{"$schema":"https://json.schemastore.org/sarif-2.1.0.json","version":"2.1.0","runs":[{"tool":{"driver":{"name":"codehealth","informationUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev","rules":[{"id":"D1","name":"Cyclomatic Complexity","shortDescription":{"text":"Cyclomatic Complexity"},"helpUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev/dimensions/D1"},{"id":"D2","name":"Cognitive Complexity","shortDescription":{"text":"Cognitive Complexity"},"helpUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev/dimensions/D2"},{"id":"D3","name":"God Classes","shortDescription":{"text":"God Classes"},"helpUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev/dimensions/D3"},{"id":"D4","name":"Code Duplication","shortDescription":{"text":"Code Duplication"},"helpUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev/dimensions/D4"},{"id":"D5","name":"Coupling","shortDescription":{"text":"Coupling"},"helpUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev/dimensions/D5"},{"id":"D6","name":"Cohesion (LCOM4)","shortDescription":{"text":"Cohesion (LCOM4)"},"helpUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev/dimensions/D6"},{"id":"D8","name":"Code Coverage","shortDescription":{"text":"Code Coverage"},"helpUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev/dimensions/D8"},{"id":"D9","name":"Test Distribution","shortDescription":{"text":"Test Distribution"},"helpUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev/dimensions/D9"},{"id":"D10","name":"Test Quality","shortDescription":{"text":"Test Quality"},"helpUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev/dimensions/D10"},{"id":"D11","name":"Test Reliability","shortDescription":{"text":"Test Reliability"},"helpUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev/dimensions/D11"},{"id":"D12","name":"Dependency Hygiene","shortDescription":{"text":"Dependency Hygiene"},"helpUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev/dimensions/D12"},{"id":"D13","name":"Secret Scanning","shortDescription":{"text":"Secret Scanning"},"helpUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev/dimensions/D13","relationships":[{"target":{"id":"CWE-798","toolComponent":{"name":"CWE","guid":"c3a2b1d0-7f3e-4b2a-9c1d-5e6f7a8b9c0d"}},"kinds":["relevant"]},{"target":{"id":"CWE-259","toolComponent":{"name":"CWE","guid":"c3a2b1d0-7f3e-4b2a-9c1d-5e6f7a8b9c0d"}},"kinds":["relevant"]}],"properties":{"cwe":["CWE-798","CWE-259"]}},{"id":"D14","name":"License Compliance","shortDescription":{"text":"License Compliance"},"helpUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev/dimensions/D14"},{"id":"D15","name":"Churn \u00D7 Complexity Hotspots","shortDescription":{"text":"Churn \u00D7 Complexity Hotspots"},"helpUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev/dimensions/D15"},{"id":"D16","name":"Bus Factor","shortDescription":{"text":"Bus Factor"},"helpUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev/dimensions/D16"},{"id":"D17","name":"Explicit Debt","shortDescription":{"text":"Explicit Debt"},"helpUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev/dimensions/D17"},{"id":"D19","name":"Documentation Quality","shortDescription":{"text":"Documentation Quality"},"helpUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev/dimensions/D19"},{"id":"D20","name":"ADR Quality","shortDescription":{"text":"ADR Quality"},"helpUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev/dimensions/D20"},{"id":"D21","name":"Naming Consistency","shortDescription":{"text":"Naming Consistency"},"helpUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev/dimensions/D21"},{"id":"D26","name":"Project Cohesion","shortDescription":{"text":"Project Cohesion"},"helpUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev/dimensions/D26"},{"id":"D28","name":"Secrets (history)","shortDescription":{"text":"Secrets (history)"},"helpUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev/dimensions/D28","relationships":[{"target":{"id":"CWE-798","toolComponent":{"name":"CWE","guid":"c3a2b1d0-7f3e-4b2a-9c1d-5e6f7a8b9c0d"}},"kinds":["relevant"]},{"target":{"id":"CWE-259","toolComponent":{"name":"CWE","guid":"c3a2b1d0-7f3e-4b2a-9c1d-5e6f7a8b9c0d"}},"kinds":["relevant"]}],"properties":{"cwe":["CWE-798","CWE-259"]}},{"id":"D29","name":"Static Analysis (SAST)","shortDescription":{"text":"Static Analysis (SAST)"},"helpUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev/dimensions/D29","relationships":[{"target":{"id":"CWE-79","toolComponent":{"name":"CWE","guid":"c3a2b1d0-7f3e-4b2a-9c1d-5e6f7a8b9c0d"}},"kinds":["relevant"]},{"target":{"id":"CWE-89","toolComponent":{"name":"CWE","guid":"c3a2b1d0-7f3e-4b2a-9c1d-5e6f7a8b9c0d"}},"kinds":["relevant"]},{"target":{"id":"CWE-78","toolComponent":{"name":"CWE","guid":"c3a2b1d0-7f3e-4b2a-9c1d-5e6f7a8b9c0d"}},"kinds":["relevant"]},{"target":{"id":"CWE-94","toolComponent":{"name":"CWE","guid":"c3a2b1d0-7f3e-4b2a-9c1d-5e6f7a8b9c0d"}},"kinds":["relevant"]},{"target":{"id":"CWE-77","toolComponent":{"name":"CWE","guid":"c3a2b1d0-7f3e-4b2a-9c1d-5e6f7a8b9c0d"}},"kinds":["relevant"]}],"properties":{"cwe":["CWE-79","CWE-89","CWE-78","CWE-94","CWE-77"]}},{"id":"D34","name":"Knowledge Freshness","shortDescription":{"text":"Knowledge Freshness"},"helpUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev/dimensions/D34"},{"id":"D35","name":"Change Coupling","shortDescription":{"text":"Change Coupling"},"helpUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev/dimensions/D35"},{"id":"D36","name":"Supply-chain Provenance \u0026 Signing","shortDescription":{"text":"Supply-chain Provenance \u0026 Signing"},"helpUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev/dimensions/D36","relationships":[{"target":{"id":"CWE-1357","toolComponent":{"name":"CWE","guid":"c3a2b1d0-7f3e-4b2a-9c1d-5e6f7a8b9c0d"}},"kinds":["relevant"]},{"target":{"id":"CWE-494","toolComponent":{"name":"CWE","guid":"c3a2b1d0-7f3e-4b2a-9c1d-5e6f7a8b9c0d"}},"kinds":["relevant"]}],"properties":{"cwe":["CWE-1357","CWE-494"]}},{"id":"D37","name":"Vulnerability-disclosure Policy","shortDescription":{"text":"Vulnerability-disclosure Policy"},"helpUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev/dimensions/D37","relationships":[{"target":{"id":"CWE-1059","toolComponent":{"name":"CWE","guid":"c3a2b1d0-7f3e-4b2a-9c1d-5e6f7a8b9c0d"}},"kinds":["relevant"]}],"properties":{"cwe":["CWE-1059"]}},{"id":"AX10","name":"Code composition","shortDescription":{"text":"Code composition"},"helpUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev/dimensions/AX10"},{"id":"AX3","name":"Project dependency cycles","shortDescription":{"text":"Project dependency cycles"},"helpUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev/dimensions/AX3"},{"id":"AX4","name":"Dependency direction","shortDescription":{"text":"Dependency direction"},"helpUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev/dimensions/AX4"},{"id":"AX8","name":"Test isolation","shortDescription":{"text":"Test isolation"},"helpUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev/dimensions/AX8"},{"id":"AX9","name":"CQS / query purity","shortDescription":{"text":"CQS / query purity"},"helpUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev/dimensions/AX9"},{"id":"AXB1","name":"Runtime evidence locked \u2014 no reproducible boot","shortDescription":{"text":"Runtime evidence locked \u2014 no reproducible boot"},"helpUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev/dimensions/AXB1"},{"id":"M1","name":"Documentation (README)","shortDescription":{"text":"Documentation (README)"},"helpUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev/dimensions/M1"},{"id":"M2","name":"Architecture documentation","shortDescription":{"text":"Architecture documentation"},"helpUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev/dimensions/M2"},{"id":"M3","name":"Folder \u0026 project structure","shortDescription":{"text":"Folder \u0026 project structure"},"helpUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev/dimensions/M3"},{"id":"M4","name":"Documentation accuracy","shortDescription":{"text":"Documentation accuracy"},"helpUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev/dimensions/M4"},{"id":"P1","name":"CI/CD gates","shortDescription":{"text":"CI/CD gates"},"helpUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev/dimensions/P1"},{"id":"P12","name":"CI test-gate honesty","shortDescription":{"text":"CI test-gate honesty"},"helpUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev/dimensions/P12"},{"id":"P2","name":"Observability","shortDescription":{"text":"Observability"},"helpUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev/dimensions/P2"},{"id":"P3","name":"Security \u0026 performance tooling","shortDescription":{"text":"Security \u0026 performance tooling"},"helpUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev/dimensions/P3"},{"id":"P4","name":"Deployment \u0026 Rollback","shortDescription":{"text":"Deployment \u0026 Rollback"},"helpUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev/dimensions/P4"},{"id":"P6","name":"Release Hygiene","shortDescription":{"text":"Release Hygiene"},"helpUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev/dimensions/P6"},{"id":"PF2","name":"Allocation hygiene","shortDescription":{"text":"Allocation hygiene"},"helpUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev/dimensions/PF2"},{"id":"X10","name":"Duplicated predicate","shortDescription":{"text":"Duplicated predicate"},"helpUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev/dimensions/X10"},{"id":"X32","name":"Type resolved by simple name across every loaded assembly","shortDescription":{"text":"Type resolved by simple name across every loaded assembly"},"helpUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev/dimensions/X32"},{"id":"X6","name":"Hand-rolled structured-format parsing","shortDescription":{"text":"Hand-rolled structured-format parsing"},"helpUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev/dimensions/X6"},{"id":"X9","name":"Subsumed condition operand","shortDescription":{"text":"Subsumed condition operand"},"helpUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev/dimensions/X9"}]}},"results":[{"ruleId":"D1","level":"warning","message":{"text":"GeneratorOptions.init (cyclomatic 27): GeneratorOptions.init has cyclomatic complexity 27 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/protoc-gen-grpc-swift/Options.swift"},"region":{"startLine":91}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"67802f4319582d83dcd7f8528a0ce69045674d9d0a0e599d63a71e6900e4ba61"}},{"ruleId":"D1","level":"warning","message":{"text":"GRPCClientChannelHandler.write (cyclomatic 22): GRPCClientChannelHandler.write has cyclomatic complexity 22 (threshold 15). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Where every arm is uniform \u2014 the same kind of value, with no behaviour of its own \u2014 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."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/GRPC/GRPCClientChannelHandler.swift"},"region":{"startLine":506}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"397254e82af71499db4951fb60e9b5a288f17e0a1966dfe0198a88dd3d62ba00"}},{"ruleId":"D1","level":"warning","message":{"text":"GRPCIdleHandler.perform (cyclomatic 19): GRPCIdleHandler.perform 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."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/GRPC/GRPCIdleHandler.swift"},"region":{"startLine":131}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"7bc6369652b281a562e113cd7cf5d23308f5b8c03d64b094e2ab1edc600adb52"}},{"ruleId":"D2","level":"warning","message":{"text":"GeneratorOptions.init (cognitive 55): GeneratorOptions.init has cognitive complexity 55 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 24 (48 pts), error handling 1 (4 pts), match/switch 1 (2 pts), loops 1 (nesting depth added 28). 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."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/protoc-gen-grpc-swift/Options.swift"},"region":{"startLine":91}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"5b4ee9ed92b9f54a78ea8e8431dda0e06cfdb0c49598da5df5f1d0abad7eeaeb"}},{"ruleId":"D2","level":"warning","message":{"text":"GRPCClientChannelHandler.write (cognitive 26): GRPCClientChannelHandler.write has cognitive complexity 26 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: match/switch 8 (19 pts), if/else 1 (4 pts), loops 1 (2 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 15). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/GRPC/GRPCClientChannelHandler.swift"},"region":{"startLine":506}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"d907446d21dc2a2b6e3c741ee498909b3fb7eb177a0323cb0e8f6edaf488e1f5"}},{"ruleId":"D2","level":"warning","message":{"text":"CoalescingLengthPrefixedMessageWriter.next (cognitive 23): CoalescingLengthPrefixedMessageWriter.next has cognitive complexity 23 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 6 (12 pts), loops 2 (5 pts), error handling 1 (4 pts), boolean chains 1, match/switch 1 (nesting depth added 12). The drivers above price the dispatch low by construction \u2014 a dispatch is charged once however many cases it lists, while each branch inside an arm is charged in full \u2014 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."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/GRPC/CoalescingLengthPrefixedMessageWriter.swift"},"region":{"startLine":111}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"0ffcd0193f24df93c39e54aca8b8525268053f3ee9aef140416628bc378e9094"}},{"ruleId":"D2","level":"warning","message":{"text":"ReadState.readMessages (cognitive 22): ReadState.readMessages has cognitive complexity 22 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 6 (13 pts), loops 1 (3 pts), match/switch 2 (3 pts), error handling 1 (2 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 11). The drivers above price the dispatch low by construction \u2014 a dispatch is charged once however many cases it lists, while each branch inside an arm is charged in full \u2014 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."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/GRPC/ReadWriteStates.swift"},"region":{"startLine":155}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"05f5939108ee05038db352a45e1b40ab7d9a552d8b08117f18223922ba486468"}},{"ruleId":"D2","level":"warning","message":{"text":"GRPCIdleHandler.perform (cognitive 19): GRPCIdleHandler.perform has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (10 pts), boolean chains 5, match/switch 2 (4 pts) (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."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/GRPC/GRPCIdleHandler.swift"},"region":{"startLine":131}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"dac1984f3a7cc4c4e8fb40f89351ee4335f245f6230ab0722ef7058c10325d05"}},{"ruleId":"D2","level":"warning","message":{"text":"LengthPrefixedMessageReader.processNextState (cognitive 17): LengthPrefixedMessageReader.processNextState has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 8 (14 pts), boolean chains 2, match/switch 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."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/GRPC/LengthPrefixedMessageReader.swift"},"region":{"startLine":164}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"7c1c5a32534913e4d4941a2f575bfc4c8286a1a79d24e24e8ffc6fd14d91650a"}},{"ruleId":"D3","level":"warning","message":{"text":"TooManyMethods: Generator: TooManyMethods \u2014 53 methods. The bar is 30 methods; this is 23 over it, 1.77\u00D7 the bar. To reduce it, group the members that share the same data into a smaller type of their own and delegate to it, so no single type carries every responsibility."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/protoc-gen-grpc-swift/Generator.swift"},"region":{"startLine":18}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"339ef9a0afa3a720c507d9817e373176a5b1901825ea93f7c4595fc25225b6ce"}},{"ruleId":"D3","level":"warning","message":{"text":"FileTooLong: GRPC/HTTP2ToRawGRPCStateMachine.swift: FileTooLong \u2014 741 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 241 over it, 1.48\u00D7 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."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/GRPC/HTTP2ToRawGRPCStateMachine.swift"},"region":{"startLine":1}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"1bf9147967a8a7afefe823c87bb2270149f9d3fbc5d1deaff65a81432082ecf9"}},{"ruleId":"D3","level":"warning","message":{"text":"FileTooLong: GRPC/ConnectionManager.swift: FileTooLong \u2014 645 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), about 80% of them inside a single declaration: ConnectionManager (27-998). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 145 over it, 1.29\u00D7 the bar. Moving the declarations that sit BESIDE it into sibling files will not shorten this file. Extract from INSIDE that declaration instead: lift each cohesive group of its body \u2014 the parts that share the same inputs and are named together \u2014 into its own unit in a sibling file, and have the original call them."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/GRPC/ConnectionManager.swift"},"region":{"startLine":1}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"bf43fab0648dc74991a6848a51e3b769821fe7fdf36bd75f498dc68340d7ca87"}},{"ruleId":"D3","level":"warning","message":{"text":"ClassTooLong: ConnectionManager: ClassTooLong \u2014 513 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), 26 methods. The bar is 400 significant lines; this is 113 over it, 1.28\u00D7 the bar. To reduce it, group the members that share the same data into a smaller type of their own and delegate to it, so no single type carries every responsibility."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/GRPC/ConnectionManager.swift"},"region":{"startLine":26}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"cc753b1c00e0bb9a8f169be4c6eb48aae4edc3fd0176ec858095ae829465327f"}},{"ruleId":"D3","level":"warning","message":{"text":"TooManyMethods: ClientTransport: TooManyMethods \u2014 36 methods. The bar is 30 methods; this is 6 over it, 1.20\u00D7 the bar. To reduce it, group the members that share the same data into a smaller type of their own and delegate to it, so no single type carries every responsibility."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/GRPC/Interceptor/ClientTransport.swift"},"region":{"startLine":37}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"bd87667aedaf59df3b24a0230bc5e5e6d81d86166bfbf04baf5f5a3c186c6ea3"}},{"ruleId":"D3","level":"warning","message":{"text":"FileTooLong: AsyncAwaitSupport/GRPCAsyncServerHandler.swift: FileTooLong \u2014 594 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), about 65% of them inside a single declaration: AsyncServerHandler (168-761). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 94 over it, 1.19\u00D7 the bar. Moving the declarations that sit BESIDE it into sibling files will not shorten this file. Extract from INSIDE that declaration instead: lift each cohesive group of its body \u2014 the parts that share the same inputs and are named together \u2014 into its own unit in a sibling file, and have the original call them."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/GRPC/AsyncAwaitSupport/GRPCAsyncServerHandler.swift"},"region":{"startLine":1}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"5f27641049dc9e63dad960043b470bba00cffc1f642d6cc5083976133d8265a6"}},{"ruleId":"D3","level":"warning","message":{"text":"FileTooLong: ConnectionPool/ConnectionPool.swift: FileTooLong \u2014 561 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), about 62% of them inside a single declaration: ConnectionPool (24-682). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 61 over it, 1.12\u00D7 the bar. Moving the declarations that sit BESIDE it into sibling files will not shorten this file. Extract from INSIDE that declaration instead: lift each cohesive group of its body \u2014 the parts that share the same inputs and are named together \u2014 into its own unit in a sibling file, and have the original call them."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/GRPC/ConnectionPool/ConnectionPool.swift"},"region":{"startLine":1}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"25a76fbb70652b391cf0a91474c258579c650649c07902db7d1750ceaf4d2489"}},{"ruleId":"D3","level":"warning","message":{"text":"FileTooLong: Interceptor/ClientTransport.swift: FileTooLong \u2014 511 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 11 over it, 1.02\u00D7 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."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/GRPC/Interceptor/ClientTransport.swift"},"region":{"startLine":1}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"2dc724c5cf993a97033879fda4e59d89c98ff90518dbeec901cfc2e73cf8dd45"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Near-duplicate member family (4 members, 32 shared lines): Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/BidirectionalStreamingServerHandler.swift:311-354 | Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/ClientStreamingServerHandler.swift:294-338 | Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/ServerStreamingServerHandler.swift:311-355 | Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/UnaryServerHandler.swift:293-337 \u2014 These 4 members are variants of one another: a block of 32 lines reported below appears in every one of them, and the pairwise near-duplicate rows they would otherwise produce are collapsed into this row. Read them as one construct written 4 times. The repair is at the members\u0027 grain \u2014 factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 4 times."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/BidirectionalStreamingServerHandler.swift"},"region":{"startLine":311}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"9325b5777ff9851ae0263990cf9b3ccc7fecdfd4415559db717387412ea579d7"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Members sharing a duplicated core (4 members, 50\u002B identical tokens): Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/BidirectionalStreamingServerHandler.swift:356-383 | Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/ClientStreamingServerHandler.swift:342-369 | Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/ServerStreamingServerHandler.swift:282-309 | Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/UnaryServerHandler.swift:263-291 \u2014 These 4 members share a duplicated core: a run of at least 50 identical tokens appears in every one of them. That run is NOT broken out as duplicated-block rows below \u2014 it is what admitted this row, and the blocks below cover only the part of it that clears the block floor, so they understate the correspondence. Read the members as one construct written 4 times. The repair is at the members\u0027 grain \u2014 factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 4 times."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/BidirectionalStreamingServerHandler.swift"},"region":{"startLine":356}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"d193abf464f06ed7f2d5ca5c637562b70b2f86336a24656098047ec8d47fcddc"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Members sharing a duplicated core (4 members, 50\u002B identical tokens): Sources/protoc-gen-grpc-swift/Generator-Client.swift:294-318 | Sources/protoc-gen-grpc-swift/Generator-Client.swift:320-346 | Sources/protoc-gen-grpc-swift/Generator-Client.swift:348-375 | Sources/protoc-gen-grpc-swift/Generator-Client.swift:377-403 \u2014 These 4 members share a duplicated core: a run of at least 50 identical tokens appears in every one of them. That run is NOT broken out as duplicated-block rows below \u2014 it is what admitted this row, and the blocks below cover only the part of it that clears the block floor, so they understate the correspondence. Read the members as one construct written 4 times. The repair is at the members\u0027 grain \u2014 factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 4 times."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/protoc-gen-grpc-swift/Generator-Client.swift"},"region":{"startLine":294}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"5eed81f6b4ade91363e06dc821baf8f36d4bcaa67a67536e4a29d131ac9f5d78"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (37 lines \u00D7 2): Sources/GRPCReflectionService/Server/ReflectionServiceV1.swift:113-149 | Sources/GRPCReflectionService/Server/ReflectionServiceV1Alpha.swift:117-153 \u2014 before extracting anything, compare \u0060Sources/GRPCReflectionService/Server/ReflectionServiceV1.swift\u0060 and \u0060Sources/GRPCReflectionService/Server/ReflectionServiceV1Alpha.swift\u0060 as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 9 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 118 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together \u2014 extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at \u0060Sources/GRPCReflectionService/Server/ReflectionServiceV1.swift:113\u0060 it runs out through the closing brace of the declaration holding it and carries on into the declaration that follows \u2014 the window is the tail of one member plus the head of the next, so no call can be substituted for those exact lines, and the smallest declaration that contains all of them is the type they sit in. The repeated unit is the member each site sits in: where those members\u0027 bodies are the same, move one whole member to the shared location and have the others delegate to it; where the copies are a run of near-identical overloads or wrappers that differ only in their signatures, the repetition IS the run \u2014 a one-line delegation has no helper inside it to lift \u2014 so generate the run from the set it enumerates, or accept it and keep each member\u0027s own documentation with it. Note first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: the declarations holding them bind \u0060request\u0060 to \u0060Grpc_Reflection_V1_ServerReflectionRequest\u0060 in one and \u0060Grpc_Reflection_V1alpha_ServerReflectionRequest\u0060 in another, and the duplicated lines use it. The extracted unit therefore needs a parameter type that fits BOTH \u2014 their common supertype where they have one, or a new abstraction over them where they do not \u2014 and settling that is the step that comes BEFORE the extraction above. Where the two types are deliberately unrelated, the duplication is the price of that separation and the honest resolution is to record the decision rather than to extract."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/GRPCReflectionService/Server/ReflectionServiceV1.swift"},"region":{"startLine":113}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"b19f08ddfe48ce82abdd20dc30489cb8c34b1d09130d527369f445651db7b835"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (30\u201331 lines \u00D7 2): Performance/QPSBenchmark/Sources/QPSBenchmark/Runtime/Async/AsyncQPSClientImpl.swift:139-169 | Performance/QPSBenchmark/Sources/QPSBenchmark/Runtime/NIO/NIOQPSClientImpl.swift:130-159 \u2014 before extracting anything, compare \u0060Performance/QPSBenchmark/Sources/QPSBenchmark/Runtime/Async/AsyncQPSClientImpl.swift\u0060 and \u0060Performance/QPSBenchmark/Sources/QPSBenchmark/Runtime/NIO/NIOQPSClientImpl.swift\u0060 as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 4 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 79 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Performance/QPSBenchmark/Sources/QPSBenchmark/Runtime/Async/AsyncQPSClientImpl.swift"},"region":{"startLine":139}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"f2102a225519a3364b54ffce366b09f076c102a92bfd990e25318c003ac09568"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (24\u201326 lines \u00D7 2): Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/BidirectionalStreamingServerHandler.swift:239-264 | Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/ClientStreamingServerHandler.swift:238-261 \u2014 before extracting anything, compare \u0060Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/BidirectionalStreamingServerHandler.swift\u0060 and \u0060Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/ClientStreamingServerHandler.swift\u0060 as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 10 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 161 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together \u2014 extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at \u0060Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/BidirectionalStreamingServerHandler.swift:239\u0060 it runs out through the closing brace of the declaration holding it and carries on into the declaration that follows \u2014 the window is the tail of one member plus the head of the next, so no call can be substituted for those exact lines, and the smallest declaration that contains all of them is the type they sit in. The repeated unit is the member each site sits in: where those members\u0027 bodies are the same, move one whole member to the shared location and have the others delegate to it; where the copies are a run of near-identical overloads or wrappers that differ only in their signatures, the repetition IS the run \u2014 a one-line delegation has no helper inside it to lift \u2014 so generate the run from the set it enumerates, or accept it and keep each member\u0027s own documentation with it."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/BidirectionalStreamingServerHandler.swift"},"region":{"startLine":239}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"3ad571f93fc741787cc2cb8cd751065abc0961723a6af88d3fc5edea72705267"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (26 lines \u00D7 2): Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/BidirectionalStreamingServerHandler.swift:314-339 | Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/ClientStreamingServerHandler.swift:297-322 \u2014 before extracting anything, compare \u0060Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/BidirectionalStreamingServerHandler.swift\u0060 and \u0060Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/ClientStreamingServerHandler.swift\u0060 as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 10 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 161 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together \u2014 extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at \u0060Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/BidirectionalStreamingServerHandler.swift:314\u0060 it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand \u2014 widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/BidirectionalStreamingServerHandler.swift"},"region":{"startLine":314}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"c3aeaa260f676e25bf289abd6c784b22da0a27a81825e3d24dc29062c13a08b2"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (26 lines \u00D7 2): Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/ServerStreamingServerHandler.swift:314-339 | Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/UnaryServerHandler.swift:296-321 \u2014 before extracting anything, compare \u0060Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/ServerStreamingServerHandler.swift\u0060 and \u0060Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/UnaryServerHandler.swift\u0060 as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 7 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 107 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together \u2014 extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at \u0060Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/ServerStreamingServerHandler.swift:314\u0060 it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand \u2014 widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/ServerStreamingServerHandler.swift"},"region":{"startLine":314}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"f616e27472e892e1d5e2107b1b67e0aabd5b6aa1040d1af30537fbb68853d76e"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (25 lines \u00D7 2): Sources/protoc-gen-grpc-swift/Generator-Client.swift:215-239 | Sources/protoc-gen-grpc-swift/Generator-Client.swift:247-271 \u2014 both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site \u2014 the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at \u0060Sources/protoc-gen-grpc-swift/Generator-Client.swift:215\u0060 it runs out through the closing brace of the declaration holding it \u2014 the window is that declaration\u0027s tail, not a fragment that begins part-way through something, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand \u2014 widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/protoc-gen-grpc-swift/Generator-Client.swift"},"region":{"startLine":215}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"3d712fd946b4d473b2acc8917224a9c8f19ec919f241a23161bd54d19ce1eba0"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (21 lines \u00D7 2): Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/ClientStreamingServerHandler.swift:272-292 | Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/UnaryServerHandler.swift:241-261 \u2014 before extracting anything, compare \u0060Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/ClientStreamingServerHandler.swift\u0060 and \u0060Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/UnaryServerHandler.swift\u0060 as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 7 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 101 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together \u2014 extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at \u0060Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/ClientStreamingServerHandler.swift:272\u0060 it runs out through the closing brace of the declaration holding it \u2014 the window is that declaration\u0027s tail, not a fragment that begins part-way through something, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand \u2014 widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/ClientStreamingServerHandler.swift"},"region":{"startLine":272}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"b0dd90bc74656f003c82f0c4ab5b2fdd127c6b5e4461e76fd7da6675ac9ab867"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (20 lines \u00D7 4): Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/BidirectionalStreamingServerHandler.swift:327-346 | Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/ClientStreamingServerHandler.swift:310-329 | Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/ServerStreamingServerHandler.swift:327-346 | Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/UnaryServerHandler.swift:309-328 \u2014 before extracting anything, compare \u0060Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/BidirectionalStreamingServerHandler.swift\u0060 and \u0060Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/ClientStreamingServerHandler.swift\u0060 as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 10 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 161 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together \u2014 extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/BidirectionalStreamingServerHandler.swift"},"region":{"startLine":327}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"14b1ea9368ecf0aec280c09f7a23ea6445cfeb456a47d1d98c14ac07b9607090"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (20 lines \u00D7 2): Performance/QPSBenchmark/Sources/QPSBenchmark/Runtime/Async/AsyncQPSClientImpl.swift:92-111 | Performance/QPSBenchmark/Sources/QPSBenchmark/Runtime/NIO/NIOQPSClientImpl.swift:81-100 \u2014 before extracting anything, compare \u0060Performance/QPSBenchmark/Sources/QPSBenchmark/Runtime/Async/AsyncQPSClientImpl.swift\u0060 and \u0060Performance/QPSBenchmark/Sources/QPSBenchmark/Runtime/NIO/NIOQPSClientImpl.swift\u0060 as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 4 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 79 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Performance/QPSBenchmark/Sources/QPSBenchmark/Runtime/Async/AsyncQPSClientImpl.swift"},"region":{"startLine":92}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"b13a96278d789a71ed1a541b43c25704f5831020dae15597a4aa88fe2b9b98b7"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (18\u201320 lines \u00D7 2): Sources/GRPC/ConnectionManager.swift:792-811 | Sources/GRPC/ConnectionManager.swift:828-845 \u2014 both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site \u2014 the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at \u0060Sources/GRPC/ConnectionManager.swift:792\u0060 it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand \u2014 widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/GRPC/ConnectionManager.swift"},"region":{"startLine":792}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"efd1c6cd87938d97e5894637ca35b93bfc9a8241bef9463309c2079e228c5544"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (16 lines \u00D7 4): Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/BidirectionalStreamingServerHandler.swift:368-383 | Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/ClientStreamingServerHandler.swift:354-369 | Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/ServerStreamingServerHandler.swift:294-309 | Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/UnaryServerHandler.swift:276-291 \u2014 before extracting anything, compare \u0060Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/BidirectionalStreamingServerHandler.swift\u0060 and \u0060Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/ClientStreamingServerHandler.swift\u0060 as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 10 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 161 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together \u2014 extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at \u0060Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/BidirectionalStreamingServerHandler.swift:368\u0060 it runs out through the closing brace of the declaration holding it \u2014 the window is that declaration\u0027s tail, not a fragment that begins part-way through something, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand \u2014 widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/BidirectionalStreamingServerHandler.swift"},"region":{"startLine":368}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"9d3162c756a13abd50c70e91e277015a4423d96fb59e581fa9b90351a2f0ba78"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (16 lines \u00D7 2): Performance/QPSBenchmark/Sources/QPSBenchmark/Runtime/Async/AsyncQPSClientImpl.swift:188-203 | Performance/QPSBenchmark/Sources/QPSBenchmark/Runtime/NIO/NIOQPSClientImpl.swift:177-192 \u2014 before extracting anything, compare \u0060Performance/QPSBenchmark/Sources/QPSBenchmark/Runtime/Async/AsyncQPSClientImpl.swift\u0060 and \u0060Performance/QPSBenchmark/Sources/QPSBenchmark/Runtime/NIO/NIOQPSClientImpl.swift\u0060 as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 4 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 79 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at \u0060Performance/QPSBenchmark/Sources/QPSBenchmark/Runtime/Async/AsyncQPSClientImpl.swift:188\u0060 it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand \u2014 widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Performance/QPSBenchmark/Sources/QPSBenchmark/Runtime/Async/AsyncQPSClientImpl.swift"},"region":{"startLine":188}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"3a59882156c163284ad84cda236f4afa5125f2f091e025e02f1d8f1b00948bc3"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (15\u201316 lines \u00D7 2): Sources/GRPC/_GRPCClientCodecHandler.swift:46-61 | Sources/GRPC/_GRPCClientCodecHandler.swift:130-144 \u2014 both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site \u2014 the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at \u0060Sources/GRPC/_GRPCClientCodecHandler.swift:46\u0060 it runs out through the closing brace of the declaration holding it \u2014 the window is that declaration\u0027s tail, not a fragment that begins part-way through something, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand \u2014 widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/GRPC/_GRPCClientCodecHandler.swift"},"region":{"startLine":46}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"1338afd4027abd86c2b0c6ed3940876d3249ef67eaf6d62370c8e0ebe9b585e2"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (11\u201315 lines \u00D7 4): Sources/protoc-gen-grpc-swift/Generator-Client.swift:300-310 | Sources/protoc-gen-grpc-swift/Generator-Client.swift:327-337 | Sources/protoc-gen-grpc-swift/Generator-Client.swift:355-369 | Sources/protoc-gen-grpc-swift/Generator-Client.swift:385-396 \u2014 all 4 copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from every one of those sites \u2014 resolving only two of them leaves the rest to drift apart the first time one is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at \u0060Sources/protoc-gen-grpc-swift/Generator-Client.swift:300\u0060 it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand \u2014 widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names \u2014 the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately. \u2605 These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, \u0060Sources/protoc-gen-grpc-swift/Generator-Client.swift:326\u0060 calls \u0060printHandlerParameter\u0060 and \u0060Sources/protoc-gen-grpc-swift/Generator-Client.swift:299\u0060 does not \u2014 after which the two agree again for 4 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/protoc-gen-grpc-swift/Generator-Client.swift"},"region":{"startLine":300}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"f53c563a44f5a6199344e35c630bf1ae3b84c8f90bb0e4a0abc1352aae8a5da8"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (15 lines \u00D7 3): Sources/GRPC/ServerCallContexts/ServerCallContext.swift:136-150 | Sources/GRPC/ServerCallContexts/StreamingResponseCallContext.swift:34-48 | Sources/GRPC/ServerCallContexts/UnaryResponseCallContext.swift:54-68 \u2014 the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach \u2014 a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them \u2014 and call it from all 3 call sites, so a change lands once."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/GRPC/ServerCallContexts/ServerCallContext.swift"},"region":{"startLine":136}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"e78fcca3d246e17f3db5ee38880833c441397c2e5d6bbd984434d7a8741854ea"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (15 lines \u00D7 3): Sources/GRPC/ServerCallContexts/ServerCallContext.swift:152-166 | Sources/GRPC/ServerCallContexts/StreamingResponseCallContext.swift:50-64 | Sources/GRPC/ServerCallContexts/UnaryResponseCallContext.swift:70-84 \u2014 the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach \u2014 a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them \u2014 and call it from all 3 call sites, so a change lands once."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/GRPC/ServerCallContexts/ServerCallContext.swift"},"region":{"startLine":152}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"8cb99f755a9f62c1451bea90706611878002851c8b2787b9cee98cda55978500"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (15 lines \u00D7 2): Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/BidirectionalStreamingServerHandler.swift:203-217 | Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/ClientStreamingServerHandler.swift:202-216 \u2014 before extracting anything, compare \u0060Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/BidirectionalStreamingServerHandler.swift\u0060 and \u0060Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/ClientStreamingServerHandler.swift\u0060 as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 10 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 161 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together \u2014 extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/BidirectionalStreamingServerHandler.swift"},"region":{"startLine":203}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"e0680d8bf7633db08869542e8edb8cb8aaea75e573edb32cc059af480dad5de8"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (15 lines \u00D7 2): Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/BidirectionalStreamingServerHandler.swift:219-233 | Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/ClientStreamingServerHandler.swift:218-232 \u2014 before extracting anything, compare \u0060Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/BidirectionalStreamingServerHandler.swift\u0060 and \u0060Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/ClientStreamingServerHandler.swift\u0060 as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 10 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 161 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together \u2014 extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/BidirectionalStreamingServerHandler.swift"},"region":{"startLine":219}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"63baca7c6d59ac27c6cb74c58a3be4c7fef5bc15a00a4725de7b0a2c3f1a13e1"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (14\u201315 lines \u00D7 2): Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/BidirectionalStreamingServerHandler.swift:296-309 | Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/ServerStreamingServerHandler.swift:266-280 \u2014 before extracting anything, compare \u0060Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/BidirectionalStreamingServerHandler.swift\u0060 and \u0060Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/ServerStreamingServerHandler.swift\u0060 as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 9 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 120 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together \u2014 extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at \u0060Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/BidirectionalStreamingServerHandler.swift:296\u0060 it runs out through the closing brace of the declaration holding it \u2014 the window is that declaration\u0027s tail, not a fragment that begins part-way through something, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand \u2014 widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/BidirectionalStreamingServerHandler.swift"},"region":{"startLine":296}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"08a608bcf99d24b9e8b4c52e49755805690ffdafd9db7a6ace48884a3cbd49b2"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (14 lines \u00D7 2): Performance/QPSBenchmark/Sources/QPSBenchmark/Runtime/Async/AsyncBenchmarkServiceImpl.swift:90-103 | Performance/QPSBenchmark/Sources/QPSBenchmark/Runtime/NIO/NIOBenchmarkServiceImpl.swift:98-111 \u2014 the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach \u2014 a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none \u2014 and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Performance/QPSBenchmark/Sources/QPSBenchmark/Runtime/Async/AsyncBenchmarkServiceImpl.swift"},"region":{"startLine":90}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"cbaea3e5a10026b4137c4162dc47cd9af50a9a02c3f3cc1fe637d7c1db04f309"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (14 lines \u00D7 2): Performance/QPSBenchmark/Sources/QPSBenchmark/Runtime/NIO/NIOWorkerServiceImpl.swift:136-149 | Performance/QPSBenchmark/Sources/QPSBenchmark/Runtime/NIO/NIOWorkerServiceImpl.swift:261-274 \u2014 both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site \u2014 the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at \u0060Performance/QPSBenchmark/Sources/QPSBenchmark/Runtime/NIO/NIOWorkerServiceImpl.swift:136\u0060 it runs out through the closing brace of the declaration holding it and carries on into the declaration that follows \u2014 the window is the tail of one member plus the head of the next, so no call can be substituted for those exact lines, and the smallest declaration that contains all of them is the type they sit in. The repeated unit is the member each site sits in: where those members\u0027 bodies are the same, move one whole member to the shared location and have the others delegate to it; where the copies are a run of near-identical overloads or wrappers that differ only in their signatures, the repetition IS the run \u2014 a one-line delegation has no helper inside it to lift \u2014 so generate the run from the set it enumerates, or accept it and keep each member\u0027s own documentation with it. Note first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: the declarations holding them bind \u0060context\u0060 to \u0060StreamingResponseCallContext\u003CGrpc_Testing_ServerStatus\u003E\u0060 in one and \u0060StreamingResponseCallContext\u003CGrpc_Testing_ClientStatus\u003E\u0060 in another, and the duplicated lines use it. The extracted unit therefore needs a parameter type that fits BOTH \u2014 their common supertype where they have one, or a new abstraction over them where they do not \u2014 and settling that is the step that comes BEFORE the extraction above. Where the two types are deliberately unrelated, the duplication is the price of that separation and the honest resolution is to record the decision rather than to extract."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Performance/QPSBenchmark/Sources/QPSBenchmark/Runtime/NIO/NIOWorkerServiceImpl.swift"},"region":{"startLine":136}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"606fd3da45eafda686663e1b121dd556f1ef9aff3d1e49681a0231054105b6dc"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (14 lines \u00D7 2): Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/BidirectionalStreamingServerHandler.swift:165-178 | Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/ServerStreamingServerHandler.swift:162-175 \u2014 before extracting anything, compare \u0060Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/BidirectionalStreamingServerHandler.swift\u0060 and \u0060Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/ServerStreamingServerHandler.swift\u0060 as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 9 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 120 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together \u2014 extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at \u0060Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/BidirectionalStreamingServerHandler.swift:165\u0060 it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand \u2014 widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/BidirectionalStreamingServerHandler.swift"},"region":{"startLine":165}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"b1132a15a08ddc65be543f3139be216a6d09f05b8b9f89dcbe226d187d424624"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (13\u201314 lines \u00D7 2): Sources/GRPC/_GRPCClientCodecHandler.swift:82-95 | Sources/GRPC/_GRPCClientCodecHandler.swift:163-175 \u2014 both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site \u2014 the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at \u0060Sources/GRPC/_GRPCClientCodecHandler.swift:82\u0060 it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand \u2014 widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/GRPC/_GRPCClientCodecHandler.swift"},"region":{"startLine":82}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"df92bd1da5ce50e7a693cf019ed4bd531a488d715b6a16b7b415764b01456fb7"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (12 lines \u00D7 4): Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/BidirectionalStreamingServerHandler.swift:311-322 | Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/ClientStreamingServerHandler.swift:294-305 | Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/ServerStreamingServerHandler.swift:311-322 | Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/UnaryServerHandler.swift:293-304 \u2014 before extracting anything, compare \u0060Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/BidirectionalStreamingServerHandler.swift\u0060 and \u0060Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/ClientStreamingServerHandler.swift\u0060 as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 10 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 161 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together \u2014 extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at \u0060Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/BidirectionalStreamingServerHandler.swift:311\u0060 it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand \u2014 widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/BidirectionalStreamingServerHandler.swift"},"region":{"startLine":311}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"0c0a1e4d3f05a4b1a227133b4fefd34d9de1583aaa9b5b7f99d89fa708850699"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (11\u201312 lines \u00D7 3): Sources/GRPC/ConnectionPool/PooledChannel.swift:85-95 | Sources/GRPC/ConnectionPool/PooledChannel.swift:100-111 | Sources/GRPC/ConnectionPool/PooledChannel.swift:115-126 \u2014 all 3 copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from every one of those sites \u2014 resolving only two of them leaves the rest to drift apart the first time one is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at \u0060Sources/GRPC/ConnectionPool/PooledChannel.swift:85\u0060 it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand \u2014 widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names \u2014 the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/GRPC/ConnectionPool/PooledChannel.swift"},"region":{"startLine":85}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"9ddb59cf9b7f98ac2cecfe3b682d24b398f4bedb5907dad7ec3818610826a922"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (12 lines \u00D7 2): Performance/QPSBenchmark/Sources/QPSBenchmark/Runtime/Async/AsyncQPSClientImpl.swift:205-216 | Performance/QPSBenchmark/Sources/QPSBenchmark/Runtime/NIO/NIOQPSClientImpl.swift:194-205 \u2014 before extracting anything, compare \u0060Performance/QPSBenchmark/Sources/QPSBenchmark/Runtime/Async/AsyncQPSClientImpl.swift\u0060 and \u0060Performance/QPSBenchmark/Sources/QPSBenchmark/Runtime/NIO/NIOQPSClientImpl.swift\u0060 as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 4 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 79 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at \u0060Performance/QPSBenchmark/Sources/QPSBenchmark/Runtime/Async/AsyncQPSClientImpl.swift:205\u0060 it runs out through the closing brace of the declaration holding it \u2014 the window is that declaration\u0027s tail, not a fragment that begins part-way through something, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand \u2014 widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Performance/QPSBenchmark/Sources/QPSBenchmark/Runtime/Async/AsyncQPSClientImpl.swift"},"region":{"startLine":205}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"bd567c8fb651591e61d38b6bcb2f39e3b45408bd4a3d6706cd193da5dbe7e3bc"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (12 lines \u00D7 2): Sources/GRPC/AsyncAwaitSupport/GRPCAsyncServerHandler.swift:68-79 | Sources/GRPC/AsyncAwaitSupport/GRPCAsyncServerHandler.swift:123-134 \u2014 both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site \u2014 the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at \u0060Sources/GRPC/AsyncAwaitSupport/GRPCAsyncServerHandler.swift:68\u0060 it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand \u2014 widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/GRPC/AsyncAwaitSupport/GRPCAsyncServerHandler.swift"},"region":{"startLine":68}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"c6b65d860b64aa75a39f2655a89cbc2b6cf3c15086e1832edf52ca6269537518"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (12 lines \u00D7 2): Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/BidirectionalStreamingServerHandler.swift:82-93 | Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/ServerStreamingServerHandler.swift:79-90 \u2014 before extracting anything, compare \u0060Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/BidirectionalStreamingServerHandler.swift\u0060 and \u0060Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/ServerStreamingServerHandler.swift\u0060 as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 9 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 120 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together \u2014 extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at \u0060Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/BidirectionalStreamingServerHandler.swift:82\u0060 it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand \u2014 widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/BidirectionalStreamingServerHandler.swift"},"region":{"startLine":82}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"11e7e4a898d4c086d8b722a9049d383516bfcba80f731fd3bb95037960ea1e8c"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (12 lines \u00D7 2): Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/ClientStreamingServerHandler.swift:166-177 | Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/UnaryServerHandler.swift:158-169 \u2014 before extracting anything, compare \u0060Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/ClientStreamingServerHandler.swift\u0060 and \u0060Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/UnaryServerHandler.swift\u0060 as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 7 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 101 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together \u2014 extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at \u0060Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/ClientStreamingServerHandler.swift:166\u0060 it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand \u2014 widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/ClientStreamingServerHandler.swift"},"region":{"startLine":166}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"205ba4ce7f4e07e8d31bd59243c8e8792f3b8158409367ee6c7caff598c6a9a3"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (11 lines \u00D7 3): Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/BidirectionalStreamingServerHandler.swift:356-366 | Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/ClientStreamingServerHandler.swift:342-352 | Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/ServerStreamingServerHandler.swift:282-292 \u2014 before extracting anything, compare \u0060Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/BidirectionalStreamingServerHandler.swift\u0060 and \u0060Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/ClientStreamingServerHandler.swift\u0060 as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 10 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 161 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together \u2014 extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at \u0060Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/BidirectionalStreamingServerHandler.swift:356\u0060 it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand \u2014 widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/BidirectionalStreamingServerHandler.swift"},"region":{"startLine":356}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"b1108fd385682a23978a76edb3e83991527cbd9f8ea8d37221ada46757a251d8"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (11 lines \u00D7 2): Performance/QPSBenchmark/Sources/QPSBenchmark/Runtime/Async/AsyncQPSServerImpl.swift:73-83 | Performance/QPSBenchmark/Sources/QPSBenchmark/Runtime/NIO/NIOQPSServerImpl.swift:71-81 \u2014 the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach \u2014 a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none \u2014 and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Performance/QPSBenchmark/Sources/QPSBenchmark/Runtime/Async/AsyncQPSServerImpl.swift"},"region":{"startLine":73}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"4e6a74f139dc2aee50fe0357360f185f25c15064719174b79e2ea0c012411a94"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (11 lines \u00D7 2): Performance/QPSBenchmark/Sources/QPSBenchmark/Runtime/Async/AsyncWorkerServiceImpl.swift:153-163 | Performance/QPSBenchmark/Sources/QPSBenchmark/Runtime/Async/AsyncWorkerServiceImpl.swift:281-291 \u2014 both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site \u2014 the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at \u0060Performance/QPSBenchmark/Sources/QPSBenchmark/Runtime/Async/AsyncWorkerServiceImpl.swift:153\u0060 it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand \u2014 widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Performance/QPSBenchmark/Sources/QPSBenchmark/Runtime/Async/AsyncWorkerServiceImpl.swift"},"region":{"startLine":153}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"bc037b155cb8673d428f892bb2e3acd7e966bdf9bfe9f2fc863ea3adc66c489c"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (11 lines \u00D7 2): Sources/GRPC/AsyncAwaitSupport/AsyncServerHandler/ServerHandlerStateMachine/ServerHandlerStateMachine.swift:175-185 | Sources/GRPC/AsyncAwaitSupport/AsyncServerHandler/ServerInterceptorStateMachine/ServerInterceptorStateMachine.swift:194-204 \u2014 the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach \u2014 a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none \u2014 and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at \u0060Sources/GRPC/AsyncAwaitSupport/AsyncServerHandler/ServerHandlerStateMachine/ServerHandlerStateMachine.swift:175\u0060 it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand \u2014 widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/GRPC/AsyncAwaitSupport/AsyncServerHandler/ServerHandlerStateMachine/ServerHandlerStateMachine.swift"},"region":{"startLine":175}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"518db61c324ba019ffa81c1a9a6f1dc31bca61f90e71fd69f71ea2677a885dfa"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (11 lines \u00D7 2): Sources/GRPC/_GRPCClientCodecHandler.swift:68-78 | Sources/GRPC/_GRPCClientCodecHandler.swift:151-161 \u2014 both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site \u2014 the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at \u0060Sources/GRPC/_GRPCClientCodecHandler.swift:68\u0060 it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand \u2014 widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/GRPC/_GRPCClientCodecHandler.swift"},"region":{"startLine":68}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"fc9c1e2731a99fcb98ca9a3cb0406e5d6baecf01e4aac6e20db4844ed7d6a206"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (10 lines \u00D7 2): Performance/QPSBenchmark/Sources/QPSBenchmark/Runtime/Async/AsyncQPSServerImpl.swift:44-53 | Performance/QPSBenchmark/Sources/QPSBenchmark/Runtime/NIO/NIOQPSServerImpl.swift:40-49 \u2014 the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach \u2014 a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none \u2014 and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Performance/QPSBenchmark/Sources/QPSBenchmark/Runtime/Async/AsyncQPSServerImpl.swift"},"region":{"startLine":44}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"915db3ca9b5bb005e0ad294b69aac2e8586c12decf7c688a182938c166232982"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (10 lines \u00D7 2): Sources/GRPC/AsyncAwaitSupport/AsyncServerHandler/ServerHandlerStateMachine/ServerHandlerStateMachine.swift:186-195 | Sources/GRPC/AsyncAwaitSupport/AsyncServerHandler/ServerInterceptorStateMachine/ServerInterceptorStateMachine.swift:197-206 \u2014 the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach \u2014 a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none \u2014 and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at \u0060Sources/GRPC/AsyncAwaitSupport/AsyncServerHandler/ServerHandlerStateMachine/ServerHandlerStateMachine.swift:186\u0060 it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand \u2014 widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/GRPC/AsyncAwaitSupport/AsyncServerHandler/ServerHandlerStateMachine/ServerHandlerStateMachine.swift"},"region":{"startLine":186}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"c0d336f6cf86e5f4b3995d17ab8a5a09e6f69b37b4ea8c4632842a71d5ac8607"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (10 lines \u00D7 2): Sources/GRPC/AsyncAwaitSupport/GRPCClient\u002BAsyncAwaitSupport.swift:241-250 | Sources/GRPC/AsyncAwaitSupport/GRPCClient\u002BAsyncAwaitSupport.swift:321-330 \u2014 both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site \u2014 the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at \u0060Sources/GRPC/AsyncAwaitSupport/GRPCClient\u002BAsyncAwaitSupport.swift:241\u0060 it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand \u2014 widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/GRPC/AsyncAwaitSupport/GRPCClient\u002BAsyncAwaitSupport.swift"},"region":{"startLine":241}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"51f8a528e627ed4dabcf1620a82a9ed81094799b5abc60322b3e83e67d980ca5"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (9\u201310 lines \u00D7 2): Sources/GRPC/ClientCalls/Call.swift:219-228 | Sources/GRPC/ClientCalls/Call.swift:238-246 \u2014 both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site \u2014 the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at \u0060Sources/GRPC/ClientCalls/Call.swift:219\u0060 it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand \u2014 widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/GRPC/ClientCalls/Call.swift"},"region":{"startLine":219}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"591b94d371c216775094eec2358450e6e4fe1eaf9164a441d5bd8f95bf40854f"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (9 lines \u00D7 2): Sources/GRPC/AsyncAwaitSupport/GRPCAsyncBidirectionalStreamingCall.swift:121-129 | Sources/GRPC/AsyncAwaitSupport/GRPCAsyncClientStreamingCall.swift:105-113 \u2014 the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach \u2014 a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them \u2014 and call it from both call sites, so a change lands once. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at \u0060Sources/GRPC/AsyncAwaitSupport/GRPCAsyncBidirectionalStreamingCall.swift:121\u0060 it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand \u2014 widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. \u2605 These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, \u0060Sources/GRPC/AsyncAwaitSupport/GRPCAsyncBidirectionalStreamingCall.swift:130\u0060 calls \u0060finish\u0060 and \u0060Sources/GRPC/AsyncAwaitSupport/GRPCAsyncClientStreamingCall.swift:114\u0060 does not \u2014 after which the two agree again for 4 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/GRPC/AsyncAwaitSupport/GRPCAsyncBidirectionalStreamingCall.swift"},"region":{"startLine":121}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"807374c02f3aa75a6710ec88f88f94126101dd51f96ef619673ecf93220a9d40"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (9 lines \u00D7 2): Sources/GRPC/Interceptor/ClientTransportFactory.swift:147-155 | Sources/GRPC/Interceptor/ClientTransportFactory.swift:229-237 \u2014 both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site \u2014 the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at \u0060Sources/GRPC/Interceptor/ClientTransportFactory.swift:147\u0060 it runs out through the closing brace of the declaration holding it \u2014 the window is that declaration\u0027s tail, not a fragment that begins part-way through something, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand \u2014 widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/GRPC/Interceptor/ClientTransportFactory.swift"},"region":{"startLine":147}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"d69e87491c9e93519a7942b18513a93e1da5c2aefe47faf98855205aa503ef05"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (8 lines \u00D7 2): Sources/GRPC/AsyncAwaitSupport/GRPCClient\u002BAsyncAwaitSupport.swift:87-94 | Sources/GRPC/AsyncAwaitSupport/GRPCClient\u002BAsyncAwaitSupport.swift:121-128 \u2014 both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site \u2014 the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at \u0060Sources/GRPC/AsyncAwaitSupport/GRPCClient\u002BAsyncAwaitSupport.swift:87\u0060 it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand \u2014 widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/GRPC/AsyncAwaitSupport/GRPCClient\u002BAsyncAwaitSupport.swift"},"region":{"startLine":87}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"aa5df4a126c8eea757606452b311d4909e9be404bf06ee07aad9079aec5234ac"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (8 lines \u00D7 2): Sources/GRPC/ClientCalls/BidirectionalStreamingCall.swift:105-112 | Sources/GRPC/ClientCalls/ClientStreamingCall.swift:106-113 \u2014 before extracting anything, compare \u0060Sources/GRPC/ClientCalls/BidirectionalStreamingCall.swift\u0060 and \u0060Sources/GRPC/ClientCalls/ClientStreamingCall.swift\u0060 as WHOLE FILES: 88% of the shorter file\u0027s lines also appear in the other, so this reads as one file having been copied from the other rather than as a helper waiting to be extracted. The 3 duplicated block(s) this scan matched between them are fragments of that copy, not the extent of it \u2014 treat the file pair as the unit. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together \u2014 extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/GRPC/ClientCalls/BidirectionalStreamingCall.swift"},"region":{"startLine":105}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"97cfa090c60ed51b4eb88ead5f56f00df7e88fcea1ae9327e091584f94c82ce6"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (7 lines \u00D7 2): Sources/GRPC/_GRPCClientCodecHandler.swift:38-44 | Sources/GRPC/_GRPCClientCodecHandler.swift:120-126 \u2014 both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site \u2014 the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at \u0060Sources/GRPC/_GRPCClientCodecHandler.swift:38\u0060 it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand \u2014 widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/GRPC/_GRPCClientCodecHandler.swift"},"region":{"startLine":38}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"4d890ccd942c3ae4427b0152a4b5dba5bfbe96511fc06c1882c8c08545fdcf34"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (5 lines \u00D7 2): Sources/GRPC/ConnectionKeepalive.swift:75-79 | Sources/GRPC/ConnectionKeepalive.swift:164-168 \u2014 both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site \u2014 the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at \u0060Sources/GRPC/ConnectionKeepalive.swift:75\u0060 it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand \u2014 widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/GRPC/ConnectionKeepalive.swift"},"region":{"startLine":75}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"fe267f3e2e33175bd2f77aecbedf6ebe8c6bdaa0984779211ed011fc6c9e8501"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (12 lines \u00D7 2): Performance/QPSBenchmark/Sources/QPSBenchmark/Runtime/Async/AsyncBenchmarkServiceImpl.swift:109-120 | Performance/QPSBenchmark/Sources/QPSBenchmark/Runtime/NIO/NIOBenchmarkServiceImpl.swift:117-128 \u2014 the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach \u2014 a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none \u2014 and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Performance/QPSBenchmark/Sources/QPSBenchmark/Runtime/Async/AsyncBenchmarkServiceImpl.swift"},"region":{"startLine":109}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"e9ff736b896397612bc34049507ee412a1d7fd5c0d5083013075cd7a1ff31130"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (5 lines \u00D7 4): Sources/GRPC/AsyncAwaitSupport/GRPCAsyncBidirectionalStreamingCall.swift:56-60 | Sources/GRPC/AsyncAwaitSupport/GRPCAsyncClientStreamingCall.swift:46-50 | Sources/GRPC/AsyncAwaitSupport/GRPCAsyncServerStreamingCall.swift:53-57 | Sources/GRPC/AsyncAwaitSupport/GRPCAsyncUnaryCall.swift:44-48 \u2014 the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach \u2014 a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them \u2014 and call it from all 4 call sites, so a change lands once."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/GRPC/AsyncAwaitSupport/GRPCAsyncBidirectionalStreamingCall.swift"},"region":{"startLine":56}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"8fb26f341d945dbbc31b34f2eecabfcf205ea26ef1d67472710bd359cff57c2e"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (11 lines \u00D7 5): Sources/GRPC/AsyncAwaitSupport/GRPCAsyncServerHandler.swift:412-422 | Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/BidirectionalStreamingServerHandler.swift:153-163 | Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/ClientStreamingServerHandler.swift:154-164 | Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/ServerStreamingServerHandler.swift:150-160 | Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/UnaryServerHandler.swift:146-156 \u2014 before extracting anything, compare \u0060Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/BidirectionalStreamingServerHandler.swift\u0060 and \u0060Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/ClientStreamingServerHandler.swift\u0060 as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 10 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 161 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together \u2014 extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/GRPC/AsyncAwaitSupport/GRPCAsyncServerHandler.swift"},"region":{"startLine":412}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"82ac38a86cd9694d7f3b048981759cd4f72ba1fc7d14b38f28866a39875bdff4"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (9 lines \u00D7 4): Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/BidirectionalStreamingServerHandler.swift:111-119 | Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/ClientStreamingServerHandler.swift:112-120 | Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/ServerStreamingServerHandler.swift:108-116 | Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/UnaryServerHandler.swift:104-112 \u2014 before extracting anything, compare \u0060Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/BidirectionalStreamingServerHandler.swift\u0060 and \u0060Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/ClientStreamingServerHandler.swift\u0060 as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 10 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 161 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together \u2014 extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/BidirectionalStreamingServerHandler.swift"},"region":{"startLine":111}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"54a357a64491c38c362496a6a6991cebc8b4b74ce574a99b4578c5921631d096"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (13 lines \u00D7 2): Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/ServerStreamingServerHandler.swift:219-231 | Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/UnaryServerHandler.swift:213-225 \u2014 before extracting anything, compare \u0060Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/ServerStreamingServerHandler.swift\u0060 and \u0060Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/UnaryServerHandler.swift\u0060 as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 7 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 107 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together \u2014 extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/GRPC/CallHandlers/ServerStreamingServerHandler.swift"},"region":{"startLine":219}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"f13408e53c9a04851e1bf791f6f1690fdf8efd4791402464cf230831f548ec5a"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (7 lines \u00D7 2): Sources/GRPC/ClientCalls/BidirectionalStreamingCall.swift:77-83 | Sources/GRPC/ClientCalls/ServerStreamingCall.swift:72-78 \u2014 before extracting anything, compare \u0060Sources/GRPC/ClientCalls/BidirectionalStreamingCall.swift\u0060 and \u0060Sources/GRPC/ClientCalls/ServerStreamingCall.swift\u0060 as WHOLE FILES: 85% of the shorter file\u0027s lines also appear in the other, so this reads as one file having been copied from the other rather than as a helper waiting to be extracted. The 1 duplicated block(s) this scan matched between them are fragments of that copy, not the extent of it \u2014 treat the file pair as the unit. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together \u2014 extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/GRPC/ClientCalls/BidirectionalStreamingCall.swift"},"region":{"startLine":77}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"dc8a03315ebe32b0bb69119fdfebc78c122722aae018fe036ecabd514eead926"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (7 lines \u00D7 2): Sources/GRPC/ClientCalls/BidirectionalStreamingCall.swift:85-91 | Sources/GRPC/ClientCalls/ClientStreamingCall.swift:86-92 \u2014 before extracting anything, compare \u0060Sources/GRPC/ClientCalls/BidirectionalStreamingCall.swift\u0060 and \u0060Sources/GRPC/ClientCalls/ClientStreamingCall.swift\u0060 as WHOLE FILES: 88% of the shorter file\u0027s lines also appear in the other, so this reads as one file having been copied from the other rather than as a helper waiting to be extracted. The 3 duplicated block(s) this scan matched between them are fragments of that copy, not the extent of it \u2014 treat the file pair as the unit. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together \u2014 extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/GRPC/ClientCalls/BidirectionalStreamingCall.swift"},"region":{"startLine":85}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"8992cd2b1cd9f883c6333777775c27415d27f999e94a1df02b1ed4f1e9616d9b"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (7 lines \u00D7 2): Sources/GRPC/ClientCalls/BidirectionalStreamingCall.swift:125-131 | Sources/GRPC/ClientCalls/ClientStreamingCall.swift:126-132 \u2014 before extracting anything, compare \u0060Sources/GRPC/ClientCalls/BidirectionalStreamingCall.swift\u0060 and \u0060Sources/GRPC/ClientCalls/ClientStreamingCall.swift\u0060 as WHOLE FILES: 88% of the shorter file\u0027s lines also appear in the other, so this reads as one file having been copied from the other rather than as a helper waiting to be extracted. The 3 duplicated block(s) this scan matched between them are fragments of that copy, not the extent of it \u2014 treat the file pair as the unit. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together \u2014 extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/GRPC/ClientCalls/BidirectionalStreamingCall.swift"},"region":{"startLine":125}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"bf79439fd737756c6662885fbeeb946841e486786976309ca89878f47673dcaf"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (8 lines \u00D7 2): Sources/GRPC/ClientCalls/ServerStreamingCall.swift:80-87 | Sources/GRPC/ClientCalls/UnaryCall.swift:84-91 \u2014 the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach \u2014 a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them \u2014 and call it from both call sites, so a change lands once."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/GRPC/ClientCalls/ServerStreamingCall.swift"},"region":{"startLine":80}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"6d4459946eaa1303980361e403e9792e3567b84a2f86c1a49b457ee0122fac03"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (12 lines \u00D7 2): Sources/protoc-gen-grpc-swift/Generator-Client.swift:646-657 | Sources/protoc-gen-grpc-swift/StreamingType.swift:26-37 \u2014 the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach \u2014 a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them \u2014 and call it from both call sites, so a change lands once."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/protoc-gen-grpc-swift/Generator-Client.swift"},"region":{"startLine":646}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"355258dfa0d3a3de79d98943669aa44808c7295c93b2f5b3a7f0abfe27b6c855"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (14 lines \u00D7 2): Performance/QPSBenchmark/Sources/QPSBenchmark/Runtime/Async/AsyncPingPongRequestMaker.swift:45-58 | Performance/QPSBenchmark/Sources/QPSBenchmark/Runtime/NIO/NIOPingPongRequestMaker.swift:42-55 \u2014 the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach \u2014 a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none \u2014 and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Performance/QPSBenchmark/Sources/QPSBenchmark/Runtime/Async/AsyncPingPongRequestMaker.swift"},"region":{"startLine":45}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"102c5066fa1f99ca5db70c8635e37d2966fa87db5095c406d15f147a0e120ed2"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (5 lines \u00D7 3): Sources/GRPC/ClientCalls/Call.swift:181-185 | Sources/GRPC/ClientCalls/ClientCall.swift:159-163 | Sources/GRPC/ClientConnection.swift:146-150 \u2014 the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere all 3 call sites can already reach \u2014 a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none \u2014 and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made 3 times."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/GRPC/ClientCalls/Call.swift"},"region":{"startLine":181}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"7c88c2ea1b6f60f958f60ff06a26d3c1d8ad1b75ec8bb8206708f1924da4eb5f"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (10 lines \u00D7 2): Sources/GRPC/Interceptor/ClientInterceptorContext.swift:59-68 | Sources/GRPC/Interceptor/ServerInterceptorContext.swift:82-91 \u2014 the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach \u2014 a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them \u2014 and call it from both call sites, so a change lands once. \u2605 These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, \u0060Sources/GRPC/Interceptor/ClientInterceptorContext.swift:76\u0060 calls \u0060assertInEventLoop\u0060 and \u0060Sources/GRPC/Interceptor/ServerInterceptorContext.swift:99\u0060 does not \u2014 after which the two agree again for 2 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/GRPC/Interceptor/ClientInterceptorContext.swift"},"region":{"startLine":59}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"bbc5b399be63bd9afeb36c8df51c4328ad3d6f33cdf8f5dcf0a10912b9a1892f"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (7 lines \u00D7 2): Sources/GRPC/Interceptor/ClientInterceptorPipeline.swift:185-191 | Sources/GRPC/Interceptor/ServerInterceptorPipeline.swift:154-160 \u2014 before extracting anything, compare \u0060Sources/GRPC/Interceptor/ClientInterceptorPipeline.swift\u0060 and \u0060Sources/GRPC/Interceptor/ServerInterceptorPipeline.swift\u0060 as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 4 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 40 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together \u2014 extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/GRPC/Interceptor/ClientInterceptorPipeline.swift"},"region":{"startLine":185}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"288a32f5365879b59863d42a5f279b878ea4e22ddbce113a2724b97cd9435894"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (13 lines \u00D7 2): Sources/GRPC/Interceptor/ClientInterceptorPipeline.swift:194-206 | Sources/GRPC/Interceptor/ServerInterceptorPipeline.swift:163-176 \u2014 before extracting anything, compare \u0060Sources/GRPC/Interceptor/ClientInterceptorPipeline.swift\u0060 and \u0060Sources/GRPC/Interceptor/ServerInterceptorPipeline.swift\u0060 as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 4 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 40 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together \u2014 extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/GRPC/Interceptor/ClientInterceptorPipeline.swift"},"region":{"startLine":194}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"d88d708715841a531cf2555ba05de8cfe7495180650b6c2963153a08cd13d230"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (12 lines \u00D7 2): Sources/GRPC/Interceptor/ClientInterceptorPipeline.swift:322-333 | Sources/GRPC/Interceptor/ServerInterceptorPipeline.swift:213-224 \u2014 before extracting anything, compare \u0060Sources/GRPC/Interceptor/ClientInterceptorPipeline.swift\u0060 and \u0060Sources/GRPC/Interceptor/ServerInterceptorPipeline.swift\u0060 as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 4 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 40 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together \u2014 extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/GRPC/Interceptor/ClientInterceptorPipeline.swift"},"region":{"startLine":322}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"8f3a3576c84f9f0e836c4f93aac6ef7f52df774a118b7e323f32a9b3558c3f6f"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (7 lines \u00D7 2): Sources/GRPC/Interceptor/ClientInterceptorPipeline.swift:497-503 | Sources/GRPC/Interceptor/ServerInterceptorPipeline.swift:291-297 \u2014 before extracting anything, compare \u0060Sources/GRPC/Interceptor/ClientInterceptorPipeline.swift\u0060 and \u0060Sources/GRPC/Interceptor/ServerInterceptorPipeline.swift\u0060 as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 4 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 40 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together \u2014 extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/GRPC/Interceptor/ClientInterceptorPipeline.swift"},"region":{"startLine":497}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"d748ccfb7703606edcdccaf18c12ff0d903415480257417f7216dda2d284e596"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (13 lines \u00D7 2): Sources/GRPCReflectionService/Server/ReflectionServiceV1.swift:31-43 | Sources/GRPCReflectionService/Server/ReflectionServiceV1Alpha.swift:33-46 \u2014 before extracting anything, compare \u0060Sources/GRPCReflectionService/Server/ReflectionServiceV1.swift\u0060 and \u0060Sources/GRPCReflectionService/Server/ReflectionServiceV1Alpha.swift\u0060 as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 9 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 118 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together \u2014 extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/GRPCReflectionService/Server/ReflectionServiceV1.swift"},"region":{"startLine":31}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"0187a039708a54ee5571f586c586e750384493df629cfa1e6f2d9973489bb72e"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (7 lines \u00D7 2): Sources/GRPCReflectionService/Server/ReflectionServiceV1.swift:45-51 | Sources/GRPCReflectionService/Server/ReflectionServiceV1Alpha.swift:48-54 \u2014 before extracting anything, compare \u0060Sources/GRPCReflectionService/Server/ReflectionServiceV1.swift\u0060 and \u0060Sources/GRPCReflectionService/Server/ReflectionServiceV1Alpha.swift\u0060 as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 9 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 118 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together \u2014 extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Note first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: the declarations holding them bind \u0060request\u0060 to \u0060Grpc_Reflection_V1_ServerReflectionRequest\u0060 in one and \u0060Grpc_Reflection_V1alpha_ServerReflectionRequest\u0060 in another, and the duplicated lines use it. The extracted unit therefore needs a parameter type that fits BOTH \u2014 their common supertype where they have one, or a new abstraction over them where they do not \u2014 and settling that is the step that comes BEFORE the extraction above. Where the two types are deliberately unrelated, the duplication is the price of that separation and the honest resolution is to record the decision rather than to extract."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/GRPCReflectionService/Server/ReflectionServiceV1.swift"},"region":{"startLine":45}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"25bfba37e4a560804ed200c3c8a6a12ea653b4f1297216a5da7d345872a41b8e"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (14 lines \u00D7 2): Sources/GRPCReflectionService/Server/ReflectionServiceV1.swift:53-66 | Sources/GRPCReflectionService/Server/ReflectionServiceV1Alpha.swift:56-69 \u2014 before extracting anything, compare \u0060Sources/GRPCReflectionService/Server/ReflectionServiceV1.swift\u0060 and \u0060Sources/GRPCReflectionService/Server/ReflectionServiceV1Alpha.swift\u0060 as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 9 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 118 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together \u2014 extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Note first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: the declarations holding them bind \u0060request\u0060 to \u0060Grpc_Reflection_V1_ServerReflectionRequest\u0060 in one and \u0060Grpc_Reflection_V1alpha_ServerReflectionRequest\u0060 in another, and the duplicated lines use it. The extracted unit therefore needs a parameter type that fits BOTH \u2014 their common supertype where they have one, or a new abstraction over them where they do not \u2014 and settling that is the step that comes BEFORE the extraction above. Where the two types are deliberately unrelated, the duplication is the price of that separation and the honest resolution is to record the decision rather than to extract."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/GRPCReflectionService/Server/ReflectionServiceV1.swift"},"region":{"startLine":53}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"335989a6da49eb2d61c1d3b6ce463aa8a268d288b19c2ebb51b2fbbab78e7fdf"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (11 lines \u00D7 2): Sources/GRPCReflectionService/Server/ReflectionServiceV1.swift:68-78 | Sources/GRPCReflectionService/Server/ReflectionServiceV1Alpha.swift:71-81 \u2014 before extracting anything, compare \u0060Sources/GRPCReflectionService/Server/ReflectionServiceV1.swift\u0060 and \u0060Sources/GRPCReflectionService/Server/ReflectionServiceV1Alpha.swift\u0060 as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 9 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 118 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together \u2014 extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Note first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: the declarations holding them bind \u0060request\u0060 to \u0060Grpc_Reflection_V1_ServerReflectionRequest\u0060 in one and \u0060Grpc_Reflection_V1alpha_ServerReflectionRequest\u0060 in another, and the duplicated lines use it. The extracted unit therefore needs a parameter type that fits BOTH \u2014 their common supertype where they have one, or a new abstraction over them where they do not \u2014 and settling that is the step that comes BEFORE the extraction above. Where the two types are deliberately unrelated, the duplication is the price of that separation and the honest resolution is to record the decision rather than to extract."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/GRPCReflectionService/Server/ReflectionServiceV1.swift"},"region":{"startLine":68}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"d3f18ad5be907e23a9842e7b0c1fef41bfa75b99b090c0ba04c21cbbf6d8ded6"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (12 lines \u00D7 2): Sources/GRPCReflectionService/Server/ReflectionServiceV1.swift:80-91 | Sources/GRPCReflectionService/Server/ReflectionServiceV1Alpha.swift:83-94 \u2014 before extracting anything, compare \u0060Sources/GRPCReflectionService/Server/ReflectionServiceV1.swift\u0060 and \u0060Sources/GRPCReflectionService/Server/ReflectionServiceV1Alpha.swift\u0060 as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 9 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 118 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together \u2014 extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Note first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: the declarations holding them bind \u0060extensionRequest\u0060 to \u0060Grpc_Reflection_V1_ExtensionRequest\u0060 in one and \u0060Grpc_Reflection_V1alpha_ExtensionRequest\u0060 in another, and the duplicated lines use it. The extracted unit therefore needs a parameter type that fits BOTH \u2014 their common supertype where they have one, or a new abstraction over them where they do not \u2014 and settling that is the step that comes BEFORE the extraction above. Where the two types are deliberately unrelated, the duplication is the price of that separation and the honest resolution is to record the decision rather than to extract."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/GRPCReflectionService/Server/ReflectionServiceV1.swift"},"region":{"startLine":80}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"539a699722fb9019c3b357585e5f13f9b5b14709f693637ad8476805681b371b"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (10 lines \u00D7 2): Sources/GRPCReflectionService/Server/ReflectionServiceV1.swift:166-175 | Sources/GRPCReflectionService/Server/ReflectionServiceV1Alpha.swift:170-179 \u2014 before extracting anything, compare \u0060Sources/GRPCReflectionService/Server/ReflectionServiceV1.swift\u0060 and \u0060Sources/GRPCReflectionService/Server/ReflectionServiceV1Alpha.swift\u0060 as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 9 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 118 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together \u2014 extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Note first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: the declarations holding them bind \u0060messageResponse\u0060 to \u0060Grpc_Reflection_V1_ServerReflectionResponse.OneOf_MessageResponse\u0060 in one and \u0060Grpc_Reflection_V1alpha_ServerReflectionResponse.OneOf_MessageResponse\u0060 in another, and the duplicated lines use it. The extracted unit therefore needs a parameter type that fits BOTH \u2014 their common supertype where they have one, or a new abstraction over them where they do not \u2014 and settling that is the step that comes BEFORE the extraction above. Where the two types are deliberately unrelated, the duplication is the price of that separation and the honest resolution is to record the decision rather than to extract."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/GRPCReflectionService/Server/ReflectionServiceV1.swift"},"region":{"startLine":166}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"57851afcae4faf419e0f450e356d591cb9e356b676a15c640bfcde0fb9d1ee4b"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (6 lines \u00D7 2): Sources/GRPCReflectionService/Server/ReflectionServiceV1.swift:190-195 | Sources/GRPCReflectionService/Server/ReflectionServiceV1Alpha.swift:196-201 \u2014 before extracting anything, compare \u0060Sources/GRPCReflectionService/Server/ReflectionServiceV1.swift\u0060 and \u0060Sources/GRPCReflectionService/Server/ReflectionServiceV1Alpha.swift\u0060 as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 9 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 118 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together \u2014 extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Note first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: the declarations holding them bind \u0060request\u0060 to \u0060Grpc_Reflection_V1_ServerReflectionRequest\u0060 in one and \u0060Grpc_Reflection_V1alpha_ServerReflectionRequest\u0060 in another, and the duplicated lines use it. The extracted unit therefore needs a parameter type that fits BOTH \u2014 their common supertype where they have one, or a new abstraction over them where they do not \u2014 and settling that is the step that comes BEFORE the extraction above. Where the two types are deliberately unrelated, the duplication is the price of that separation and the honest resolution is to record the decision rather than to extract."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/GRPCReflectionService/Server/ReflectionServiceV1.swift"},"region":{"startLine":190}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"fc4bed9c1807218043f9766461978b71322895e9ee70fa732deb77a69780a80b"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (7 lines \u00D7 2): Sources/GRPCReflectionService/Server/ReflectionServiceV1.swift:200-206 | Sources/GRPCReflectionService/Server/ReflectionServiceV1Alpha.swift:206-212 \u2014 before extracting anything, compare \u0060Sources/GRPCReflectionService/Server/ReflectionServiceV1.swift\u0060 and \u0060Sources/GRPCReflectionService/Server/ReflectionServiceV1Alpha.swift\u0060 as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 9 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 118 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together \u2014 extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/GRPCReflectionService/Server/ReflectionServiceV1.swift"},"region":{"startLine":200}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"e450979eeed7546b5b9feb8b70d15495f54d493f93212c1c82557dba1d69842c"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (9 lines \u00D7 2): Examples/v1/HelloWorld/Server/GreeterProvider.swift:24-32 | Examples/v1/ReflectionService/GreeterProvider.swift:24-32 \u2014 before extracting anything, compare \u0060Examples/v1/HelloWorld/Server/GreeterProvider.swift\u0060 and \u0060Examples/v1/ReflectionService/GreeterProvider.swift\u0060 as WHOLE FILES: 100% of the shorter file\u0027s lines also appear in the other, so this reads as one file having been copied from the other rather than as a helper waiting to be extracted. The 1 duplicated block(s) this scan matched between them are fragments of that copy, not the extent of it \u2014 treat the file pair as the unit. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Examples/v1/HelloWorld/Server/GreeterProvider.swift"},"region":{"startLine":24}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"7b8093fdd58007696d0bf8d3c74ec4946fe446dcc62ea50c10f8032879fef9f7"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (9 lines \u00D7 2): Examples/v1/RouteGuide/Client/RouteGuideClient.swift:24-32 | Examples/v1/RouteGuide/Server/RouteGuideServer.swift:26-34 \u2014 the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach \u2014 a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none \u2014 and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at \u0060Examples/v1/RouteGuide/Client/RouteGuideClient.swift:24\u0060 it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand \u2014 widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Examples/v1/RouteGuide/Client/RouteGuideClient.swift"},"region":{"startLine":24}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"4a029a5a3ddbba7423e7041272940b58d816fdc23ef15054a93d1df3df6ee36f"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (12 lines \u00D7 2): Sources/GRPCInteroperabilityTestsImplementation/TestServiceAsyncProvider.swift:42-53 | Sources/GRPCInteroperabilityTestsImplementation/TestServiceProvider.swift:43-54 \u2014 the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach \u2014 a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them \u2014 and call it from both call sites, so a change lands once. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/GRPCInteroperabilityTestsImplementation/TestServiceAsyncProvider.swift"},"region":{"startLine":42}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"dcc35f0ac74e2eb55242032b6ad05588d6b822432cac31b4fdb1d0eb0ab20f26"}},{"ruleId":"D6","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Low cohesion: TestServiceAsyncProvider (LCOM4 7): TestServiceAsyncProvider\u0027s methods fall into 7 groups that share no field and call none of each other, against a bar of more than 3 for this run (LCOM4, configurable \u2014 your repository\u0027s bar is the one quoted here). Each group is a set of methods reachable from one another through shared fields or direct calls, so 7 groups means the type has that many internally-connected clusters with nothing tying them together. Types whose shape makes a high count expected \u2014 and which would otherwise dominate this list \u2014 are excluded before this row is raised, so this is a genuine split candidate rather than a metric reading. It is still a shape, not a defect: confirm the groups match responsibilities you can name before splitting."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/GRPCInteroperabilityTestsImplementation/TestServiceAsyncProvider.swift"},"region":{"startLine":24}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"63923d15888d584977a9bd7002a28c0e3585298ec2f97eb57a4a57d0a675081e"}},{"ruleId":"D6","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Low cohesion: TestServiceProvider (LCOM4 7): TestServiceProvider\u0027s methods fall into 7 groups that share no field and call none of each other, against a bar of more than 3 for this run (LCOM4, configurable \u2014 your repository\u0027s bar is the one quoted here). Each group is a set of methods reachable from one another through shared fields or direct calls, so 7 groups means the type has that many internally-connected clusters with nothing tying them together. Types whose shape makes a high count expected \u2014 and which would otherwise dominate this list \u2014 are excluded before this row is raised, so this is a genuine split candidate rather than a metric reading. It is still a shape, not a defect: confirm the groups match responsibilities you can name before splitting."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/GRPCInteroperabilityTestsImplementation/TestServiceProvider.swift"},"region":{"startLine":26}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"ede769715fa8c85841d2c979267450ef718dd23cff9f4829b5f854de714ef29e"}},{"ruleId":"D6","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Low cohesion: AsyncBenchmarkServiceImpl (LCOM4 5): AsyncBenchmarkServiceImpl\u0027s methods fall into 5 groups that share no field and call none of each other, against a bar of more than 3 for this run (LCOM4, configurable \u2014 your repository\u0027s bar is the one quoted here). Each group is a set of methods reachable from one another through shared fields or direct calls, so 5 groups means the type has that many internally-connected clusters with nothing tying them together. Types whose shape makes a high count expected \u2014 and which would otherwise dominate this list \u2014 are excluded before this row is raised, so this is a genuine split candidate rather than a metric reading. It is still a shape, not a defect: confirm the groups match responsibilities you can name before splitting."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Performance/QPSBenchmark/Sources/QPSBenchmark/Runtime/Async/AsyncBenchmarkServiceImpl.swift"},"region":{"startLine":22}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"bb76fee52b674381bf3650f3cf884d61490d8c638c5af11a6ab56a8b88151381"}},{"ruleId":"D6","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Low cohesion: NIOBenchmarkServiceImpl (LCOM4 5): NIOBenchmarkServiceImpl\u0027s methods fall into 5 groups that share no field and call none of each other, against a bar of more than 3 for this run (LCOM4, configurable \u2014 your repository\u0027s bar is the one quoted here). Each group is a set of methods reachable from one another through shared fields or direct calls, so 5 groups means the type has that many internally-connected clusters with nothing tying them together. Types whose shape makes a high count expected \u2014 and which would otherwise dominate this list \u2014 are excluded before this row is raised, so this is a genuine split candidate rather than a metric reading. It is still a shape, not a defect: confirm the groups match responsibilities you can name before splitting."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Performance/QPSBenchmark/Sources/QPSBenchmark/Runtime/NIO/NIOBenchmarkServiceImpl.swift"},"region":{"startLine":22}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"a59f22d7549fdd8e83d3f3500c54e6022c30c092fac93fd831019a23cefdcd83"}},{"ruleId":"D6","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Low cohesion: AsyncWorkerServiceImpl (LCOM4 4): AsyncWorkerServiceImpl\u0027s methods fall into 4 groups that share no field and call none of each other, against a bar of more than 3 for this run (LCOM4, configurable \u2014 your repository\u0027s bar is the one quoted here). Each group is a set of methods reachable from one another through shared fields or direct calls, so 4 groups means the type has that many internally-connected clusters with nothing tying them together. Types whose shape makes a high count expected \u2014 and which would otherwise dominate this list \u2014 are excluded before this row is raised, so this is a genuine split candidate rather than a metric reading. It is still a shape, not a defect: confirm the groups match responsibilities you can name before splitting."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Performance/QPSBenchmark/Sources/QPSBenchmark/Runtime/Async/AsyncWorkerServiceImpl.swift"},"region":{"startLine":20}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"eb33667ce43fc70a8cc22b42bcdaa7675adf40e2420527883343d43d475412a7"}},{"ruleId":"D6","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Low cohesion: NIOWorkerServiceImpl (LCOM4 4): NIOWorkerServiceImpl\u0027s methods fall into 4 groups that share no field and call none of each other, against a bar of more than 3 for this run (LCOM4, configurable \u2014 your repository\u0027s bar is the one quoted here). Each group is a set of methods reachable from one another through shared fields or direct calls, so 4 groups means the type has that many internally-connected clusters with nothing tying them together. Types whose shape makes a high count expected \u2014 and which would otherwise dominate this list \u2014 are excluded before this row is raised, so this is a genuine split candidate rather than a metric reading. It is still a shape, not a defect: confirm the groups match responsibilities you can name before splitting."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Performance/QPSBenchmark/Sources/QPSBenchmark/Runtime/NIO/NIOWorkerServiceImpl.swift"},"region":{"startLine":21}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"c847b47bf87e04d04d565d439c78273f8217377b856f44d1dbcd345706345eb7"}},{"ruleId":"D6","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Low cohesion: EchoAsyncProvider (LCOM4 4): EchoAsyncProvider\u0027s methods fall into 4 groups that share no field and call none of each other, against a bar of more than 3 for this run (LCOM4, configurable \u2014 your repository\u0027s bar is the one quoted here). Each group is a set of methods reachable from one another through shared fields or direct calls, so 4 groups means the type has that many internally-connected clusters with nothing tying them together. Types whose shape makes a high count expected \u2014 and which would otherwise dominate this list \u2014 are excluded before this row is raised, so this is a genuine split candidate rather than a metric reading. It is still a shape, not a defect: confirm the groups match responsibilities you can name before splitting."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Examples/v1/Echo/Implementation/EchoAsyncProvider.swift"},"region":{"startLine":19}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"fd8f8202a31ef0eaba5ea3b49fc2ddd279c07f8bcdf0c110d66fc4537194b67c"}},{"ruleId":"D6","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Low cohesion: EchoProvider (LCOM4 4): EchoProvider\u0027s methods fall into 4 groups that share no field and call none of each other, against a bar of more than 3 for this run (LCOM4, configurable \u2014 your repository\u0027s bar is the one quoted here). Each group is a set of methods reachable from one another through shared fields or direct calls, so 4 groups means the type has that many internally-connected clusters with nothing tying them together. Types whose shape makes a high count expected \u2014 and which would otherwise dominate this list \u2014 are excluded before this row is raised, so this is a genuine split candidate rather than a metric reading. It is still a shape, not a defect: confirm the groups match responsibilities you can name before splitting."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Examples/v1/Echo/Implementation/EchoProvider.swift"},"region":{"startLine":21}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"f7d8131d76e67f4f532cb803177f687ebcd9e6033bbde8f01c30458112495a29"}},{"ruleId":"D8","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Coverage not measured \u2014 Swift suite: Coverage NOT MEASURED: the Swift half could not be measured \u2014 the Swift suite in . produced no coverage export. Coverage is excluded from the score rather than counted as a near-zero. The named suite step is one the repository\u0027s maintainers can perform; once it passes, the real number is measured on the next scan. Alternatively, commit the lcov/Cobertura report your CI produces and it is read without a re-run."},"locations":[],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"62e63e619c28f057e129f2997c965d32a457366a9ce18ca019ffb6bdfba85c99"}},{"ruleId":"D10","level":"note","message":{"text":"No direct assertions: testOptionsPreflightAllowAllOrigins: No conventional assertion call was detected, and 14 of 18 tests in \u0060GRPCTests\u0060 read the same way \u2014 so this is treated as that project\u0027s convention rather than a broken test, and it does not drag the score. Two things look like this: verification that happens indirectly (an approval/verifier harness or BDD step methods), or a project of runnable samples compiled as tests, where a run that does not throw is the only check. If it is the latter, these methods genuinely verify nothing."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Tests/GRPCTests/WebCORSHandlerTests.swift"},"region":{"startLine":81}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"0b6001db29939860d0be9d257da76a18d4e268f12fd2b52c9ac3e9da9889502a"}},{"ruleId":"D10","level":"note","message":{"text":"No direct assertions: testOptionsPreflightOriginBased: No conventional assertion call was detected, and 14 of 18 tests in \u0060GRPCTests\u0060 read the same way \u2014 so this is treated as that project\u0027s convention rather than a broken test, and it does not drag the score. Two things look like this: verification that happens indirectly (an approval/verifier harness or BDD step methods), or a project of runnable samples compiled as tests, where a run that does not throw is the only check. If it is the latter, these methods genuinely verify nothing."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Tests/GRPCTests/WebCORSHandlerTests.swift"},"region":{"startLine":98}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"1775577da9cbb37b30ee5214210d96aa81290a19c853faace4a085e0b9b6c0e2"}},{"ruleId":"D10","level":"note","message":{"text":"No direct assertions: testOptionsPreflightCustom: No conventional assertion call was detected, and 14 of 18 tests in \u0060GRPCTests\u0060 read the same way \u2014 so this is treated as that project\u0027s convention rather than a broken test, and it does not drag the score. Two things look like this: verification that happens indirectly (an approval/verifier harness or BDD step methods), or a project of runnable samples compiled as tests, where a run that does not throw is the only check. If it is the latter, these methods genuinely verify nothing."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Tests/GRPCTests/WebCORSHandlerTests.swift"},"region":{"startLine":115}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"54b6e311b57fd0e81bdec97f69314fa42208710444eb44a44c8c7c7d7fb1e24d"}},{"ruleId":"D10","level":"note","message":{"text":"No direct assertions: testOptionsPreflightAllowSomeOrigins: No conventional assertion call was detected, and 14 of 18 tests in \u0060GRPCTests\u0060 read the same way \u2014 so this is treated as that project\u0027s convention rather than a broken test, and it does not drag the score. Two things look like this: verification that happens indirectly (an approval/verifier harness or BDD step methods), or a project of runnable samples compiled as tests, where a run that does not throw is the only check. If it is the latter, these methods genuinely verify nothing."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Tests/GRPCTests/WebCORSHandlerTests.swift"},"region":{"startLine":142}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"a36cff181457b8de5723e4cbe61bbcd6bf593e06bac46670212cf1cb0aaf8513"}},{"ruleId":"D10","level":"note","message":{"text":"No direct assertions: testOptionsPreflightAllowNoHeaders: No conventional assertion call was detected, and 14 of 18 tests in \u0060GRPCTests\u0060 read the same way \u2014 so this is treated as that project\u0027s convention rather than a broken test, and it does not drag the score. Two things look like this: verification that happens indirectly (an approval/verifier harness or BDD step methods), or a project of runnable samples compiled as tests, where a run that does not throw is the only check. If it is the latter, these methods genuinely verify nothing."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Tests/GRPCTests/WebCORSHandlerTests.swift"},"region":{"startLine":159}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"423248f036312755a0fd582ce7ccffa22f8f1ffc5d74ba1abe657c8c38471e34"}},{"ruleId":"D10","level":"note","message":{"text":"No direct assertions: testOptionsPreflightNoMaxAge: No conventional assertion call was detected, and 14 of 18 tests in \u0060GRPCTests\u0060 read the same way \u2014 so this is treated as that project\u0027s convention rather than a broken test, and it does not drag the score. Two things look like this: verification that happens indirectly (an approval/verifier harness or BDD step methods), or a project of runnable samples compiled as tests, where a run that does not throw is the only check. If it is the latter, these methods genuinely verify nothing."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Tests/GRPCTests/WebCORSHandlerTests.swift"},"region":{"startLine":176}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"76dff770ee2894fdca6a1955e8eb347eaa0c8abdaf2e65386bfe9f815791f3e8"}},{"ruleId":"D10","level":"note","message":{"text":"No direct assertions: testOptionsPreflightNegativeMaxAge: No conventional assertion call was detected, and 14 of 18 tests in \u0060GRPCTests\u0060 read the same way \u2014 so this is treated as that project\u0027s convention rather than a broken test, and it does not drag the score. Two things look like this: verification that happens indirectly (an approval/verifier harness or BDD step methods), or a project of runnable samples compiled as tests, where a run that does not throw is the only check. If it is the latter, these methods genuinely verify nothing."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Tests/GRPCTests/WebCORSHandlerTests.swift"},"region":{"startLine":193}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"b94c48c6a91cc4db80424103c99e8ac03ef46b3d0e3ec14394a9888fbb332d2a"}},{"ruleId":"D10","level":"note","message":{"text":"No direct assertions: testOptionsPreflightWithCredentials: No conventional assertion call was detected, and 14 of 18 tests in \u0060GRPCTests\u0060 read the same way \u2014 so this is treated as that project\u0027s convention rather than a broken test, and it does not drag the score. Two things look like this: verification that happens indirectly (an approval/verifier harness or BDD step methods), or a project of runnable samples compiled as tests, where a run that does not throw is the only check. If it is the latter, these methods genuinely verify nothing."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Tests/GRPCTests/WebCORSHandlerTests.swift"},"region":{"startLine":210}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"7665dd1eb2658f1bdf767ac29dc5041bd4029312b69aa654cb3d3351114f47c7"}},{"ruleId":"D10","level":"note","message":{"text":"No direct assertions: testOptionsPreflightWithDisallowedOrigin: No conventional assertion call was detected, and 14 of 18 tests in \u0060GRPCTests\u0060 read the same way \u2014 so this is treated as that project\u0027s convention rather than a broken test, and it does not drag the score. Two things look like this: verification that happens indirectly (an approval/verifier harness or BDD step methods), or a project of runnable samples compiled as tests, where a run that does not throw is the only check. If it is the latter, these methods genuinely verify nothing."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Tests/GRPCTests/WebCORSHandlerTests.swift"},"region":{"startLine":227}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"ae8175261d3f17a3bbabe4b7b710874456e731656ed5184e9e131b79a779732e"}},{"ruleId":"D10","level":"note","message":{"text":"No direct assertions: testRegularRequestWithWildcardOrigin: No conventional assertion call was detected, and 14 of 18 tests in \u0060GRPCTests\u0060 read the same way \u2014 so this is treated as that project\u0027s convention rather than a broken test, and it does not drag the score. Two things look like this: verification that happens indirectly (an approval/verifier harness or BDD step methods), or a project of runnable samples compiled as tests, where a run that does not throw is the only check. If it is the latter, these methods genuinely verify nothing."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Tests/GRPCTests/WebCORSHandlerTests.swift"},"region":{"startLine":298}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"5f523c5462af531701e55044f2aa50c81c93d30d875a9370896542ca59064138"}},{"ruleId":"D10","level":"note","message":{"text":"No direct assertions: testRegularRequestWithLimitedOrigin: No conventional assertion call was detected, and 14 of 18 tests in \u0060GRPCTests\u0060 read the same way \u2014 so this is treated as that project\u0027s convention rather than a broken test, and it does not drag the score. Two things look like this: verification that happens indirectly (an approval/verifier harness or BDD step methods), or a project of runnable samples compiled as tests, where a run that does not throw is the only check. If it is the latter, these methods genuinely verify nothing."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Tests/GRPCTests/WebCORSHandlerTests.swift"},"region":{"startLine":311}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"8105ae11365c558480eae6340978a59bac7697abf883752a5b96e05496e27e6f"}},{"ruleId":"D10","level":"note","message":{"text":"No direct assertions: testRegularRequestWithNoOrigin: No conventional assertion call was detected, and 14 of 18 tests in \u0060GRPCTests\u0060 read the same way \u2014 so this is treated as that project\u0027s convention rather than a broken test, and it does not drag the score. Two things look like this: verification that happens indirectly (an approval/verifier harness or BDD step methods), or a project of runnable samples compiled as tests, where a run that does not throw is the only check. If it is the latter, these methods genuinely verify nothing."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Tests/GRPCTests/WebCORSHandlerTests.swift"},"region":{"startLine":324}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"6d00a7bb5505fb5e3a47ae9013847f47adb790b9c85a1b34212bac7f1b43810b"}},{"ruleId":"D10","level":"note","message":{"text":"No direct assertions: testRegularRequestWithCredentials: No conventional assertion call was detected, and 14 of 18 tests in \u0060GRPCTests\u0060 read the same way \u2014 so this is treated as that project\u0027s convention rather than a broken test, and it does not drag the score. Two things look like this: verification that happens indirectly (an approval/verifier harness or BDD step methods), or a project of runnable samples compiled as tests, where a run that does not throw is the only check. If it is the latter, these methods genuinely verify nothing."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Tests/GRPCTests/WebCORSHandlerTests.swift"},"region":{"startLine":337}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"2681440e07a12288a3df7adc3a12b1d76b954faec613c9ae2ea1f8427b9fd693"}},{"ruleId":"D10","level":"note","message":{"text":"No direct assertions: testRegularRequestWithDisallowedOrigin: No conventional assertion call was detected, and 14 of 18 tests in \u0060GRPCTests\u0060 read the same way \u2014 so this is treated as that project\u0027s convention rather than a broken test, and it does not drag the score. Two things look like this: verification that happens indirectly (an approval/verifier harness or BDD step methods), or a project of runnable samples compiled as tests, where a run that does not throw is the only check. If it is the latter, these methods genuinely verify nothing."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Tests/GRPCTests/WebCORSHandlerTests.swift"},"region":{"startLine":350}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"bf5efa8ae2d31813afa7a8047dcc193ffc335de05d0f74f701022dcea4fbd06d"}},{"ruleId":"D11","level":"error","message":{"text":"Flaky test: .::GRPCTests.AcceptedServerTests.testGracefulShutdownOfServer: Passed 2\u00D7, failed 1\u00D7 across repeated runs."},"locations":[],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"f9de79cee1ff44f0b7f0130646583b9ff5ff76a4d7887c0fc9496ed296130c67"}},{"ruleId":"D11","level":"error","message":{"text":"Flaky test: .::GRPCTests.ClientConnectionBackoffTests.testClientConnectionFailsWithNoBackoff: Passed 2\u00D7, failed 1\u00D7 across repeated runs."},"locations":[],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"795acaeb8c1215371c4596afbf0fd503f22b665f458cccd4a4ddf95d17451e68"}},{"ruleId":"D11","level":"error","message":{"text":"Flaky test: .::GRPCTests.ClientConnectionBackoffTests.testClientReconnectsAutomatically: Passed 2\u00D7, failed 1\u00D7 across repeated runs."},"locations":[],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"d25b2fa28a01cbfe1b3ef97786fd6df0bebf41fb55bd3043b4f7fcc30b3dbfc0"}},{"ruleId":"D11","level":"error","message":{"text":"Flaky test: .::GRPCTests.ClientQuiescingTests.testInitiateShutdownWithPastDeadline_channelPool: Passed 1\u00D7, failed 2\u00D7 across repeated runs."},"locations":[],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"5d92bc595aef688aae45c35864e3e8ce4d4460d9380c8f654440edcf88ff6ead"}},{"ruleId":"D11","level":"error","message":{"text":"Flaky test: .::GRPCTests.ClientQuiescingTests.testQuiescingTimesOutAndFailsExistingRPC_clientConnection: Passed 2\u00D7, failed 1\u00D7 across repeated runs."},"locations":[],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"e71cc10a66e59fd9be79aa1f8cff1f7c1192cede89681785a1c89ee6a3a0031b"}},{"ruleId":"D11","level":"error","message":{"text":"Flaky test: .::GRPCTests.ClientQuiescingTests.testQuiescingTimesOutAndFailsWaiters_channelPool: Passed 1\u00D7, failed 2\u00D7 across repeated runs."},"locations":[],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"c927e1a67d411112363b9004d5f575ecd815ce195bd26ed32713429d98c8a311"}},{"ruleId":"D11","level":"error","message":{"text":"Flaky test: .::GRPCTests.ClientQuiescingTests.testQuiescingWithNoOutstandingRPCs_channelPool: Passed 1\u00D7, failed 2\u00D7 across repeated runs."},"locations":[],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"901860ab3bb51a16d94b44c89b310f36fa6d3af8acf98ff4356613733110e6ff"}},{"ruleId":"D11","level":"error","message":{"text":"Flaky test: .::GRPCTests.ClientQuiescingTests.testQuiescingWithNoOutstandingRPCs_clientConnection: Passed 1\u00D7, failed 2\u00D7 across repeated runs."},"locations":[],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"c8d4872f059b99c66caf212dc0431630202c5853bab4d09770d59ec0acdcd928"}},{"ruleId":"D11","level":"error","message":{"text":"Flaky test: .::GRPCTests.ClientQuiescingTests.testStartRPCAfterShutdownCompletes_clientConnection: Passed 2\u00D7, failed 1\u00D7 across repeated runs."},"locations":[],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"0483b9b665a5e7d1ce3fdfe55c4538c9de2d5c733d5978c24bd739964bb7c0d6"}},{"ruleId":"D12","level":"warning","message":{"text":"No Package.resolved committed (FuzzTesting/Package.swift): FuzzTesting/Package.swift declares 1 dependency and no \u0060.library\u0060 product, so it is an APPLICATION \u2014 but no \u0060Package.resolved\u0060 is committed beside it. Nothing records the versions a working build resolved to, so \u0060swift build\u0060 re-resolves against whatever each dependency\u0027s git host serves today and two builds of this commit are not guaranteed to be the same build. Build once and commit the resulting \u0060Package.resolved\u0060. (A published LIBRARY correctly omits its resolution \u2014 SwiftPM ignores a library\u0027s \u0060Package.resolved\u0060 when the package is consumed \u2014 which is why this is asked only of a package that ships no \u0060.library\u0060 product.)"},"locations":[],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"b9389972683fc0e191948d70e64f5cff88c8cb21e0d3995df0bc69077fb120dd"}},{"ruleId":"D12","level":"warning","message":{"text":"No Package.resolved committed (Performance/QPSBenchmark/Package.swift): Performance/QPSBenchmark/Package.swift declares 6 dependencies and no \u0060.library\u0060 product, so it is an APPLICATION \u2014 but no \u0060Package.resolved\u0060 is committed beside it. Nothing records the versions a working build resolved to, so \u0060swift build\u0060 re-resolves against whatever each dependency\u0027s git host serves today and two builds of this commit are not guaranteed to be the same build. Build once and commit the resulting \u0060Package.resolved\u0060. (A published LIBRARY correctly omits its resolution \u2014 SwiftPM ignores a library\u0027s \u0060Package.resolved\u0060 when the package is consumed \u2014 which is why this is asked only of a package that ships no \u0060.library\u0060 product.)"},"locations":[],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"1da8636ddf0acaf322d0d51286c1821455220d7c683b0353b3fcaff18456a95d"}},{"ruleId":"D13","level":"error","message":{"text":"A security finding was recorded here. Its details are withheld on the public artifact \u2014 ask the repository owner for the full report."},"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"561169b9f3f6bc1cc9c2baf932502fcac5154cb5f46453ef87e9b677f11c4d44"},"taxa":[{"id":"CWE-259","toolComponent":{"name":"CWE","guid":"c3a2b1d0-7f3e-4b2a-9c1d-5e6f7a8b9c0d"}},{"id":"CWE-798","toolComponent":{"name":"CWE","guid":"c3a2b1d0-7f3e-4b2a-9c1d-5e6f7a8b9c0d"}}]},{"ruleId":"D13","level":"error","message":{"text":"A security finding was recorded here. Its details are withheld on the public artifact \u2014 ask the repository owner for the full report."},"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"72384801f4f65c5a670b6a782b90da1b4f198e3443e21ff966d28ea3623eddf7"},"taxa":[{"id":"CWE-259","toolComponent":{"name":"CWE","guid":"c3a2b1d0-7f3e-4b2a-9c1d-5e6f7a8b9c0d"}},{"id":"CWE-798","toolComponent":{"name":"CWE","guid":"c3a2b1d0-7f3e-4b2a-9c1d-5e6f7a8b9c0d"}}]},{"ruleId":"D16","level":"note","message":{"text":"Off-boarding risk: anonymized user #1: If anonymized user #1 becomes unavailable, 2 significant file(s) lose their only recent owner: Sources/GRPC/ConnectionManager.swift, Sources/GRPC/GRPCClientChannelHandler.swift. Pair on, review, or document these before any departure."},"locations":[],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"d7322c107fa7adc0490bc97053a93057a49fc48abdad7744511f1ceed2d1aa40"}},{"ruleId":"D17","level":"warning","message":{"text":"TodoComment: // TODO: Support TLS if requested. \u2014 source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. \u0060// REF: #123\u0060), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Performance/QPSBenchmark/Sources/QPSBenchmark/Runtime/Async/AsyncQPSClientImpl.swift"},"region":{"startLine":196}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"1bd6eac471d8d37d3e119e6c8725e3c578041d47d60a438bffcac427768a972a"}},{"ruleId":"D17","level":"warning","message":{"text":"TodoComment: // TODO: Support TLS if requested. \u2014 source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. \u0060// REF: #123\u0060), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Performance/QPSBenchmark/Sources/QPSBenchmark/Runtime/NIO/NIOQPSServerImpl.swift"},"region":{"startLine":54}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"3d36d5bb0e407bff9addc67a698cbf917287b437aa246b7515993ce4b4fffd0d"}},{"ruleId":"D17","level":"warning","message":{"text":"TodoComment: // TODO: Support TLS if requested. \u2014 source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. \u0060// REF: #123\u0060), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Performance/QPSBenchmark/Sources/QPSBenchmark/Runtime/NIO/NIOQPSClientImpl.swift"},"region":{"startLine":185}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"2c6287a45f1494ba4e8e7fcce8d0737f2e127a5bc912a3ba48bbab919dfd513e"}},{"ruleId":"D17","level":"warning","message":{"text":"FixmeComment: //! FIXME: Check whether we can let browsers keep connections alive. It\u0027s not possible \u2014 source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. \u0060// REF: #123\u0060), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/GRPC/WebCORSHandler.swift"},"region":{"startLine":166}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"10edfbf7480f2b5b4e335bfe2379dcb0a9287364ccdd8fadcf2b28ef0c7b1c3d"}},{"ruleId":"D17","level":"warning","message":{"text":"FixmeComment: //! FIXME: Also support errors in this type, to propagate them to the event handler. \u2014 source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. \u0060// REF: #123\u0060), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/GRPC/StreamEvent.swift"},"region":{"startLine":22}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"3229ac20e21042658cff752f9d05ccce0b515cc316c597752369da23d8386351"}},{"ruleId":"D17","level":"warning","message":{"text":"FixmeComment: //! FIXME: Provide more context about where the error was thrown, i.e. using \u0060GRPCError\u0060. \u2014 source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. \u0060// REF: #123\u0060), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/GRPC/ServerErrorDelegate.swift"},"region":{"startLine":22}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"0779bb2e40e6bd0420572278f427499c712e2518a430ceef00306f955a4b8f0e"}},{"ruleId":"D17","level":"warning","message":{"text":"TodoComment: // TODO: Revisit the handling of NIO/NIOTS once https://github.com/apple/swift-nio/issues/796"},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/GRPC/PlatformSupport.swift"},"region":{"startLine":111}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"52b318dcb61c069b2aeaf8473984d9792a41058d1b8a989dda5ddc42e1ca388a"}},{"ruleId":"D17","level":"warning","message":{"text":"TodoComment: // TODO: If compression is enabled and we store the buffer slices then we can feed the slices \u2014 source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. \u0060// REF: #123\u0060), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/GRPC/LengthPrefixedMessageReader.swift"},"region":{"startLine":203}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"502d905d7c87a4ebd7880642539bea45d9865994551d6c2d85ab918fe6494939"}},{"ruleId":"D17","level":"warning","message":{"text":"TodoComment: // TODO: Use API provided by https://github.com/apple/swift-nio-http2/issues/254 to avoid the"},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/GRPC/GRPCWebToHTTP2ServerCodec.swift"},"region":{"startLine":276}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"b7d40cc03686ae53dfcfe22f3ec1def4716b2959815d97502fc60649da07c54f"}},{"ruleId":"D17","level":"warning","message":{"text":"FixmeComment: // FIXME: lazily set the value on the backend when applying the options. \u2014 source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. \u0060// REF: #123\u0060), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/GRPC/GRPCTLSConfiguration.swift"},"region":{"startLine":123}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"19887e3cdf40e648751fa6bd9e1290841b78a5173f82fb66c6f4afa49d2bb47f"}},{"ruleId":"D17","level":"warning","message":{"text":"TodoComment: // TODO: provide user configuration for header normalization. \u2014 source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. \u0060// REF: #123\u0060), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/GRPC/GRPCServerPipelineConfigurator.swift"},"region":{"startLine":124}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"d5d34ef289e95045aadab9a2773932e2e800f571b27403002648f559edf3a1ab"}},{"ruleId":"D17","level":"warning","message":{"text":"TodoComment: // TODO: we should ratchet down the last initiated stream after 1-RTT. \u2014 source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. \u0060// REF: #123\u0060), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/GRPC/GRPCIdleHandlerStateMachine.swift"},"region":{"startLine":424}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"f8069273f4c646f524153a4366ebaba4a8604db89741a3818f0680edaeac4d10"}},{"ruleId":"D17","level":"warning","message":{"text":"TodoComment: // TODO: make header normalization user-configurable. \u2014 source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. \u0060// REF: #123\u0060), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/GRPC/GRPCClientStateMachine.swift"},"region":{"startLine":658}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"fe8abf4973ce65578d6babd07c6ae08b3079ddb43e4f5ef39344f87a2a8ccf3a"}},{"ruleId":"D17","level":"warning","message":{"text":"TodoComment: // TODO: synthesise a more precise \u0060GRPCStatus\u0060 from RST_STREAM frames in accordance \u2014 source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. \u0060// REF: #123\u0060), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/GRPC/GRPCClientChannelHandler.swift"},"region":{"startLine":339}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"84db24dc21b5855a76be4d17679f0efac23cb4306178a399bead00e6beb06a87"}},{"ruleId":"D17","level":"warning","message":{"text":"TodoComment: // TODO: this method will have to be implemented when we add support for backpressure. \u2014 source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. \u0060// REF: #123\u0060), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/GRPC/AsyncAwaitSupport/GRPCAsyncSequenceProducerDelegate.swift"},"region":{"startLine":23}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"0626ea222671501296b2d18c9d1d75eb6625e11c19386acd1169ea3ae28c3332"}},{"ruleId":"D17","level":"warning","message":{"text":"TodoComment: // TODO: this method will have to be implemented when we add support for backpressure. \u2014 source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. \u0060// REF: #123\u0060), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/GRPC/AsyncAwaitSupport/GRPCAsyncSequenceProducerDelegate.swift"},"region":{"startLine":27}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"2c37e86a86236c43c5773eba9d3c3f73bb555cb31f0ef27fe309729b344d90bf"}},{"ruleId":"D17","level":"warning","message":{"text":"TodoComment: // TODO: when we support backpressure we will need to stop ignoring the return value. \u2014 source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. \u0060// REF: #123\u0060), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/GRPC/AsyncAwaitSupport/GRPCAsyncBidirectionalStreamingCall.swift"},"region":{"startLine":167}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"878baf046ad8d3ad0bd5cab3341b1dffea0360ef17dbdb3ce5cdeceabef3c164"}},{"ruleId":"D17","level":"warning","message":{"text":"TodoComment: // TODO: be smarter about inserting flushes. \u2014 source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. \u0060// REF: #123\u0060), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/GRPC/AsyncAwaitSupport/Call\u002BAsyncRequestStreamWriter.swift"},"region":{"startLine":34}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"951e084adf6657a282c39bc87d12f5a7adc78099066329a55a862fc0c029dad7"}},{"ruleId":"D17","level":"warning","message":{"text":"TodoComment: // TODO: make this cheaper by storing and incrementally updating the number of idle connections \u2014 source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. \u0060// REF: #123\u0060), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/GRPC/ConnectionPool/ConnectionPool.swift"},"region":{"startLine":477}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"c7e4b259247eed5878a8637e310e8f79a7472ac5e850abeb07f74c273122742c"}},{"ruleId":"D17","level":"warning","message":{"text":"TodoComment: // TODO: Add tests for application/grpc-web as well. \u2014 source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. \u0060// REF: #123\u0060), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Tests/GRPCTests/ServerWebTests.swift"},"region":{"startLine":30}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"0dc46d2c27242e39b4567ce89809cbfda2463b86d344bb51765c3a1b638f65a1"}},{"ruleId":"D17","level":"warning","message":{"text":"TodoComment: // TODO: https://github.com/grpc/grpc-swift/issues/1215"},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Tests/GRPCTests/ServerOnCloseTests.swift"},"region":{"startLine":231}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"0b96def76163c7c09c1dd4db4f6ed8b7960433c27421f6b67255635db6ed6056"}},{"ruleId":"D17","level":"warning","message":{"text":"TodoComment: // TODO: Replace with \u0060always\u0060 once https://github.com/apple/swift-nio/pull/981 is released."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Tests/GRPCTests/EventLoopFuture\u002BAssertions.swift"},"region":{"startLine":97}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"6b4e0afa1342cffc160b8a64ffbceb8926c54eefc4fc1aa6321081ecc024b4cc"}},{"ruleId":"D17","level":"warning","message":{"text":"TodoComment: // TODO: Replace with \u0060always\u0060 once https://github.com/apple/swift-nio/pull/981 is released."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Tests/GRPCTests/EventLoopFuture\u002BAssertions.swift"},"region":{"startLine":103}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"7ca2acb3315be7d94145d974a7af59e525cbdd56554f8e9227cb70f17ddf8941"}},{"ruleId":"D19","level":"note","message":{"text":"Documentation: no installation or build instructions: The \u0027Building\u0027 section is a shell command block but gives no install/build instructions for the repository root. Add installation/dependency requirements and build commands under the README\u0027s overview, or move the shell-block building content to a dedicated INSTALL.md."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"README.md"},"region":{"startLine":1}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"1fa6bfcd5c6ae231d1b8ee99bced50b832d1f61cde9da6cbb533467b879a57db"}},{"ruleId":"D19","level":"note","message":{"text":"Documentation: no usage examples: The \u0027Running the benchmarks\u0027 section is a code block but gives no usage examples for the repository root. Add one or two short usage examples under the README\u0027s overview, such as how to run the fuzz-testing binaries."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"README.md"},"region":{"startLine":1}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"1355eb4e127a4bc9236772ce1c46f09510aa9286e7a06d1e47f308229df19049"}},{"ruleId":"D20","level":"note","message":{"text":"No ADRs found: No ADRs found. The recognised ADR directories in this tree were read \u2014 \u0060Sources/GRPC/Docs.docc/Proposals\u0060 \u2014 and none of their files is a decision record (a README, index or template page does not count). 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 (\u0060docs/adr/use-postgres.md\u0060, \u0060docs/adr/2024/0001-x.md\u0060); or a file anywhere whose name is ADR-shaped (\u00600001-use-postgres.md\u0060, \u0060adr-012-caching.md\u0060); or, when neither turned anything up, a document carrying the decision-record signature (an \u0022Architecture Decision Record\u0022 heading, or Status / Context / Decision / Consequences as section headings). A decision log that clears none of these \u2014 unnumbered files outside any recognised directory, without those headings \u2014 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 \u0060docs/adr/\u0060."},"locations":[],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"d2bea044ff79d7d275f5a91a6e2f548586178eaf480274c33960ad020c854631"}},{"ruleId":"D26","level":"note","message":{"text":"Projects may be oversized for their cohesion: 1 of 3 project(s) overshoot their size bounds, lowering Project Cohesion to 3.3/10. The most over is \u0060(repository root)\u0060 (35452 LoC, 286 public types across 23 directories). Review these for cohesion \u2014 draw the boundary inside the module first (group each responsibility into its own package or directory and keep the cross-boundary members non-public), since splitting a published package moves types between packages and breaks consumers."},"locations":[],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"d5a94650dc74886a0f1f08eb9fb6775f1fc395279ef7e901c970c9d26f767a72"}},{"ruleId":"D28","level":"error","message":{"text":"A security finding was recorded here. Its details are withheld on the public artifact \u2014 ask the repository owner for the full report."},"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"16e4e01a6a1d76dffbc6b62818464c3397c9dfcd2f4b773afa1e3071ec5154fe"},"properties":{"commitSha":"941650c14638b2659c3241097be10bd2ce9ea8d4"}},{"ruleId":"D28","level":"error","message":{"text":"A security finding was recorded here. Its details are withheld on the public artifact \u2014 ask the repository owner for the full report."},"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"f4afc808d59554f48aa41e6dcd2676f8c73cc2a4bc4c1036114c8fd0986fdbd3"},"properties":{"commitSha":"084463541da3bd46303ba4a42fa2ee3f6578b5b5"}},{"ruleId":"D28","level":"error","message":{"text":"A security finding was recorded here. Its details are withheld on the public artifact \u2014 ask the repository owner for the full report."},"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"ce631b333392ff658ad09aca39d0d82ee70f8471fc95d9e87135a0bfb81b76cd"},"properties":{"commitSha":"8422b38364608bf25a9308b6bdcf0a52d2f2d937"}},{"ruleId":"D28","level":"error","message":{"text":"A security finding was recorded here. Its details are withheld on the public artifact \u2014 ask the repository owner for the full report."},"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"feab6e583f45a821d7dbfc55b0e0c1f2b514a85524ecba092fea11b0dbd9a6c1"},"properties":{"commitSha":"7438d2012d9895a3046fc46af81e8837f7ce4762"}},{"ruleId":"D28","level":"error","message":{"text":"A security finding was recorded here. Its details are withheld on the public artifact \u2014 ask the repository owner for the full report."},"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"8b1e9b0ddd64c227b1c1493f2c5f308a2924a3e401ee5e5a8b78d856cf685179"},"properties":{"commitSha":"2906a07f0866e77e429e0e23129af797608e0cae"}},{"ruleId":"D28","level":"error","message":{"text":"A security finding was recorded here. Its details are withheld on the public artifact \u2014 ask the repository owner for the full report."},"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"7983d5913dc816685eaf4910b51ac16c290238a26610642549de84a664fb9777"},"properties":{"commitSha":"b90d1a5bdc2397e4db3e9f0d2231e53f262f9d19"}},{"ruleId":"D28","level":"error","message":{"text":"A security finding was recorded here. Its details are withheld on the public artifact \u2014 ask the repository owner for the full report."},"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"1694410fc7c10b21a5d55363d7143e7e96e264c192e7fadd68e25caddec62fac"},"properties":{"commitSha":"5028338f047a309bbc38c7966d7d6ec06e125500"}},{"ruleId":"D28","level":"error","message":{"text":"A security finding was recorded here. Its details are withheld on the public artifact \u2014 ask the repository owner for the full report."},"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"c80c8f7e9bbfdfd94b776092a0537507b91524048f601ae293a2567307516abb"},"properties":{"commitSha":"ececfd78eea8278b1a2cc161c4c03f15fe4df8b4"}},{"ruleId":"D28","level":"error","message":{"text":"A security finding was recorded here. Its details are withheld on the public artifact \u2014 ask the repository owner for the full report."},"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"cd361facb820ade16e371d35d92ea5a2ad703daf415fd9b6494905ff309a6260"},"properties":{"commitSha":"75940a411ed0f4bcdca4d0aaca7396dd3768f1c9"}},{"ruleId":"D28","level":"error","message":{"text":"A security finding was recorded here. Its details are withheld on the public artifact \u2014 ask the repository owner for the full report."},"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"bb62ec21955148121beef6b38465445e249820f2dbbc37e66be18ace7c0984e7"},"properties":{"commitSha":"cf9649a4b42d6d1fbba17ff0c2a6b2d31c8463c7"}},{"ruleId":"D28","level":"error","message":{"text":"A security finding was recorded here. Its details are withheld on the public artifact \u2014 ask the repository owner for the full report."},"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"1fd0d7b40aae466febf033bc302c4f4d32c65d7c8c78aecf3b0647d5444b00d1"},"properties":{"commitSha":"cf9649a4b42d6d1fbba17ff0c2a6b2d31c8463c7"}},{"ruleId":"D28","level":"error","message":{"text":"A security finding was recorded here. Its details are withheld on the public artifact \u2014 ask the repository owner for the full report."},"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"848917addaed3a1e8c927efe6ec1b54c8081568a03ac4d02651cfd4fe97f5afe"},"properties":{"commitSha":"0db63065132a4a2e082a758aec88cc4773d82100"}},{"ruleId":"D28","level":"error","message":{"text":"A security finding was recorded here. Its details are withheld on the public artifact \u2014 ask the repository owner for the full report."},"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"44d30509c4d595deb5da24d434cb54f02d665eb333cabacf58bf788274d402a8"},"properties":{"commitSha":"b76f4b4d69c9335c55ab3a9528db73c96627db17"}},{"ruleId":"D28","level":"error","message":{"text":"A security finding was recorded here. Its details are withheld on the public artifact \u2014 ask the repository owner for the full report."},"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"316e862b94ad3ac1bb64661477db32e8cb14c93cc678288df6dd40023de6c320"},"taxa":[{"id":"CWE-321","toolComponent":{"name":"CWE","guid":"c3a2b1d0-7f3e-4b2a-9c1d-5e6f7a8b9c0d"}},{"id":"CWE-798","toolComponent":{"name":"CWE","guid":"c3a2b1d0-7f3e-4b2a-9c1d-5e6f7a8b9c0d"}}]},{"ruleId":"D28","level":"error","message":{"text":"A security finding was recorded here. Its details are withheld on the public artifact \u2014 ask the repository owner for the full report."},"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"6cdbe6d5f29e63a31ddad21e2708421108db676dd7a2cc2710656b3648b89591"},"properties":{"commitSha":"ef54360a631b3fd30d190f5ac6d8a3892d8393fc"}},{"ruleId":"D28","level":"note","message":{"text":"A security finding was recorded here. Its details are withheld on the public artifact \u2014 ask the repository owner for the full report."},"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"3cdfd7beb31b791ae18dcb425e21eb157c842e7bbcd522cc330573c1a6538db1"}},{"ruleId":"D29","level":"error","message":{"text":"A security finding was recorded here. Its details are withheld on the public artifact \u2014 ask the repository owner for the full report."},"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"923e32f96db17ecbcc78fb970b7972b0c5ea08bb60a82a9c9da9c30285066dc2"},"taxa":[{"id":"CWE-1357","toolComponent":{"name":"CWE","guid":"c3a2b1d0-7f3e-4b2a-9c1d-5e6f7a8b9c0d"}},{"id":"CWE-353","toolComponent":{"name":"CWE","guid":"c3a2b1d0-7f3e-4b2a-9c1d-5e6f7a8b9c0d"}}]},{"ruleId":"D29","level":"error","message":{"text":"A security finding was recorded here. Its details are withheld on the public artifact \u2014 ask the repository owner for the full report."},"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"77acac134f1162cc6c17e6baf468faf6043bbf5869d3f7bdefbaae2a9ffcc6b0"},"taxa":[{"id":"CWE-1357","toolComponent":{"name":"CWE","guid":"c3a2b1d0-7f3e-4b2a-9c1d-5e6f7a8b9c0d"}},{"id":"CWE-353","toolComponent":{"name":"CWE","guid":"c3a2b1d0-7f3e-4b2a-9c1d-5e6f7a8b9c0d"}}]},{"ruleId":"D29","level":"error","message":{"text":"A security finding was recorded here. Its details are withheld on the public artifact \u2014 ask the repository owner for the full report."},"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"8d6eab37a8a4d9a4d97d2903db4c714cfaf71ca8acd8a974ca666f8e2c742215"},"taxa":[{"id":"CWE-1357","toolComponent":{"name":"CWE","guid":"c3a2b1d0-7f3e-4b2a-9c1d-5e6f7a8b9c0d"}},{"id":"CWE-353","toolComponent":{"name":"CWE","guid":"c3a2b1d0-7f3e-4b2a-9c1d-5e6f7a8b9c0d"}}]},{"ruleId":"D29","level":"error","message":{"text":"A security finding was recorded here. Its details are withheld on the public artifact \u2014 ask the repository owner for the full report."},"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"2e4878d27aaa95c06af3f937edf4b8e466b863fc5324b3d9f96111dcd0c6d11d"},"taxa":[{"id":"CWE-1357","toolComponent":{"name":"CWE","guid":"c3a2b1d0-7f3e-4b2a-9c1d-5e6f7a8b9c0d"}},{"id":"CWE-353","toolComponent":{"name":"CWE","guid":"c3a2b1d0-7f3e-4b2a-9c1d-5e6f7a8b9c0d"}}]},{"ruleId":"D29","level":"error","message":{"text":"A security finding was recorded here. Its details are withheld on the public artifact \u2014 ask the repository owner for the full report."},"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"43db6868a1703c599704b08e8146eed6fff47cc5123bfa7d017d769fc9695078"},"taxa":[{"id":"CWE-1357","toolComponent":{"name":"CWE","guid":"c3a2b1d0-7f3e-4b2a-9c1d-5e6f7a8b9c0d"}},{"id":"CWE-353","toolComponent":{"name":"CWE","guid":"c3a2b1d0-7f3e-4b2a-9c1d-5e6f7a8b9c0d"}}]},{"ruleId":"D29","level":"error","message":{"text":"A security finding was recorded here. Its details are withheld on the public artifact \u2014 ask the repository owner for the full report."},"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"693249723480b7d3690fbc9002e4acaa2fd5c4f5277d52948268b51530c89d1e"},"taxa":[{"id":"CWE-1357","toolComponent":{"name":"CWE","guid":"c3a2b1d0-7f3e-4b2a-9c1d-5e6f7a8b9c0d"}},{"id":"CWE-353","toolComponent":{"name":"CWE","guid":"c3a2b1d0-7f3e-4b2a-9c1d-5e6f7a8b9c0d"}}]},{"ruleId":"D29","level":"error","message":{"text":"A security finding was recorded here. Its details are withheld on the public artifact \u2014 ask the repository owner for the full report."},"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"f1b966c70d2e5f6ab697ac6d268d54938c60e802d8ea58ea6ff9cb7e10a35f70"},"taxa":[{"id":"CWE-78","toolComponent":{"name":"CWE","guid":"c3a2b1d0-7f3e-4b2a-9c1d-5e6f7a8b9c0d"}}]},{"ruleId":"D29","level":"error","message":{"text":"A security finding was recorded here. Its details are withheld on the public artifact \u2014 ask the repository owner for the full report."},"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"957b150e90b8de065e3fab913d6db8aa84cc38085b4826b482eaabde0c4cf347"},"taxa":[{"id":"CWE-1357","toolComponent":{"name":"CWE","guid":"c3a2b1d0-7f3e-4b2a-9c1d-5e6f7a8b9c0d"}},{"id":"CWE-353","toolComponent":{"name":"CWE","guid":"c3a2b1d0-7f3e-4b2a-9c1d-5e6f7a8b9c0d"}}]},{"ruleId":"D29","level":"warning","message":{"text":"A security finding was recorded here. Its details are withheld on the public artifact \u2014 ask the repository owner for the full report."},"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"5fca7eb1e7298a2615267821615aa5eeb20eb440796556617864883b1b1c5ded"},"taxa":[{"id":"CWE-1104","toolComponent":{"name":"CWE","guid":"c3a2b1d0-7f3e-4b2a-9c1d-5e6f7a8b9c0d"}},{"id":"CWE-1329","toolComponent":{"name":"CWE","guid":"c3a2b1d0-7f3e-4b2a-9c1d-5e6f7a8b9c0d"}}]},{"ruleId":"D34","level":"note","message":{"text":"Orphaned files with no living knowledge: 22 of 145 analysed file(s) have no living knowledge left \u2014 their last meaningful change has decayed away, so if one breaks, no one currently understands it (counted over production source files of roughly 2,400 bytes or more, excluding vendored, generated and example/demo trees and test files identified by path convention, largest first; 145 of the 208 production source files in this repository met that bar). None is large enough to earn a read-through of its own, so this row stands in for the per-file rows rather than raising one each \u2014 most significant first: Sources/GRPCReflectionService/Server/ReflectionService.swift, Performance/QPSBenchmark/Sources/QPSBenchmark/Runtime/NIO/NIOWorkerServiceImpl.swift, Performance/QPSBenchmark/Sources/QPSBenchmark/Runtime/Async/AsyncWorkerServiceImpl.swift, Performance/QPSBenchmark/Sources/QPSBenchmark/Runtime/NIO/NIOQPSClientImpl.swift, Performance/QPSBenchmark/Sources/QPSBenchmark/Runtime/Async/AsyncQPSClientImpl.swift, Sources/GRPCInteroperabilityTestsImplementation/TestServiceAsyncProvider.swift, Sources/GRPCReflectionService/Server/ReflectionServiceV1Alpha.swift, Sources/GRPC/AsyncAwaitSupport/GRPCChannel\u002BAsyncAwaitSupport.swift (and 14 more). Attach the read to the next change that touches one of them: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for, so the knowledge comes back at the cost of a change you were making anyway."},"locations":[],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"ce861fd78f6935114d3a342cb90ad25870f984e1042954fcbbe27c0e23be3658"}},{"ruleId":"D35","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Change coupling: ConnectionPool.swift \u2194 PooledChannel.swift: \u0060Sources/GRPC/ConnectionPool/ConnectionPool.swift\u0060 and \u0060Sources/GRPC/ConnectionPool/PooledChannel.swift\u0060 change together 50% of the time (5 of the 10 commits that touched whichever of the two files changed less often, counting a file under its earlier names as well \u2014 a repo-wide or module-wide sweep is evidence about the sweep rather than about any pair inside it and is left out of BOTH sides of this ratio, while a dependency bump, a formatter/rename sweep, or a commit whose edit to one of the two files was a tool directive such as //go:generate or whitespace only is left out of the shared count ONLY, so the two sides are not taken over identical commit sets). They sit in the same directory, and in this ecosystem sibling files there normally share one namespace/package \u2014 so a direct reference between them needs no import and this pass cannot see whether one exists. Read the pair before acting: if one file only DECLARES what the other consumes (a constants/types file beside its user), the co-change is definitional and the question is whether the split earns its keep; if they duplicate structure, extract the common part into a shared function or type they both call; if neither holds, the coupling is hidden and worth breaking. You can check this without leaving the row: of the 5 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are \u00606ee1ed29\u0060 Remove GRPCLogger (#1853); \u0060ec5b3963\u0060 Add a minimum connections configuration to the ConnectionPool (#1822); \u00606ec9effb\u0060 Allow clients to shutdown gracefully (#1308) \u2014 run \u0060git show\u0060 on any of them."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/GRPC/ConnectionPool/ConnectionPool.swift"},"region":{"startLine":1}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"b0dcab247a8cdcb069cc8b318669248015a725031b2e26ac36179b06ff436407"}},{"ruleId":"D36","level":"note","message":{"text":"A security finding was recorded here. Its details are withheld on the public artifact \u2014 ask the repository owner for the full report."},"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"1b213f6eedd4b140d0bc37bdf1496f72811a643f34064f12518b32e9e83bcfc7"}},{"ruleId":"D36","level":"note","message":{"text":"A security finding was recorded here. Its details are withheld on the public artifact \u2014 ask the repository owner for the full report."},"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"0e17f71490e4d120a48b2b2881ab866c93b272bef2febb673a3e8e42b2c288ab"}},{"ruleId":"D36","level":"note","message":{"text":"A security finding was recorded here. Its details are withheld on the public artifact \u2014 ask the repository owner for the full report."},"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"759dca709f1a032fb6f624ce672e6afb5558fce53ecf01fb73618c4d33923164"}},{"ruleId":"D36","level":"note","message":{"text":"A security finding was recorded here. Its details are withheld on the public artifact \u2014 ask the repository owner for the full report."},"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"eb00976a698a5d68999b7ee6d27206fd374e916853e7ff1ead5eed42386f043f"}},{"ruleId":"D36","level":"warning","message":{"text":"A security finding was recorded here. Its details are withheld on the public artifact \u2014 ask the repository owner for the full report."},"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"90f83b4fa27db32740afe9540c905f3c0499caed87f61049a8a903ecc95b41c3"}},{"ruleId":"D36","level":"note","message":{"text":"A security finding was recorded here. Its details are withheld on the public artifact \u2014 ask the repository owner for the full report."},"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"ace515990e7ee0f17b5c17e44dd168a5bdecf90804a3a3dd845cf05540978013"}},{"ruleId":"M2","level":"note","message":{"text":"No ADRs: No Architecture Decision Records found \u2014 no conventional ADR directory, no numbered \u0060NNNN-title\u0060 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."},"locations":[],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"670b3d6e36a756d63097d0dfbf90afd5fc761308800b9354894a07c3f4e4aa14"}},{"ruleId":"M4","level":"note","message":{"text":"README/code drift: README claims gRPC Swift 2 while the repository is gRPC Swift 1 \u2014 searched for: \u0060gRPC Swift 2\u0060. Each was matched case- and separator-insensitively against file and directory NAMES anywhere in the tree, and against the CONTENTS of manifest files (package.json, *.csproj, *.props, *.slnx, *.yml, Dockerfile); the README\u0027s own prose never counts, so a claim is never refuted by merely being made. Nothing outside that search was read \u2014 a footprint living only in a submodule, in a file type not listed here, or under a name none of those terms matches is not seen, and this row is then wrong."},"locations":[],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"343bbbd51ceb8de7a9ff88d79f7c797abf9b5921f8727b67b4d0f4f8a22c5e49"}},{"ruleId":"P3","level":"note","message":{"text":"No SAST: No static application security testing detected. For this repository\u0027s stack, add CodeQL\u0027s Swift pack (Swift/Xcode) (or \u0060semgrep --config=auto\u0060, which runs on any language) as a CI step. What was searched, so you can tell an absence from a miss: the 5278 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\u0027s web UI rather than in a committed file, or a tool whose name is none of those this check carries, is not seen \u2014 if that is your case the row is wrong, and saying so is more useful than adding a second scanner."},"locations":[],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"6e54424179c892f03ef2fd003130ac4bd43f39bbf3b1ca0a0143e25acb80ec87"}},{"ruleId":"P4","level":"note","message":{"text":"No release approval gate: The release is automated and no gate that pauses it for a human is DECLARED IN THIS REPOSITORY\u0027S PIPELINE FILES. What was read: every file under \u0060.github/workflows/\u0060, \u0060.forgejo/workflows/\u0060, \u0060.gitea/workflows/\u0060, \u0060.azuredevops/\u0060 and \u0060.azure-pipelines/\u0060, plus \u0060.gitlab-ci*\u0060 and \u0060azure-pipelines*\u0060 \u2014 with comment text stripped, so documenting a gate is not declaring one. What would have counted: GitLab\u0027s \u0060when: manual\u0060, CircleCI\u0027s \u0060type: approval\u0060, an Azure \u0060ManualValidation@\u0060 task or an \u0060approvals:\u0060 block, a Jenkins \u0060input\u0060 step, a \u0060uses:\u0060 step naming an approval action, an \u0060environment:\u0060 paired with \u0060reviewers\u0060 / \u0060required_reviewers\u0060 / \u0060protection\u0060 / \u0060wait-timer\u0060 / \u0060deployment_branch_policy\u0060, a draft-release step, a \u0060workflow_dispatch\u0060 promotion, or a release-event gate. \u2605 What this cannot see, because none of it is a file: a GitHub environment whose required reviewers are configured in repo SETTINGS, a branch protection rule, or an organisation deployment policy \u2014 all of them real, enforced gates that live outside the repository. If yours is one of those, this row is wrong and nothing in the tree could have told us. Otherwise: whatever the release trigger points at is published to users unreviewed, so a mistagged or unverified commit ships and the only remedy is a follow-up release."},"locations":[],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"6c11e2dbd483b4b423b95ac61bfcc7af1d55351b28a20d2b1105b31cfe38cc60"}},{"ruleId":"P6","level":"note","message":{"text":"No changelog: No CHANGELOG/HISTORY/RELEASES file \u2014 what shipped when isn\u0027t easy to reconstruct for support or audit. (Versioning/tagging makes releases traceable, but a changelog records the what.)"},"locations":[],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"dda5aa5aed8cbb292c3ef2b733bc138f614293ae6426c85e98bf31ef330d9415"}}],"taxonomies":[{"name":"CWE","guid":"c3a2b1d0-7f3e-4b2a-9c1d-5e6f7a8b9c0d","organization":"MITRE","informationUri":"https://cwe.mitre.org/","isComprehensive":false,"shortDescription":{"text":"The MITRE Common Weakness Enumeration (CWE)."},"taxa":[{"id":"CWE-1059","guid":"a2381a08-60f6-9554-a8b8-f3018cfaaca5","name":"Insufficient Technical Documentation","shortDescription":{"text":"Insufficient Technical Documentation"},"helpUri":"https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/1059.html"},{"id":"CWE-1104","guid":"4c918cb5-b2a6-6c55-9963-a44ee464305e","name":"CWE-1104","shortDescription":{"text":"CWE-1104"},"helpUri":"https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/1104.html"},{"id":"CWE-1329","guid":"f70f1c3f-4ccf-cb5e-bdd3-03ba4868d36d","name":"CWE-1329","shortDescription":{"text":"CWE-1329"},"helpUri":"https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/1329.html"},{"id":"CWE-1357","guid":"e4d2e772-757e-0a5c-bd7d-77052949d866","name":"Reliance on Insufficiently Trustworthy Component","shortDescription":{"text":"Reliance on Insufficiently Trustworthy Component"},"helpUri":"https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/1357.html"},{"id":"CWE-259","guid":"ae9ad959-fbb6-9d5e-892d-3dca66da0b69","name":"Use of Hard-coded Password","shortDescription":{"text":"Use of Hard-coded Password"},"helpUri":"https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/259.html"},{"id":"CWE-321","guid":"0ce564a5-a44c-3358-b3db-317712e6e019","name":"CWE-321","shortDescription":{"text":"CWE-321"},"helpUri":"https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/321.html"},{"id":"CWE-353","guid":"09d7e902-d4ee-f05d-ae6c-0a1554d0c18f","name":"CWE-353","shortDescription":{"text":"CWE-353"},"helpUri":"https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/353.html"},{"id":"CWE-494","guid":"b8a65e0d-e459-4a55-a931-fc1136482375","name":"Download of Code Without Integrity Check","shortDescription":{"text":"Download of Code Without Integrity Check"},"helpUri":"https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/494.html"},{"id":"CWE-77","guid":"332c8ade-6612-9f56-a06b-d8d90b1a8750","name":"Command Injection","shortDescription":{"text":"Command Injection"},"helpUri":"https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/77.html"},{"id":"CWE-78","guid":"2e31ceaf-c7ae-2e5e-9661-cfb1362789cf","name":"OS Command Injection","shortDescription":{"text":"OS Command Injection"},"helpUri":"https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/78.html"},{"id":"CWE-79","guid":"fd45580b-e8c4-fc5e-8c2f-aa8fab0b4dbf","name":"Cross-site Scripting (XSS)","shortDescription":{"text":"Cross-site Scripting (XSS)"},"helpUri":"https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/79.html"},{"id":"CWE-798","guid":"5e8f057d-fee3-995a-a0cb-9fc5b0d174d1","name":"Use of Hard-coded Credentials","shortDescription":{"text":"Use of Hard-coded Credentials"},"helpUri":"https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/798.html"},{"id":"CWE-89","guid":"6d08fdad-37eb-c150-bbf0-d7d946863407","name":"SQL Injection","shortDescription":{"text":"SQL Injection"},"helpUri":"https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/89.html"},{"id":"CWE-94","guid":"75e7f50c-6c2f-dd52-bf40-bf6c52b861fd","name":"Code Injection","shortDescription":{"text":"Code Injection"},"helpUri":"https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/94.html"}]}],"properties":{"codehealthPublication":{"public":true,"notice":"This is the PUBLIC form of this artifact. Findings are listed in full, but the details of SECURITY findings \u2014 which rule fired, in which file, on which line, and how to fix it \u2014 are deliberately withheld, and any secret-scanner results are excluded entirely. Where detail is absent here it was REMOVED FOR PUBLICATION; it is not missing from the analysis. The complete artifact is available from the repository owner.","securityFindingsRedacted":33,"secretScannerRunsExcluded":0}},"redactionTokens":["A security finding was recorded here. Its details are withheld on the public artifact \u2014 ask the repository owner for the full report."]}]}