooLong: line-break.walkPreparedComplexLines src/line-break.ts:464— FunctionTooLong — walkPreparedComplexLines runs 357 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 257 over it, 3.57× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
FunctionTooLong: invariants.runInvariants harness/invariants.ts:213— FunctionTooLong — runInvariants runs 310 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 210 over it, 3.10× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
FunctionTooLong: rich-inline.prepareRichInline src/rich-inline.ts:186— FunctionTooLong — prepareRichInline runs 295 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 195 over it, 2.95× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
FunctionTooLong: rich.richTemplates harness/sets/rich.ts:226— FunctionTooLong — richTemplates runs 261 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 161 over it, 2.61× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
FunctionTooLong: prepare.measureAnalysis src/prepare.ts:352— FunctionTooLong — measureAnalysis runs 171 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 71 over it, 1.71× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
FunctionTooLong: gecko-line-breaks.markWordBreaks src/gecko-line-breaks.ts:448— FunctionTooLong — markWordBreaks runs 111 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 11 over it, 1.11× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
FunctionTooLong: rich-inline.createLine src/rich-inline.ts:959— FunctionTooLong — createLine runs 106 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 6 over it, 1.06× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
FileTooLong: src/rich-inline.ts src/rich-inline.ts— FileTooLong — 744 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 244 over it, 1.49× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.
FileTooLong: src/line-break.ts src/line-break.ts— FileTooLong — 649 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 149 over it, 1.30× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.
FileTooLong: src/measurement.ts src/measurement.ts— FileTooLong — 589 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 89 over it, 1.18× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.
FileTooLong: REDACTED REDACTED— FileTooLong — 567 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 67 over it, 1.13× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.
FileTooLong: harness/cli.ts harness/cli.ts— FileTooLong — 549 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 49 over it, 1.10× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.
FileTooLong: REDACTED REDACTED— FileTooLong — 545 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 45 over it, 1.09× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.
FileTooLong: sets/sample.ts harness/sets/sample.ts— FileTooLong — 516 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 16 over it, 1.03× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 2 locations) harness/invariants.ts:284— harness/invariants.ts:284 · harness/invariants.ts:306 — all 2 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 2 locations) harness/predict.ts:206— harness/predict.ts:206 · harness/predict.ts:267 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 2 locations) harness/predict.ts:399— harness/predict.ts:399 · harness/predict.ts:413 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the 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 locations) harness/sets/rich.ts:401— harness/sets/rich.ts:401 · harness/sets/rich.ts:523 — all 2 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 2 locations) REDACTED:809— REDACTED:809 · scripts/grapheme-check/check.ts:85 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 2 locations) scripts/grapheme-check/check.ts:69— scripts/grapheme-check/check.ts:69 · scripts/grapheme-check/check.ts:112 — all 2 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.
Swallowed exception (empty catch) harness/browsers.ts:229— An empty catch block silently discards the error — failures vanish with no log and no rethrow. Log it, handle it, or don't catch it.
Swallowed exception (empty catch) harness/browsers.ts:253— An empty catch block silently discards the error — failures vanish with no log and no rethrow. Log it, handle it, or don't catch it.
Swallowed exception (empty catch) harness/browsers.ts:414— An empty catch block silently discards the error — failures vanish with no log and no rethrow. Log it, handle it, or don't catch it.
Swallowed exception (empty catch) harness/browsers.ts:516— An empty catch block silently discards the error — failures vanish with no log and no rethrow. Log it, handle it, or don't catch it.
Swallowed exception (empty catch) harness/browsers.ts:578— 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.
invariants.runInvariants::rich (cyclomatic 60) harness/invariants.ts:318— invariants.runInvariants::rich has cyclomatic complexity 60 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top. This shape REPEATS in the file: 2 other methods here (invariants.runInvariants, invariants.runInvariants::plain) have the same decision points, in the same order, at the same nesting depths — so this is one pattern written 3 times rather than 3 independent problems. Splitting this body alone leaves the other 2 exactly as they are. Where these are variations on one operation, the change that clears all 3 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.
invariants.runInvariants::plain (cyclomatic 25) harness/invariants.ts:247— invariants.runInvariants::plain has cyclomatic complexity 25 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top. This shape REPEATS in the file: 2 other methods here (invariants.runInvariants, invariants.runInvariants::rich) have the same decision points, in the same order, at the same nesting depths — so this is one pattern written 3 times rather than 3 independent problems. Splitting this body alone leaves the other 2 exactly as they are. Where these are variations on one operation, the change that clears all 3 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.
invariants.runInvariants::rich (cognitive 127) harness/invariants.ts:318— invariants.runInvariants::rich has cognitive complexity 127 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 28 (73 pts), ternaries 7 (25 pts), boolean chains 14, loops 7 (14 pts), error handling 1 (nesting depth added 70). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: this score is depth rather than breadth — most of its points come from checks stacked inside one another, so the work sits several levels in. Invert each enclosing check into an early exit (a return, or the language's equivalent) so the happy path stays at one level, and where a level cannot be exited early, lift the block it encloses into its own named function. This shape REPEATS in the file: 2 other methods here (invariants.runInvariants, invariants.runInvariants::plain) have the same decision points, in the same order, at the same nesting depths — so this is one pattern written 3 times rather than 3 independent problems. Splitting this body alone leaves the other 2 exactly as they are. Where these are variations on one operation, the change that clears all 3 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.
invariants.runInvariants::plain (cognitive 37) harness/invariants.ts:247— invariants.runInvariants::plain has cognitive complexity 37 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 15 (27 pts), loops 4, boolean chains 3, ternaries 1 (2 pts), error handling 1 (nesting depth added 13). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body. This shape REPEATS in the file: 2 other methods here (invariants.runInvariants, invariants.runInvariants::rich) have the same decision points, in the same order, at the same nesting depths — so this is one pattern written 3 times rather than 3 independent problems. Splitting this body alone leaves the other 2 exactly as they are. Where these are variations on one operation, the change that clears all 3 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.
Duplicated block (6 lines × 2 locations) harness/store.ts:150— harness/store.ts:150 · harness/store.ts:165 — all 2 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.
Duplicated block (6 lines × 2 locations) src/gecko-line-breaks.ts:484— src/gecko-line-breaks.ts:484 · src/gecko-line-breaks.ts: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.
line-break.walkPreparedComplexLines (cyclomatic 263) src/line-break.ts:464— line-break.walkPreparedComplexLines has cyclomatic complexity 263 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
rich-inline.prepareRichInline (cyclomatic 187) src/rich-inline.ts:186— rich-inline.prepareRichInline has cyclomatic complexity 187 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
prepare.measureAnalysis (cyclomatic 113) src/prepare.ts:352— prepare.measureAnalysis has cyclomatic complexity 113 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
line-breaks.classify (cyclomatic 98) REDACTED:586— line-breaks.classify has cyclomatic complexity 98 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
analysis.segmentAtLineBreaks (cyclomatic 65) src/analysis.ts:334— analysis.segmentAtLineBreaks has cyclomatic complexity 65 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
gecko-line-breaks.markWordBreaks (cyclomatic 62) src/gecko-line-breaks.ts:448— gecko-line-breaks.markWordBreaks has cyclomatic complexity 62 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
store.caseProblem (cyclomatic 61) harness/store.ts:206— store.caseProblem has cyclomatic complexity 61 (threshold 15). To reduce it, name the conditions: bind each compound test to a well-named local or a small predicate function, so the body reads as a sequence of named decisions rather than a chain of operators.
rich-inline.createLine (cyclomatic 52) src/rich-inline.ts:959— rich-inline.createLine has cyclomatic complexity 52 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
analysis.analyzeText (cyclomatic 51) src/analysis.ts:439— analysis.analyzeText has cyclomatic complexity 51 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
cli.check (cyclomatic 46) harness/cli.ts:274— cli.check has cyclomatic complexity 46 (threshold 15). Of this number, 44 points are the body's own statements and 2 belong to 2 function literals inside it that branch. To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
rich.richTemplates (cyclomatic 42) harness/sets/rich.ts:226— rich.richTemplates has cyclomatic complexity 42 (threshold 15). Of this number, 41 points are the body's own statements and 1 belongs to one function literal inside it that branches. To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
line-breaks.nextBreakablePosition (cyclomatic 41) REDACTED:695— line-breaks.nextBreakablePosition has cyclomatic complexity 41 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
gecko-line-breaks.transformText (cyclomatic 41) src/gecko-line-breaks.ts:181— gecko-line-breaks.transformText has cyclomatic complexity 41 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
sample.build (cyclomatic 40) harness/sets/sample.ts:349— sample.build has cyclomatic complexity 40 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
predict.plainDisagreement (cyclomatic 39) harness/predict.ts:203— predict.plainDisagreement has cyclomatic complexity 39 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
rich-inline.setEmptyObjectFacts (cyclomatic 38) src/rich-inline.ts:732— rich-inline.setEmptyObjectFacts has cyclomatic complexity 38 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
widths.cut (cyclomatic 34) harness/sets/widths.ts:431— widths.cut has cyclomatic complexity 34 (threshold 15). Of this number, 32 points are the body's own statements and 2 belong to one function item inside it that branches. To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
cli.main (cyclomatic 33) harness/cli.ts:715— cli.main has cyclomatic complexity 33 (threshold 15). Of this number, 32 points are the body's own statements and 1 belongs to one function literal inside it that branches. To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
invariants.runInvariants (cyclomatic 33) harness/invariants.ts:213— invariants.runInvariants has cyclomatic complexity 33 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top. This shape REPEATS in the file: 2 other methods here (invariants.runInvariants::plain, invariants.runInvariants::rich) have the same decision points, in the same order, at the same nesting depths — so this is one pattern written 3 times rather than 3 independent problems. Splitting this body alone leaves the other 2 exactly as they are. Where these are variations on one operation, the change that clears all 3 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.
sample.draw (cyclomatic 32) harness/sets/sample.ts:527— sample.draw has cyclomatic complexity 32 (threshold 15). Of this number, 31 points are the body's own statements and 1 belongs to one function literal inside it that branches. To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
cli.parseArgs (cyclomatic 31) harness/cli.ts:99— cli.parseArgs has cyclomatic complexity 31 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
predict.predict (cyclomatic 29) harness/predict.ts:377— predict.predict has cyclomatic complexity 29 (threshold 15). Of this number, 18 points are the body's own statements and 11 belong to 5 function items inside it that branch. To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
line-breaks.markRuleBoundaries (cyclomatic 28) REDACTED:328— line-breaks.markRuleBoundaries has cyclomatic complexity 28 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
line-break.stepPreparedSimpleLineGeometry (cyclomatic 28) src/line-break.ts:1092— line-break.stepPreparedSimpleLineGeometry has cyclomatic complexity 28 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
analysis.removeSkippableSegmentBreaks (cyclomatic 26) src/analysis.ts:125— analysis.removeSkippableSegmentBreaks has cyclomatic complexity 26 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
han-kerning.getStaticCharType (cyclomatic 26) src/han-kerning.ts:60— han-kerning.getStaticCharType 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.
cli.drift (cyclomatic 26) harness/cli.ts:517— cli.drift has cyclomatic complexity 26 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
cli.record (cyclomatic 25) harness/cli.ts:189— cli.record has cyclomatic complexity 25 (threshold 15). Of this number, 23 points are the body's own statements and 2 belong to 2 function literals inside it that branch. To reduce it, split the body: these branches sit side by side rather than nested inside one another, so extracting each one on its own would leave a function per branch. Group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function, so the body reads as a short sequence of named stages.
invariants.standInWidth (cyclomatic 25) harness/invariants.ts:74— invariants.standInWidth has cyclomatic complexity 25 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
cli.gate (cyclomatic 24) harness/cli.ts:412— cli.gate has cyclomatic complexity 24 (threshold 15). Of this number, 23 points are the body's own statements and 1 belongs to one function literal inside it that branches. To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
han-kerning.getHanKerningTrims (cyclomatic 23) src/han-kerning.ts:201— han-kerning.getHanKerningTrims has cyclomatic complexity 23 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
measurement.getSegmentFit (cyclomatic 23) src/measurement.ts:1193— measurement.getSegmentFit has cyclomatic complexity 23 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
check.runGraphemeCheck (cyclomatic 23) scripts/grapheme-check/check.ts:48— check.runGraphemeCheck has cyclomatic complexity 23 (threshold 15). To reduce it, break up the iteration: give each loop body a named function, and split a multi-phase loop into one function per phase so no single body carries the whole pipeline.
line-breaks.getWebKitLineBreaks (cyclomatic 22) REDACTED:812— line-breaks.getWebKitLineBreaks has cyclomatic complexity 22 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
predict.alignStream (cyclomatic 22) harness/predict.ts:69— predict.alignStream has cyclomatic complexity 22 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
observe.searchLineEnds (cyclomatic 22) harness/observe.ts:118— observe.searchLineEnds has cyclomatic complexity 22 (threshold 15). Of this number, 17 points are the body's own statements and 5 belong to 2 function items inside it that branch. To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
sample.demoBlocks (cyclomatic 21) harness/sets/sample.ts:237— sample.demoBlocks has cyclomatic complexity 21 (threshold 15). Most of this is not in the body itself: 4 of the 21 points are its own statements and the rest belongs to 2 function items inside it that branch (visit, add). Those helpers are already separate functions, so extracting the branching again is not available. To reduce it, move them out of the body to the enclosing scope, where each is measured, reviewed and tested on its own, and reduce whichever one then reads as the largest.
sample.drawSample (cyclomatic 21) harness/sets/sample.ts:616— sample.drawSample has cyclomatic complexity 21 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
analysis.mapSourceLineBreaks (cyclomatic 20) src/analysis.ts:241— analysis.mapSourceLineBreaks has cyclomatic complexity 20 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
line-break.getTerminalLetterSpacing (cyclomatic 20) src/line-break.ts:200— line-break.getTerminalLetterSpacing has cyclomatic complexity 20 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
predict.paints (cyclomatic 20) harness/predict.ts:302— predict.paints has cyclomatic complexity 20 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
catalog.pairwiseRows (cyclomatic 20) harness/sets/catalog.ts:90— catalog.pairwiseRows has cyclomatic complexity 20 (threshold 15). Of this number, 19 points are the body's own statements and 1 belongs to one function item inside it that branches. To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
run.runJob::step (cyclomatic 19) harness/run.ts:166— run.runJob::step has cyclomatic complexity 19 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function so the top-level body reads as a short sequence of named decisions.
line-break.countPreparedLines (cyclomatic 19) src/line-break.ts:326— line-break.countPreparedLines has cyclomatic complexity 19 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
predict.richDisagreement (cyclomatic 19) harness/predict.ts:265— predict.richDisagreement has cyclomatic complexity 19 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
generate-engine-break-data.getGeckoClusterEnds (cyclomatic 19) REDACTED:735— generate-engine-break-data.getGeckoClusterEnds has cyclomatic complexity 19 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
score.judge (cyclomatic 18) harness/score.ts:408— score.judge has cyclomatic complexity 18 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
rich-inline.getOpeningFit (cyclomatic 18) src/rich-inline.ts:879— rich-inline.getOpeningFit has cyclomatic complexity 18 (threshold 15). To reduce it, name the conditions: bind each compound test to a well-named local or a small predicate function, so the body reads as a sequence of named decisions rather than a chain of operators.
cli.explain (cyclomatic 18) harness/cli.ts:678— cli.explain has cyclomatic complexity 18 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
gecko-line-breaks.getBreakStates (cyclomatic 17) src/gecko-line-breaks.ts:613— gecko-line-breaks.getBreakStates has cyclomatic complexity 17 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
analysis.getWebKitParagraphBreaks (cyclomatic 17) src/analysis.ts:678— analysis.getWebKitParagraphBreaks has cyclomatic complexity 17 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
measurement.buildEngineProfile (cyclomatic 17) src/measurement.ts:993— measurement.buildEngineProfile has cyclomatic complexity 17 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
sample.loadPools (cyclomatic 17) harness/sets/sample.ts:165— sample.loadPools has cyclomatic complexity 17 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
break-data.breakDataReport (cyclomatic 17) harness/break-data.ts:77— break-data.breakDataReport has cyclomatic complexity 17 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
observe.lineWidths (cyclomatic 17) harness/observe.ts:173— observe.lineWidths has cyclomatic complexity 17 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
prepare.addIdeographicSpaceHangs (cyclomatic 16) src/prepare.ts:698— prepare.addIdeographicSpaceHangs has cyclomatic complexity 16 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
widths.select (cyclomatic 16) harness/sets/widths.ts:263— widths.select has cyclomatic complexity 16 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
line-break.walkPreparedComplexLines (cognitive 599) src/line-break.ts:464— line-break.walkPreparedComplexLines has cognitive complexity 599 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 76 (369 pts), ternaries 27 (120 pts), boolean chains 93, loops 4 (17 pts) (nesting depth added 399). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: this score is depth rather than breadth — most of its points come from checks stacked inside one another, so the work sits several levels in. Invert each enclosing check into an early exit (a return, or the language's equivalent) so the happy path stays at one level, and where a level cannot be exited early, lift the block it encloses into its own named function.
rich-inline.prepareRichInline (cognitive 302) src/rich-inline.ts:186— rich-inline.prepareRichInline has cognitive complexity 302 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 61 (171 pts), loops 22 (54 pts), boolean chains 53, ternaries 16 (24 pts) (nesting depth added 150). 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.
prepare.measureAnalysis (cognitive 180) src/prepare.ts:352— prepare.measureAnalysis has cognitive complexity 180 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 32 (87 pts), ternaries 23 (46 pts), boolean chains 28, loops 5 (17 pts), match/switch 1 (2 pts) (nesting depth added 91). 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.
gecko-line-breaks.markWordBreaks (cognitive 138) src/gecko-line-breaks.ts:448— gecko-line-breaks.markWordBreaks has cognitive complexity 138 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 26 (104 pts), loops 6 (17 pts), boolean chains 10, ternaries 3 (7 pts) (nesting depth added 93). 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.
line-breaks.classify (cognitive 122) REDACTED:586— line-breaks.classify has cognitive complexity 122 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: ternaries 14 (51 pts), if/else 21 (49 pts), boolean chains 14, match/switch 3 (8 pts) (nesting depth added 70). 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.
analysis.analyzeText (cognitive 106) src/analysis.ts:439— analysis.analyzeText has cognitive complexity 106 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 18 (56 pts), loops 6 (24 pts), boolean chains 14, ternaries 6 (12 pts) (nesting depth added 62). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: this score is depth rather than breadth — most of its points come from checks stacked inside one another, so the work sits several levels in. Invert each enclosing check into an early exit (a return, or the language's equivalent) so the happy path stays at one level, and where a level cannot be exited early, lift the block it encloses into its own named function.
analysis.segmentAtLineBreaks (cognitive 93) src/analysis.ts:334— analysis.segmentAtLineBreaks has cognitive complexity 93 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 21 (60 pts), boolean chains 22, loops 5 (8 pts), ternaries 2 (3 pts) (nesting depth added 43). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: this score is depth rather than breadth — most of its points come from checks stacked inside one another, so the work sits several levels in. Invert each enclosing check into an early exit (a return, or the language's equivalent) so the happy path stays at one level, and where a level cannot be exited early, lift the block it encloses into its own named function.
gecko-line-breaks.transformText (cognitive 91) src/gecko-line-breaks.ts:181— gecko-line-breaks.transformText has cognitive complexity 91 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 20 (52 pts), loops 8 (26 pts), boolean chains 11, ternaries 1 (2 pts) (nesting depth added 51). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: this score is depth rather than breadth — most of its points come from checks stacked inside one another, so the work sits several levels in. Invert each enclosing check into an early exit (a return, or the language's equivalent) so the happy path stays at one level, and where a level cannot be exited early, lift the block it encloses into its own named function.
invariants.runInvariants (cognitive 85) harness/invariants.ts:213— invariants.runInvariants has cognitive complexity 85 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 66 (162 pts), ternaries 25 (57 pts), loops 27 (47 pts), boolean chains 22, error handling 3 (7 pts) (nesting depth added 152). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: this score is depth rather than breadth — most of its points come from checks stacked inside one another, so the work sits several levels in. Invert each enclosing check into an early exit (a return, or the language's equivalent) so the happy path stays at one level, and where a level cannot be exited early, lift the block it encloses into its own named function. This shape REPEATS in the file: 2 other methods here (invariants.runInvariants::plain, invariants.runInvariants::rich) have the same decision points, in the same order, at the same nesting depths — so this is one pattern written 3 times rather than 3 independent problems. Splitting this body alone leaves the other 2 exactly as they are. Where these are variations on one operation, the change that clears all 3 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.
widths.cut (cognitive 85) harness/sets/widths.ts:431— widths.cut has cognitive complexity 85 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: loops 11 (31 pts), if/else 9 (25 pts), ternaries 6 (22 pts), boolean chains 7 (nesting depth added 52). Of this number, 82 points are the body's own statements and 3 belong to one function item inside it that branches. To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
rich-inline.createLine (cognitive 84) src/rich-inline.ts:959— rich-inline.createLine has cognitive complexity 84 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 19 (52 pts), boolean chains 15, ternaries 7 (12 pts), loops 3 (5 pts) (nesting depth added 40). 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.
rich.richTemplates (cognitive 80) harness/sets/rich.ts:226— rich.richTemplates has cognitive complexity 80 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: ternaries 14 (49 pts), loops 20 (25 pts), match/switch 1 (4 pts), if/else 1 (2 pts) (nesting depth added 44). Of this number, 78 points are the body's own statements and 2 belong to one function literal inside it that branches. To reduce it, flatten the nesting: this score is depth rather than breadth — most of its points come from checks stacked inside one another, so the work sits several levels in. Invert each enclosing check into an early exit (a return, or the language's equivalent) so the happy path stays at one level, and where a level cannot be exited early, lift the block it encloses into its own named function.
line-breaks.markRuleBoundaries (cognitive 78) REDACTED:328— line-breaks.markRuleBoundaries has cognitive complexity 78 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 21 (67 pts), loops 3 (7 pts), boolean chains 4 (nesting depth added 50). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: this score is depth rather than breadth — most of its points come from checks stacked inside one another, so the work sits several levels in. Invert each enclosing check into an early exit (a return, or the language's equivalent) so the happy path stays at one level, and where a level cannot be exited early, lift the block it encloses into its own named function.
cli.check (cognitive 71) harness/cli.ts:274— cli.check has cognitive complexity 71 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 19 (34 pts), ternaries 11 (19 pts), loops 10 (12 pts), boolean chains 6 (nesting depth added 25). Of this number, 68 points are the body's own statements and 3 belong to 2 function literals inside it that branch. To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
line-breaks.nextBreakablePosition (cognitive 69) REDACTED:695— line-breaks.nextBreakablePosition has cognitive complexity 69 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 21 (50 pts), boolean chains 13, loops 2 (4 pts), ternaries 2 (nesting depth added 31). 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.
rich-inline.setEmptyObjectFacts (cognitive 59) src/rich-inline.ts:732— rich-inline.setEmptyObjectFacts has cognitive complexity 59 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 16 (32 pts), boolean chains 12, loops 5 (9 pts), ternaries 2 (6 pts) (nesting depth added 24). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
predict.predict (cognitive 52) harness/predict.ts:377— predict.predict has cognitive complexity 52 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (19 pts), loops 7 (14 pts), ternaries 6 (14 pts), boolean chains 4, error handling 1 (nesting depth added 25). Of this number, 37 points are the body's own statements and 15 belong to 5 function items inside it that branch. To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
store.caseProblem (cognitive 50) harness/store.ts:206— store.caseProblem has cognitive complexity 50 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: boolean chains 25, if/else 17 (24 pts), loops 1 (nesting depth added 7). To reduce it, name the conditions: bind each compound test to a well-named local or a small predicate function, so the body reads as a sequence of named decisions rather than a chain of operators.
catalog.pairwiseRows (cognitive 50) harness/sets/catalog.ts:90— catalog.pairwiseRows has cognitive complexity 50 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 6 (23 pts), loops 10 (23 pts), ternaries 1 (3 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 32). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
predict.plainDisagreement (cognitive 49) harness/predict.ts:203— predict.plainDisagreement has cognitive complexity 49 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 13 (23 pts), boolean chains 11, ternaries 3 (11 pts), loops 4 (nesting depth added 18). 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.
cli.parseArgs (cognitive 46) harness/cli.ts:99— cli.parseArgs has cognitive complexity 46 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 11 (20 pts), ternaries 7 (12 pts), boolean chains 8, loops 4 (6 pts) (nesting depth added 16). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
generate-engine-break-data.getGeckoClusterEnds (cognitive 46) REDACTED:735— generate-engine-break-data.getGeckoClusterEnds has cognitive complexity 46 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (34 pts), loops 4 (7 pts), ternaries 1 (3 pts), boolean chains 2 (nesting depth added 30). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
cli.main (cognitive 45) harness/cli.ts:715— cli.main has cognitive complexity 45 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 11 (19 pts), ternaries 8 (17 pts), boolean chains 3, error handling 1 (3 pts), loops 1 (2 pts), match/switch 1 (nesting depth added 20). Of this number, 44 points are the body's own statements and 1 belongs to one function literal inside it that branches. To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
widths.select (cognitive 45) harness/sets/widths.ts:263— widths.select has cognitive complexity 45 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (28 pts), loops 7 (16 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 30). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
check.runGraphemeCheck (cognitive 43) scripts/grapheme-check/check.ts:48— check.runGraphemeCheck has cognitive complexity 43 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: loops 12 (22 pts), if/else 6 (16 pts), ternaries 2 (4 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 22). To reduce it, break up the iteration: give each loop body a named function, and split a multi-phase loop into one function per phase so no single body carries the whole pipeline.
sample.build (cognitive 42) harness/sets/sample.ts:349— sample.build has cognitive complexity 42 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 18 (30 pts), ternaries 3 (7 pts), boolean chains 4, match/switch 1 (nesting depth added 16). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
line-breaks.getWebKitLineBreaks (cognitive 40) REDACTED:812— line-breaks.getWebKitLineBreaks has cognitive complexity 40 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (20 pts), loops 4 (9 pts), boolean chains 6, ternaries 1 (5 pts) (nesting depth added 22). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
observe.searchLineEnds (cognitive 40) harness/observe.ts:118— observe.searchLineEnds has cognitive complexity 40 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 11 (28 pts), loops 4 (6 pts), boolean chains 5, ternaries 1 (nesting depth added 19). Of this number, 35 points are the body's own statements and 5 belong to 2 function items inside it that branch. To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
han-kerning.getHanKerningTrims (cognitive 37) src/han-kerning.ts:201— han-kerning.getHanKerningTrims has cognitive complexity 37 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 10 (20 pts), boolean chains 8, ternaries 2 (6 pts), loops 2 (3 pts) (nesting depth added 15). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
line-break.stepPreparedSimpleLineGeometry (cognitive 37) src/line-break.ts:1092— line-break.stepPreparedSimpleLineGeometry has cognitive complexity 37 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 8 (15 pts), ternaries 5 (8 pts), boolean chains 7, loops 3 (7 pts) (nesting depth added 14). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
sample.drawSample (cognitive 37) harness/sets/sample.ts:616— sample.drawSample has cognitive complexity 37 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 8 (18 pts), loops 12 (17 pts), ternaries 1 (2 pts) (nesting depth added 16). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
offline-equal.outputs (cognitive 37) harness/offline-equal.ts:90— offline-equal.outputs has cognitive complexity 37 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: ternaries 7 (23 pts), loops 4 (10 pts), if/else 3, error handling 1 (nesting depth added 22). Of this number, 36 points are the body's own statements and 1 belongs to one function item inside it that branches. To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
measurement.getSegmentFit (cognitive 36) src/measurement.ts:1193— measurement.getSegmentFit has cognitive complexity 36 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 11 (19 pts), boolean chains 7, loops 2 (6 pts), ternaries 1 (4 pts) (nesting depth added 15). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
sample.draw (cognitive 36) harness/sets/sample.ts:527— sample.draw has cognitive complexity 36 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (13 pts), ternaries 10 (13 pts), match/switch 1 (4 pts), boolean chains 3, loops 1 (3 pts) (nesting depth added 12). Of this number, 35 points are the body's own statements and 1 belongs to one function literal inside it that branches. To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
predict.alignStream (cognitive 36) harness/predict.ts:69— predict.alignStream has cognitive complexity 36 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (21 pts), loops 4 (8 pts), boolean chains 7 (nesting depth added 18). 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.
facts.factTemplates (cognitive 35) harness/sets/facts.ts:29— facts.factTemplates has cognitive complexity 35 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: loops 6 (21 pts), ternaries 2 (14 pts) (nesting depth added 27). To reduce it, break up the iteration: give each loop body a named function, and split a multi-phase loop into one function per phase so no single body carries the whole pipeline.
analysis.removeSkippableSegmentBreaks (cognitive 34) src/analysis.ts:125— analysis.removeSkippableSegmentBreaks has cognitive complexity 34 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (17 pts), boolean chains 9, loops 4 (7 pts), ternaries 1 (nesting depth added 11). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
line-break.countPreparedLines (cognitive 34) src/line-break.ts:326— line-break.countPreparedLines has cognitive complexity 34 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (19 pts), loops 3 (6 pts), ternaries 3 (6 pts), boolean chains 3 (nesting depth added 16). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
break-data.breakDataReport (cognitive 34) harness/break-data.ts:77— break-data.breakDataReport has cognitive complexity 34 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: ternaries 7 (14 pts), loops 5 (10 pts), if/else 4 (9 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 17). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
cli.drift (cognitive 34) harness/cli.ts:517— cli.drift has cognitive complexity 34 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 15 (21 pts), loops 6 (7 pts), ternaries 3 (5 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 9). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
analysis.mapSourceLineBreaks (cognitive 33) src/analysis.ts:241— analysis.mapSourceLineBreaks has cognitive complexity 33 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 8 (20 pts), loops 5 (9 pts), boolean chains 4 (nesting depth added 16). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
measurement.getFontKanaKerning (cognitive 33) src/measurement.ts:877— measurement.getFontKanaKerning has cognitive complexity 33 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (17 pts), ternaries 4 (9 pts), loops 2 (6 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 19). 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.
sample.loadPools (cognitive 32) harness/sets/sample.ts:165— sample.loadPools has cognitive complexity 32 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 6 (15 pts), loops 7 (11 pts), ternaries 2 (5 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 16). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
score.judge (cognitive 29) harness/score.ts:408— score.judge has cognitive complexity 29 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (19 pts), boolean chains 4, loops 3, ternaries 1 (3 pts) (nesting depth added 12). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
sample.checkSources (cognitive 29) harness/sets/sample.ts:106— sample.checkSources has cognitive complexity 29 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (16 pts), ternaries 2 (7 pts), loops 2 (4 pts), boolean chains 2 (nesting depth added 16). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: this score is depth rather than breadth — most of its points come from checks stacked inside one another, so the work sits several levels in. Invert each enclosing check into an early exit (a return, or the language's equivalent) so the happy path stays at one level, and where a level cannot be exited early, lift the block it encloses into its own named function.
cli.gate (cognitive 29) harness/cli.ts:412— cli.gate has cognitive complexity 29 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 12 (16 pts), loops 5 (6 pts), ternaries 3 (5 pts), boolean chains 2 (nesting depth added 7). Of this number, 28 points are the body's own statements and 1 belongs to one function literal inside it that branches. To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
invariants.drawnCases (cognitive 28) harness/invariants.ts:131— invariants.drawnCases has cognitive complexity 28 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 3 (9 pts), loops 5 (9 pts), ternaries 3 (8 pts), boolean chains 2 (nesting depth added 15). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
line-breaks.unpackClassRuns (cognitive 27) REDACTED:145— line-breaks.unpackClassRuns has cognitive complexity 27 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (20 pts), loops 2 (4 pts), ternaries 1 (2 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 16). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
cli.record (cognitive 26) harness/cli.ts:189— cli.record has cognitive complexity 26 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: boolean chains 9, if/else 7 (9 pts), loops 2 (4 pts), ternaries 4 (nesting depth added 4). Of this number, 25 points are the body's own statements and 1 belongs to 2 function literals inside it that branch. To reduce it, split the body: this score is breadth rather than depth — many checks laid out side by side rather than nested inside one another, so inverting conditions into early returns has nothing left to flatten. Group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function, so the body reads as a short sequence of named stages.
invariants.standInWidth (cognitive 26) harness/invariants.ts:74— invariants.standInWidth has cognitive complexity 26 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (13 pts), boolean chains 5, ternaries 2 (5 pts), loops 2 (3 pts) (nesting depth added 10). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
observe.lineWidths (cognitive 26) harness/observe.ts:173— observe.lineWidths has cognitive complexity 26 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 4 (11 pts), loops 4 (7 pts), boolean chains 6, ternaries 1 (2 pts) (nesting depth added 11). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
run.runJob::step (cognitive 25) harness/run.ts:166— run.runJob::step has cognitive complexity 25 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 8 (11 pts), loops 4 (10 pts), boolean chains 4 (nesting depth added 9). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
line-breaks.markDictionaryWords (cognitive 25) REDACTED:419— line-breaks.markDictionaryWords has cognitive complexity 25 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (19 pts), loops 2 (5 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 15). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
sample.demoBlocks (cognitive 25) harness/sets/sample.ts:237— sample.demoBlocks has cognitive complexity 25 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 6 (11 pts), loops 5 (9 pts), boolean chains 3, match/switch 1 (2 pts) (nesting depth added 10). Most of this is not in the body itself: 4 of the 25 points are its own statements and the rest belongs to 2 function items inside it that branch (visit, add). Those helpers are already separate functions, so extracting the branching again is not available. To reduce it, move them out of the body to the enclosing scope, where each is measured, reviewed and tested on its own, and reduce whichever one then reads as the largest.
predict.richDisagreement (cognitive 25) harness/predict.ts:265— predict.richDisagreement has cognitive complexity 25 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (13 pts), boolean chains 5, loops 3 (4 pts), ternaries 1 (3 pts) (nesting depth added 9). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
widths.survivors (cognitive 25) harness/sets/widths.ts:168— widths.survivors has cognitive complexity 25 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 5 (14 pts), loops 5 (9 pts), ternaries 1 (2 pts) (nesting depth added 14). Of this number, 23 points are the body's own statements and 2 belong to one function literal inside it that branches. To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
predict.paints (cognitive 24) harness/predict.ts:302— predict.paints has cognitive complexity 24 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (16 pts), boolean chains 4, loops 2 (4 pts) (nesting depth added 11). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
measurement.getWebKitGenericFamilies (cognitive 23) src/measurement.ts:494— measurement.getWebKitGenericFamilies has cognitive complexity 23 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 6 (12 pts), ternaries 3 (7 pts), loops 3, boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 10). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
cli.explain (cognitive 23) harness/cli.ts:678— cli.explain has cognitive complexity 23 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: ternaries 7 (13 pts), if/else 5 (6 pts), loops 4 (nesting depth added 7). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
widths.bisect::nextRound (cognitive 23) harness/sets/widths.ts:345— widths.bisect::nextRound has cognitive complexity 23 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 4 (12 pts), loops 4 (10 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 14). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
analysis.getWebKitParagraphBreaks (cognitive 22) src/analysis.ts:678— analysis.getWebKitParagraphBreaks has cognitive complexity 22 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 4 (9 pts), boolean chains 7, loops 2 (4 pts), ternaries 1 (2 pts) (nesting depth added 8). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
prepare.readScriptRuns (cognitive 22) src/prepare.ts:184— prepare.readScriptRuns has cognitive complexity 22 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 6 (13 pts), loops 2 (4 pts), boolean chains 3, ternaries 1 (2 pts) (nesting depth added 10). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
line-breaks.shouldBreakFast (cognitive 21) REDACTED:476— line-breaks.shouldBreakFast has cognitive complexity 21 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 6 (9 pts), boolean chains 6, ternaries 2 (6 pts) (nesting depth added 7). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
measurement.buildEngineProfile (cognitive 21) src/measurement.ts:993— measurement.buildEngineProfile has cognitive complexity 21 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: ternaries 15 (20 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 5). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
rich-inline.materializeRichInlineLineRange (cognitive 21) src/rich-inline.ts:1192— rich-inline.materializeRichInlineLineRange has cognitive complexity 21 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: ternaries 4 (9 pts), if/else 5 (8 pts), boolean chains 3, loops 1 (nesting depth added 8). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
generate-engine-break-data.packTable (cognitive 21) REDACTED:110— generate-engine-break-data.packTable has cognitive complexity 21 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 6 (9 pts), loops 4 (8 pts), boolean chains 3, ternaries 1 (nesting depth added 7). Most of this is not in the body itself: 8 of the 21 points are its own statements and the rest belongs to 2 function items inside it that branch (longestCopy, remember). Those helpers are already separate functions, so extracting the branching again is not available. To reduce it, move them out of the body to the enclosing scope, where each is measured, reviewed and tested on its own, and reduce whichever one then reads as the largest.
sample.inlinePieces (cognitive 20) harness/sets/sample.ts:217— sample.inlinePieces has cognitive complexity 20 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: ternaries 4 (12 pts), if/else 2 (4 pts), match/switch 1 (2 pts), boolean chains 1, loops 1 (nesting depth added 11). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
sample.familyFor (cognitive 20) harness/sets/sample.ts:479— sample.familyFor has cognitive complexity 20 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: ternaries 6 (15 pts), boolean chains 2, if/else 1 (2 pts), match/switch 1 (nesting depth added 10). 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.
graphemes.findGraphemeEnds (cognitive 19) src/graphemes.ts:64— graphemes.findGraphemeEnds has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (15 pts), boolean chains 3, loops 1 (nesting depth added 8). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
prepare.addIdeographicSpaceHangs (cognitive 19) src/prepare.ts:698— prepare.addIdeographicSpaceHangs has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 4 (9 pts), boolean chains 5, loops 2 (3 pts), ternaries 1 (2 pts) (nesting depth added 7). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
rich-inline.getOpeningFit (cognitive 19) src/rich-inline.ts:879— rich-inline.getOpeningFit has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: boolean chains 12, ternaries 2 (4 pts), if/else 2, loops 1 (nesting depth added 2). To reduce it, name the conditions: bind each compound test to a well-named local or a small predicate function, so the body reads as a sequence of named decisions rather than a chain of operators.
catalog.classSamples (cognitive 19) harness/sets/catalog.ts:67— catalog.classSamples has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 3 (7 pts), loops 4 (6 pts), ternaries 2 (4 pts), boolean chains 2 (nesting depth added 8). Of this number, 17 points are the body's own statements and 2 belong to one function literal inside it that branches. To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
line-breaks.getBlinkLineBreaks (cognitive 18) REDACTED:520— line-breaks.getBlinkLineBreaks has cognitive complexity 18 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 8 (15 pts), boolean chains 1, loops 1, ternaries 1 (nesting depth added 7). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
gecko-line-breaks.getBreakStates (cognitive 18) src/gecko-line-breaks.ts:613— gecko-line-breaks.getBreakStates has cognitive complexity 18 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 4 (9 pts), boolean chains 6, ternaries 1 (2 pts), loops 1 (nesting depth added 6). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
han-kerning.getStaticCharType (cognitive 18) src/han-kerning.ts:60— han-kerning.getStaticCharType has cognitive complexity 18 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 3 (6 pts), ternaries 2 (6 pts), boolean chains 5, match/switch 1 (nesting depth added 7). 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.
measurement.getEmojiCorrection (cognitive 18) src/measurement.ts:1048— measurement.getEmojiCorrection has cognitive complexity 18 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 5 (9 pts), loops 2 (8 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 10). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
line-break.getTerminalLetterSpacing (cognitive 18) src/line-break.ts:200— line-break.getTerminalLetterSpacing has cognitive complexity 18 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 6 (8 pts), boolean chains 5, ternaries 2 (4 pts), loops 1 (nesting depth added 4). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
prepare.addKanaKerning (cognitive 18) src/prepare.ts:657— prepare.addKanaKerning has cognitive complexity 18 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 5 (10 pts), ternaries 2 (5 pts), loops 2 (3 pts) (nesting depth added 9). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
measurement.getHyphenText (cognitive 17) src/measurement.ts:572— measurement.getHyphenText has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 5 (12 pts), loops 1 (3 pts), boolean chains 2 (nesting depth added 9). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
measurement.getKanaKerning (cognitive 17) src/measurement.ts:929— measurement.getKanaKerning has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 6 (10 pts), boolean chains 4, loops 1 (2 pts), ternaries 1 (nesting depth added 5). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
line-break.normalizePreparedLineStart (cognitive 17) src/line-break.ts:253— line-break.normalizePreparedLineStart has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 8 (15 pts), boolean chains 1, loops 1 (nesting depth added 7). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
cli.equal (cognitive 17) harness/cli.ts:593— cli.equal has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 5 (8 pts), ternaries 2 (5 pts), loops 3, boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 6). Of this number, 15 points are the body's own statements and 2 belong to one function literal inside it that branches. To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
generate-engine-break-data.findRowDifferences (cognitive 17) REDACTED:655— generate-engine-break-data.findRowDifferences has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 3 (8 pts), loops 4 (7 pts), boolean chains 2 (nesting depth added 8). Of this number, 12 points are the body's own statements and 5 belong to one function item inside it that branches. To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
score.score (cognitive 16) harness/score.ts:55— score.score has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (10 pts), boolean chains 3, loops 2 (3 pts) (nesting depth added 4). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
gecko-line-breaks.setupClusterBoundaries (cognitive 16) src/gecko-line-breaks.ts:340— gecko-line-breaks.setupClusterBoundaries has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 4 (5 pts), boolean chains 4, loops 3 (4 pts), ternaries 2 (3 pts) (nesting depth added 3). 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.
gecko-line-breaks.segmentComplex (cognitive 16) src/gecko-line-breaks.ts:408— gecko-line-breaks.segmentComplex has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: loops 4 (9 pts), if/else 2 (6 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 9). To reduce it, break up the iteration: give each loop body a named function, and split a multi-phase loop into one function per phase so no single body carries the whole pipeline.
predict.unsupported (cognitive 16) harness/predict.ts:37— predict.unsupported has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (10 pts), boolean chains 4, loops 1, ternaries 1 (nesting depth added 3). 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.
generate-engine-break-data.checkSinglePass (cognitive 16) REDACTED:365— generate-engine-break-data.checkSinglePass has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 5 (8 pts), boolean chains 4, loops 3 (4 pts) (nesting depth added 4). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
generate-webkit-generic-families.readFamilies (cognitive 16) scripts/generate-webkit-generic-families.ts:80— generate-webkit-generic-families.readFamilies has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 4 (10 pts), loops 2 (3 pts), boolean chains 2, ternaries 1 (nesting depth added 7). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
Change coupling: han-kerning.ts ↔ rich-inline.ts src/han-kerning.ts:1— `src/han-kerning.ts` and `src/rich-inline.ts` change together 54% of the time (7 of the 13 commits that touched whichever of the two files changed less often, counting a file under its earlier names as well — a repo-wide or module-wide sweep is evidence about the sweep rather than about any pair inside it and is left out of BOTH sides of this ratio, while a dependency bump, a formatter/rename sweep, or a commit whose edit to one of the two files was a tool directive such as //go:generate or whitespace only is left out of the shared count ONLY, so the two sides are not taken over identical commit sets) 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 7 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `605b04d2` Pass measureAnalysis() its paragraph from every caller, with no defau…; `18fcc9f6` Type a pair of marks that two items split once, and ask no font where…; `4bd41113` Name the Blink function the pair halt follows — run `git show` on any of them.
No structured logging — No logging call was found in the 34 JavaScript/TypeScript, Swift production file(s) this check read across 2 module(s). Each was searched for its ecosystem's logging libraries (JavaScript/TypeScript: pino, winston, bunyan, log4js, loglevel, consola, the NestJS Logger; Swift: os.Logger/os_log/NSLog, swift-log, CocoaLumberjack, SwiftyBeaver, XCGLogger) and for a call on a receiver named `log`/`logger` (or ending in `Logger`/`_logger`) with a level verb. It cannot see logging through a repo-local wrapper named otherwise, or in source it did not read — this is 'no logging found by this walk', not a verdict that nothing here logs. If it is right, production issues will be hard to diagnose.
R10 · Code Duplication· Duplicated block with local edits (16 matched lines × 2 locations) · ×1
Duplicated block with local edits (16 matched lines × 2 locations) harness/invariants.ts:250— harness/invariants.ts:250 · harness/invariants.ts:336 — the two spans are one implementation copied and then locally edited — 200 tokens are still identical, in the same order in both spans, with only local edits between them. The copies have already begun to drift, which is this row's finding: an edit made to one and not the other changes behaviour silently. Diff the two spans first to learn what genuinely differs, then extract the shared core into one module both sites use, passing the differences in as parameters — or, if one copy exists only because the other could not be imported from its context, make one of them the single source the other is generated or re-exported from. If one copy is no longer reachable, delete it rather than letting it shadow the live one.
Duplicated block (14 lines × 2 locations) src/rich-inline.ts:993— src/rich-inline.ts:993 · src/rich-inline.ts:1017 — all 2 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.
Duplicated block (12 lines × 2 locations) scripts/package-smoke-test.ts:40— scripts/package-smoke-test.ts:40 · scripts/package-smoke-test.ts:69 — all 2 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.
Duplicated block (9 lines × 2 locations) src/layout.ts:300— src/layout.ts:300 · src/layout.ts:323 — all 2 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.
Duplicated block (7 lines × 2 locations) REDACTED:891— REDACTED:891 · scripts/generate-webkit-generic-families.ts:200 — the 2 copies sit in sibling files in one directory, so check first whether one of them (or an existing module there) already owns this behaviour and the others should call it; otherwise extract it into one module in that directory and have each site call it.
R10 · Code Duplication· Duplicated block with local edits (6 matched lines × 2 locations) · ×1
Duplicated block with local edits (6 matched lines × 2 locations) REDACTED:89— REDACTED:89 · scripts/generate-webkit-generic-families.ts:36 — the two spans are one implementation copied and then locally edited — 61 tokens are still identical, in the same order in both files, with only local edits between them. The copies have already begun to drift, which is this row's finding: an edit made to one and not the other changes behaviour silently. Diff the two spans first to learn what genuinely differs, then extract the shared core into one module both sites use, passing the differences in as parameters — or, if one copy exists only because the other could not be imported from its context, make one of them the single source the other is generated or re-exported from. If one copy is no longer reachable, delete it rather than letting it shadow the live one.
R10 · Code Duplication· Duplicated block with local edits (5 matched lines × 2 locations) · ×1
Duplicated block with local edits (5 matched lines × 2 locations) src/gecko-line-breaks.ts:69— src/gecko-line-breaks.ts:69 · src/gecko-line-breaks.ts:75 — the two spans are one implementation copied and then locally edited — 53 tokens are still identical, in the same order in both spans, with only local edits between them. The copies have already begun to drift, which is this row's finding: an edit made to one and not the other changes behaviour silently. Diff the two spans first to learn what genuinely differs, then extract the shared core into one module both sites use, passing the differences in as parameters — or, if one copy exists only because the other could not be imported from its context, make one of them the single source the other is generated or re-exported from. If one copy is no longer reachable, delete it rather than letting it shadow the live one.
Complex function walkPreparedComplexLines (cyclomatic 264, cognitive 749) src/line-break.ts:464— walkPreparedComplexLines has cyclomatic complexity 264 and cognitive complexity 749; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
Complex function prepareRichInline (cyclomatic 196, cognitive 350) src/rich-inline.ts:186— prepareRichInline has cyclomatic complexity 196 and cognitive complexity 350; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
Complex function measureAnalysis (cyclomatic 114, cognitive 194) src/prepare.ts:352— measureAnalysis has cyclomatic complexity 114 and cognitive complexity 194; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
Complex function classify (cyclomatic 98, cognitive 110) REDACTED:586— classify has cyclomatic complexity 98 and cognitive complexity 110; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
Complex function (anonymous) (cyclomatic 65, cognitive 130) harness/invariants.ts:318— (anonymous) has cyclomatic complexity 65 and cognitive complexity 130; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
Complex function segmentAtLineBreaks (cyclomatic 65, cognitive 94) src/analysis.ts:334— segmentAtLineBreaks has cyclomatic complexity 65 and cognitive complexity 94; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
Complex function render (cyclomatic 64, cognitive 98) pages/demos/editorial-engine.ts:623— render has cyclomatic complexity 64 and cognitive complexity 98; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
Complex function markWordBreaks (cyclomatic 62, cognitive 163) src/gecko-line-breaks.ts:448— markWordBreaks has cyclomatic complexity 62 and cognitive complexity 163; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
Complex function caseProblem (cyclomatic 61, cognitive 53) harness/store.ts:206— caseProblem has cyclomatic complexity 61 and cognitive complexity 53; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive sits below cyclomatic here, so much of the count is breadth — arms side by side rather than stacked — and splitting per arm would leave a function per arm; group the work between the checks into named steps instead. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
Complex function createLine (cyclomatic 52, cognitive 108) src/rich-inline.ts:959— createLine has cyclomatic complexity 52 and cognitive complexity 108; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
Complex function analyzeText (cyclomatic 51, cognitive 121) src/analysis.ts:439— analyzeText has cyclomatic complexity 51 and cognitive complexity 121; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
Complex function richTemplates (cyclomatic 46, cognitive 68) harness/sets/rich.ts:226— richTemplates has cyclomatic complexity 46 and cognitive complexity 68; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
Complex function check (cyclomatic 45, cognitive 68) harness/cli.ts:274— check has cyclomatic complexity 45 and cognitive complexity 68; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
Complex function transformText (cyclomatic 41, cognitive 96) src/gecko-line-breaks.ts:181— transformText has cyclomatic complexity 41 and cognitive complexity 96; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
Complex function nextBreakablePosition (cyclomatic 41, cognitive 69) REDACTED:695— nextBreakablePosition has cyclomatic complexity 41 and cognitive complexity 69; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
Complex function build (cyclomatic 40, cognitive 69) harness/sets/sample.ts:349— build has cyclomatic complexity 40 and cognitive complexity 69; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
Complex function setEmptyObjectFacts (cyclomatic 39, cognitive 68) src/rich-inline.ts:732— setEmptyObjectFacts has cyclomatic complexity 39 and cognitive complexity 68; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
Complex function plainDisagreement (cyclomatic 39, cognitive 54) harness/predict.ts:203— plainDisagreement has cyclomatic complexity 39 and cognitive complexity 54; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
Complex function (anonymous) (cyclomatic 38, cognitive 64) src/layout.test.ts:6110— (anonymous) has cyclomatic complexity 38 and cognitive complexity 64; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
Complex function isWideCharacter (cyclomatic 38, cognitive 37) src/layout.test.ts:95— isWideCharacter has cyclomatic complexity 38 and cognitive complexity 37; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive sits below cyclomatic here, so much of the count is breadth — arms side by side rather than stacked — and splitting per arm would leave a function per arm; group the work between the checks into named steps instead. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
src/measurement.ts: 1386 lines of code src/measurement.ts:1— src/measurement.ts has 1386 significant lines (blank lines excluded), over the 400-line bar, and contains logic — a file this long is usually several responsibilities in one module.
src/rich-inline.ts: 1218 lines of code src/rich-inline.ts:1— src/rich-inline.ts has 1218 significant lines (blank lines excluded), over the 400-line bar, and contains logic — a file this long is usually several responsibilities in one module.
src/line-break.ts: 1134 lines of code src/line-break.ts:1— src/line-break.ts has 1134 significant lines (blank lines excluded), over the 400-line bar, and contains logic — a file this long is usually several responsibilities in one module.
REDACTED: 852 lines of code REDACTED:1— REDACTED has 852 significant lines (blank lines excluded), over the 400-line bar, and contains logic — a file this long is usually several responsibilities in one module.
REDACTED: 823 lines of code REDACTED:1— REDACTED has 823 significant lines (blank lines excluded), over the 400-line bar, and contains logic — a file this long is usually several responsibilities in one module.
harness/cli.ts: 757 lines of code harness/cli.ts:1— harness/cli.ts has 757 significant lines (blank lines excluded), over the 400-line bar, and contains logic — a file this long is usually several responsibilities in one module.
src/prepare.ts: 694 lines of code src/prepare.ts:1— src/prepare.ts has 694 significant lines (blank lines excluded), over the 400-line bar, and contains logic — a file this long is usually several responsibilities in one module.
src/analysis.ts: 674 lines of code src/analysis.ts:1— src/analysis.ts has 674 significant lines (blank lines excluded), over the 400-line bar, and contains logic — a file this long is usually several responsibilities in one module.
harness/sets/sample.ts: 650 lines of code harness/sets/sample.ts:1— harness/sets/sample.ts has 650 significant lines (blank lines excluded), over the 400-line bar, and contains logic — a file this long is usually several responsibilities in one module.
src/gecko-line-breaks.ts: 636 lines of code src/gecko-line-breaks.ts:1— src/gecko-line-breaks.ts has 636 significant lines (blank lines excluded), over the 400-line bar, and contains logic — a file this long is usually several responsibilities in one module.
harness/invariants.ts: 615 lines of code harness/invariants.ts:1— harness/invariants.ts has 615 significant lines (blank lines excluded), over the 400-line bar, and contains logic — a file this long is usually several responsibilities in one module.
harness/browsers.ts: 564 lines of code harness/browsers.ts:1— harness/browsers.ts has 564 significant lines (blank lines excluded), over the 400-line bar, and contains logic — a file this long is usually several responsibilities in one module.
harness/score.ts: 531 lines of code harness/score.ts:1— harness/score.ts has 531 significant lines (blank lines excluded), over the 400-line bar, and contains logic — a file this long is usually several responsibilities in one module.
harness/sets/rich.ts: 525 lines of code harness/sets/rich.ts:1— harness/sets/rich.ts has 525 significant lines (blank lines excluded), over the 400-line bar, and contains logic — a file this long is usually several responsibilities in one module.
harness/sets/widths.ts: 487 lines of code harness/sets/widths.ts:1— harness/sets/widths.ts has 487 significant lines (blank lines excluded), over the 400-line bar, and contains logic — a file this long is usually several responsibilities in one module.
harness/predict.ts: 449 lines of code harness/predict.ts:1— harness/predict.ts has 449 significant lines (blank lines excluded), over the 400-line bar, and contains logic — a file this long is usually several responsibilities in one module.
Unused dependency 'oxlint-tsgolint' — Declared in the root package.json but never imported anywhere in that package or its workspace members — no static import reaches it. Usually that is dead weight and attack surface, but two shapes are indistinguishable from source and are NOT dead: an optional or native peer that another dependency loads dynamically at runtime, and a package a build, docs or test step installs and invokes separately. Confirm which of the three this is before removing it.
X17 · Uncapped recursion over a caller-supplied document· Recursive walk over a caller-supplied document has no depth cap · ×1
Recursive walk over a caller-supplied document has no depth cap harness/sets/build.ts:177— `canonical` is exported and takes `value: unknown` from its caller, and it calls itself at line 177 (`canonical`) with a piece of `value` (and at line 183) — and nowhere in `canonical` is there a depth parameter, a descent counter, or any other cap. The walk therefore spends one stack frame per LEVEL of the value it is handed, so the nesting of the caller's document — not this code — decides how deep the stack goes. JavaScript sets no limit of its own on that nesting: `JSON.parse` accepts any depth, so a 100,000-byte body — inside Express's default 100kb limit — parses to 50,000 levels, and a walk like this one throws `RangeError: Maximum call stack size exceeded` long before it reaches the bottom. Wherever that throw lands, the work fails: a request errors, and a walk running outside any `try` — an event handler, a timer, a promise nobody awaits — takes the Node process down with every other request in flight. Thread a depth argument through `canonical` and reject the value past a fixed maximum, or rewrite the descent with an explicit stack.
X2 · Cancellation propagation· Async function without AbortSignal · ×1
Async function without AbortSignal: post REDACTED:16— `post` awaits `fetch(…)` but neither accepts an AbortSignal nor passes one on, so its caller cannot stop the request once it has started. Accept `{ signal }` and pass it through: `fetch(url, { signal })`.
Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) harness/browsers.ts:288— `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.
Duplicated predicate src/line-break.ts:230— `i === startSegmentIndex && startGraphemeIndex > 0` appears character-identically in 2 files — src/line-break.ts, src/line-text.ts. 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 harness/invariants.ts:176— `item.text === undefined || item.break === 'never'` appears character-identically in 2 files — harness/invariants.ts, src/rich-inline.ts. 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 harness/sets/build.ts:178— `value !== null && typeof value === 'object'` appears character-identically in 2 files — harness/sets/build.ts, harness/sets/sample.ts. 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.
IC1 · Incompleteness & stubs· Empty method body · ×2
Empty method body scripts/grapheme-check/run.ts:18— `resolveReport` has an empty body — confirm it's an intentional no-op and not an unfinished method.
Empty method body scripts/grapheme-check/run.ts:19— `failReport` has an empty body — confirm it's an intentional no-op and not an unfinished method.
No ADRs found — No ADRs found. No recognised ADR directory (`docs/adr/`, `docs/decisions/`, `adr/`, `docs/rfcs/`, an `ADR0001/` folder, or their siblings) exists anywhere in this tree. What was searched, so you can tell an empty log from a search that missed one: every directory under the tree (build output, dependencies and VCS metadata excepted), for a document that is either any non-index page inside a recognised ADR directory, whatever its name and however deeply nested (`docs/adr/use-postgres.md`, `docs/adr/2024/0001-x.md`); or a file anywhere whose name is ADR-shaped (`0001-use-postgres.md`, `adr-012-caching.md`); or, when neither turned anything up, a document carrying the decision-record signature (an "Architecture Decision Record" heading, or Status / Context / Decision / Consequences as section headings). A decision log that clears none of these — unnumbered files outside any recognised directory, without those headings — is not seen by this check and this row is then wrong. If that is your case, say so rather than renaming anything; otherwise, consider recording architectural decisions in `docs/adr/`.
D28 · Secrets (history)· Rotate the exposed credentials · ×1
No ADRs — No Architecture Decision Records found — no conventional ADR directory, no numbered `NNNN-title` documents in any markup this check reads, and nothing ADR-shaped by content. Design rationale recorded elsewhere (a design-notes tree, a mailing list, pull-request discussion) is not visible to this check and is not re-findable per decision, so a future maintainer cannot ask why one choice was made and get an answer.
No SAST — No static application security testing detected. For this repository's stack, add CodeQL's javascript-typescript pack, `semgrep --config=p/typescript`, or eslint-plugin-security as a CI step. What was searched, so you can tell an absence from a miss: the 833 CI workflow file(s) in this repository, and the scanner and linter configuration checked in beside them. A scan that runs outside CI, one configured in your forge's web UI rather than in a committed file, or a tool whose name is none of those this check carries, is not seen — if that is your case the row is wrong, and saying so is more useful than adding a second scanner.
X2 · Cancellation propagation· Not all async functions that make a request accept an AbortSignal · ×1
Not all async functions that make a request accept an AbortSignal — Only 0/1 async functions that make a cancellable request (fetch, axios, ky, ofetch) accept an AbortSignal or pass one on, so a request keeps running after whatever wanted it has given up — a page navigated away from, an unmounted component, a timed-out job. Take a `signal` (or an options object that carries one) and hand it to the request; where nothing could ever cancel the call, omitting it is a deliberate choice — judge against how the function is used.
Null assertions (`!`) reduce the strict null checking score — ~76.2 `!` null assertions per 1k TypeScript source lines — 1237 assertion(s) across the 16223 source line(s) of the 40 TypeScript file(s) read, which is the only code the operator asserts anything in (a `!` in a `.js` file is not this operator and was not counted, and one in a file whose null checking is off silences nothing). Densest: src/rich-inline.ts (157), src/line-break.ts (99), REDACTED (98). Each one tells the compiler to trust the author about null, suppressing the very diagnostic `strictNullChecks` exists to produce.
Skipped (documented): (unnamed test) harness/icu.test.ts:147— Skipped with a documented reason — a deferral, not lazy debt: switched off by test.skipIf
Skipped (documented): (unnamed test) harness/icu.test.ts:153— Skipped with a documented reason — a deferral, not lazy debt: switched off by test.skipIf
Skipped (documented): (unnamed test) harness/icu.test.ts:159— Skipped with a documented reason — a deferral, not lazy debt: switched off by test.skipIf
Skipped (documented): (unnamed test) harness/icu.test.ts:172— Skipped with a documented reason — a deferral, not lazy debt: switched off by test.skipIf
Dependency hygiene PARTLY measured — npm pinning read, dependency currency not (the committed lockfile resolved no direct production dependency) — This repository's npm dependencies were read for PINNING discipline: 0 production declaration(s) plus 6 development one(s) across 1 package.json (1 of them the product — the rest are example, documentation or fixture manifests, which are read and counted but screened off the rules below, because both prescribe a MOVE and "align your example apps" is not a remedy), against 1 committed lockfile(s). No pinning defect was found. That is only PART of dependency hygiene, so this dimension is NOT SCORED: whether any of these packages has a newer, deprecated or abandoned release is the dependency-CURRENCY question, and answering it needs concrete resolved versions. This repository's committed lockfile WAS read and it resolves no direct production dependency to grade — a package.json states version RANGES, which name no particular release to be behind. That is a fact about this repository, not a reader we are missing. A clean pinning pass is NOT an all-clear for these dependencies, and it is not a finding that they are all USED. Note also what is deliberately NOT charged here: a workspace legitimately carries ONE lockfile for many manifests, so no row is raised off the lockfile count, only reported. Known CVEs in the same dependency graph are a separate question again, reported under D30 wherever the manifest is OSV-readable.
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. semgrep could not parse 7 file(s) — `harness/bench/run.ts`, `harness/store.ts`, `pages/demos/markdown-chat.data.ts`, `pages/demos/rich-note.model.ts`, `src/layout.ts`, … (+2 more) — so the PII/GDPR sweep did not cover the unparsed regions of them; rows reported elsewhere in those files are real.
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 01a1784b-a678-7003-a7ff-a7c71b2bfa4e · every finding is also locatable in findings.md, and the complete scoring record (with exit codes + durations) in sidecar.json.
Issues: 9 · Warnings: 311 · Recommendations: 15 · Info: 5 — Appendix A · all findings · full markdown report.
Generated by Watchdog — deterministic code-health analysis. 26-10-2026 @ 12:59 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.