{"$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":"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":"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"]},{"target":{"id":"A07:2025","toolComponent":{"name":"OWASP Top 10","guid":"7d1f0c2e-4b6a-4e39-9a51-0b2e8c3d5f61"}},"kinds":["relevant"]}],"properties":{"cwe":["CWE-798","CWE-259"],"owasp":"A07:2025"}},{"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":"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"]},{"target":{"id":"A07:2025","toolComponent":{"name":"OWASP Top 10","guid":"7d1f0c2e-4b6a-4e39-9a51-0b2e8c3d5f61"}},"kinds":["relevant"]}],"properties":{"cwe":["CWE-798","CWE-259"],"owasp":"A07:2025"}},{"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"]},{"target":{"id":"A05:2025","toolComponent":{"name":"OWASP Top 10","guid":"7d1f0c2e-4b6a-4e39-9a51-0b2e8c3d5f61"}},"kinds":["relevant"]}],"properties":{"cwe":["CWE-79","CWE-89","CWE-78","CWE-94","CWE-77"],"owasp":"A05:2025"}},{"id":"D30","name":"Dependency Vulnerabilities","shortDescription":{"text":"Dependency Vulnerabilities"},"helpUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev/dimensions/D30","relationships":[{"target":{"id":"CWE-1395","toolComponent":{"name":"CWE","guid":"c3a2b1d0-7f3e-4b2a-9c1d-5e6f7a8b9c0d"}},"kinds":["relevant"]},{"target":{"id":"CWE-937","toolComponent":{"name":"CWE","guid":"c3a2b1d0-7f3e-4b2a-9c1d-5e6f7a8b9c0d"}},"kinds":["relevant"]},{"target":{"id":"A03:2025","toolComponent":{"name":"OWASP Top 10","guid":"7d1f0c2e-4b6a-4e39-9a51-0b2e8c3d5f61"}},"kinds":["relevant"]}],"properties":{"cwe":["CWE-1395","CWE-937"],"owasp":"A03:2025"}},{"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"]},{"target":{"id":"A03:2025","toolComponent":{"name":"OWASP Top 10","guid":"7d1f0c2e-4b6a-4e39-9a51-0b2e8c3d5f61"}},"kinds":["relevant"]}],"properties":{"cwe":["CWE-1357","CWE-494"],"owasp":"A03:2025"}},{"id":"D43","name":"Malicious Dependencies","shortDescription":{"text":"Malicious Dependencies"},"helpUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev/dimensions/D43","relationships":[{"target":{"id":"CWE-506","toolComponent":{"name":"CWE","guid":"c3a2b1d0-7f3e-4b2a-9c1d-5e6f7a8b9c0d"}},"kinds":["relevant"]},{"target":{"id":"A08:2025","toolComponent":{"name":"OWASP Top 10","guid":"7d1f0c2e-4b6a-4e39-9a51-0b2e8c3d5f61"}},"kinds":["relevant"]}],"properties":{"cwe":["CWE-506"],"owasp":"A08:2025"}},{"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":"ED5","name":"Idempotency","shortDescription":{"text":"Idempotency"},"helpUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev/dimensions/ED5"},{"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":"P1","name":"CI/CD gates","shortDescription":{"text":"CI/CD gates"},"helpUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev/dimensions/P1"},{"id":"P10","name":"Library API \u0026 versioning","shortDescription":{"text":"Library API \u0026 versioning"},"helpUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev/dimensions/P10"},{"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":"P6","name":"Release Hygiene","shortDescription":{"text":"Release Hygiene"},"helpUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev/dimensions/P6"},{"id":"PF3","name":"Async \u0026 latency hygiene","shortDescription":{"text":"Async \u0026 latency hygiene"},"helpUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev/dimensions/PF3"},{"id":"X10","name":"Duplicated predicate","shortDescription":{"text":"Duplicated predicate"},"helpUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev/dimensions/X10"},{"id":"X14","name":"Bypassable address classification","shortDescription":{"text":"Bypassable address classification"},"helpUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev/dimensions/X14"},{"id":"X20","name":"Mistyped argument guard","shortDescription":{"text":"Mistyped argument guard"},"helpUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev/dimensions/X20"},{"id":"X21","name":"Side-effecting pattern guard","shortDescription":{"text":"Side-effecting pattern guard"},"helpUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev/dimensions/X21"},{"id":"X26","name":"Unsynchronised callback handoff","shortDescription":{"text":"Unsynchronised callback handoff"},"helpUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev/dimensions/X26"},{"id":"X28","name":"Index access outside its own emptiness guard","shortDescription":{"text":"Index access outside its own emptiness guard"},"helpUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev/dimensions/X28"},{"id":"X3","name":"Exception handling","shortDescription":{"text":"Exception handling"},"helpUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev/dimensions/X3"},{"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":"X7","name":"Silent fallback defaults","shortDescription":{"text":"Silent fallback defaults"},"helpUri":"https://codehealth.canine.dev/dimensions/X7"},{"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":"Text.init (cyclomatic 45): Text.init has cyclomatic complexity 45 (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/SwiftNavigation/TextState.swift"},"region":{"startLine":538}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"6e675c7c127f34464095ddf4e2b69a49810b3512987c7829612c6b7d59fd8b8d"}},{"ruleId":"D1","level":"warning","message":{"text":"NavigationStackController.viewDidLoad (cyclomatic 30): NavigationStackController.viewDidLoad has cyclomatic complexity 30 (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/UIKitNavigation/Navigation/NavigationStackController.swift"},"region":{"startLine":67}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"6c6c95eb88ddbdb0bf5412ede5c08467448f6b944b3a947db544ad0707da6d2b"}},{"ruleId":"D2","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Text.init (cognitive 49): Text.init has cognitive complexity 49 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 28 (42 pts), match/switch 3 (5 pts), boolean chains 2 (nesting depth added 16). 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/SwiftNavigation/TextState.swift"},"region":{"startLine":538}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"e214a39cf516f7bc1859bafa80bda2bfdc571d2ffa06a2a68bbcf64a88308a31"}},{"ruleId":"D2","level":"warning","message":{"text":"NavigationStackController.viewDidLoad (cognitive 43): NavigationStackController.viewDidLoad has cognitive complexity 43 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 16 (25 pts), boolean chains 12, loops 2 (4 pts), ternaries 1 (2 pts) (nesting depth added 12). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/UIKitNavigation/Navigation/NavigationStackController.swift"},"region":{"startLine":67}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"e187b52e69139209242620690aae201bdfd5bb7e980f4785b46b8e1664af0821"}},{"ruleId":"D2","level":"warning","message":{"text":"UIViewController.destination (cognitive 27): UIViewController.destination has cognitive complexity 27 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 14 (25 pts), boolean chains 2 (nesting depth added 11). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/UIKitNavigation/Navigation/Presentation.swift"},"region":{"startLine":375}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"b6521d0a26a0a7f74a3c68a8e9722de29ea80cdfdf6b93ea52e7a8398250133e"}},{"ruleId":"D3","level":"warning","message":{"text":"TooManyMethods: TextState: TooManyMethods \u2014 33 methods. The bar is 30 methods; this is 3 over it, 1.10\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/SwiftNavigation/TextState.swift"},"region":{"startLine":50}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"a4780e84bae3371dd491247e8708c00c4906e6d3f013a93833308dde2e37521e"}},{"ruleId":"D3","level":"warning","message":{"text":"MethodTooLong: Text.init: MethodTooLong \u2014 init runs 106 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 6 over it, 1.06\u00D7 the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body \u2014 the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name \u2014 into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/SwiftNavigation/TextState.swift"},"region":{"startLine":538}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"634abdfd6fed22aab9a838024c0913f4b6371f6a74d2f61bc3b5c2f28ee534ae"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (22\u201323 lines \u00D7 2): Sources/SwiftUINavigation/Alert\u002BState.swift:116-137 | Sources/SwiftUINavigation/Alert\u002BState.swift:148-170 \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/SwiftUINavigation/Alert\u002BState.swift:148\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/SwiftUINavigation/Alert\u002BState.swift"},"region":{"startLine":116}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"264271018454ae4786415e6fcdf21a3f2b24744160e8908b8f3163195648d665"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (14\u201315 lines \u00D7 2): Sources/SwiftNavigation/UIBindable.swift:77-90 | Sources/SwiftNavigation/UIBindable.swift:101-115 \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/SwiftNavigation/UIBindable.swift:77\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/SwiftNavigation/UIBindable.swift"},"region":{"startLine":77}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"e8ab9aa55d65821ce90f81ddbd3100c1cb8374b580abc5d53eed829d4663d2e5"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (15 lines \u00D7 2): Sources/SwiftUINavigation/Alert.swift:265-279 | Sources/SwiftUINavigation/ConfirmationDialog.swift:181-195 \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/SwiftUINavigation/Alert.swift:265\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/SwiftUINavigation/Alert.swift"},"region":{"startLine":265}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"1813a2c5eba665547e4327c99a5ee62bc40d495c040bba18d03a3094e3c84898"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (14 lines \u00D7 2): Sources/SwiftUINavigation/ConfirmationDialog\u002BState.swift:53-66 | Sources/SwiftUINavigation/ConfirmationDialog\u002BState.swift:86-99 \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/SwiftUINavigation/ConfirmationDialog\u002BState.swift:53\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/SwiftUINavigation/ConfirmationDialog\u002BState.swift"},"region":{"startLine":53}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"70bac9e16d30ee5a623f3d758ddc20d6f2001168088b6f19892ca4ce8f5f8d79"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (8\u20139 lines \u00D7 3): Sources/SwiftNavigation/AlertState.swift:158-166 | Sources/SwiftNavigation/ConfirmationDialogState.swift:148-155 | Sources/SwiftNavigation/ConfirmationDialogState.swift:168-175 \u2014 there are 3 copies across 2 file(s) \u2014 more copies than files, so at least one file holds the block twice. Extract it once into a single shared function every call site can reach and call it from all 3 sites; resolving a subset leaves the remainder to drift apart. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at \u0060Sources/SwiftNavigation/AlertState.swift:158\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 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/SwiftNavigation/AlertState.swift"},"region":{"startLine":158}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"36b4de4a50efeed27ac5a236370aede08cb961b56033cf3f30c5c3d6afee8fe0"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (9 lines \u00D7 2): Sources/SwiftNavigation/ButtonState.swift:237-245 | Sources/SwiftNavigation/ButtonState.swift:260-268 \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/SwiftNavigation/ButtonState.swift:237\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/SwiftNavigation/ButtonState.swift"},"region":{"startLine":237}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"8a86664fa12dc2720552fafa376a222b771934d4f169cd0f40d96556c08f7216"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (8 lines \u00D7 2): Sources/UIKitNavigation/Navigation/Presentation.swift:94-101 | Sources/UIKitNavigation/Navigation/Presentation.swift:124-131 \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/UIKitNavigation/Navigation/Presentation.swift:94\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 first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: the declarations holding them bind \u0060onDismiss\u0060 to \u0060(() -\u003E Void)? = nil\u0060 in one and \u0060onDismiss\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/UIKitNavigation/Navigation/Presentation.swift"},"region":{"startLine":94}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"c86e8f37cd50f2ae312e16cc78d9ddbfd6793271b514bd7cc495cd99b1c32774"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (7 lines \u00D7 2): Sources/SwiftUINavigation/Popover.swift:53-59 | Sources/SwiftUINavigation/Popover.swift:124-130 \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/SwiftUINavigation/Popover.swift:53\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/SwiftUINavigation/Popover.swift"},"region":{"startLine":53}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"5b8dfa397f89281413b4282f11942f3aeb7f3c82fa75f9b8880a05fa0f538a4b"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (5 lines \u00D7 2): Sources/SwiftUINavigation/FullScreenCover.swift:51-55 | Sources/SwiftUINavigation/Sheet.swift:55-59 \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/SwiftUINavigation/FullScreenCover.swift:51\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/SwiftUINavigation/FullScreenCover.swift"},"region":{"startLine":51}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"b4dcf29418e731346fe7e6e9b9bf266fa0d41dc5d97cf0a514be62aa0c742dc9"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (5 lines \u00D7 2): Sources/SwiftNavigation/AlertState.swift:181-185 | Sources/SwiftNavigation/ConfirmationDialogState.swift:217-221 \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/SwiftNavigation/ConfirmationDialogState.swift:224\u0060 calls \u0060available\u0060 and \u0060Sources/SwiftNavigation/AlertState.swift:188\u0060 does not \u2014 after which the two agree again for 3 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/SwiftNavigation/AlertState.swift"},"region":{"startLine":181}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"c82ad95cf5d86d898c978400c798d48820499e006baa559b9db38a9b39cff986"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (5 lines \u00D7 2): Sources/SwiftNavigation/AlertState.swift:189-193 | Sources/SwiftNavigation/ConfirmationDialogState.swift:226-230 \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 before the matched lines, \u0060Sources/SwiftNavigation/ConfirmationDialogState.swift:224\u0060 calls \u0060available\u0060 and \u0060Sources/SwiftNavigation/AlertState.swift:186\u0060 does not \u2014 after which the two agree again for 3 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/SwiftNavigation/AlertState.swift"},"region":{"startLine":189}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"399b9e882223cccf52b14dabc8b0fef4c7fb18d6110f016d41fe81890896e80f"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (5 lines \u00D7 2): Sources/AppKitNavigation/UIBinding.swift:9-13 | Sources/UIKitNavigation/UIBinding.swift:9-13 \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":"Sources/AppKitNavigation/UIBinding.swift"},"region":{"startLine":9}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"9f798ffb1cb260da875a1d81ec87fc74bc3cc0eb35fe4eee032bb6eccb2d7608"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Members sharing a duplicated core (10 members, 50\u002B identical tokens): Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/BasicsNavigationViewController.swift:13-106 | Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/ConciseEnumNavigationViewController.swift:23-139 | Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/EnumControlsViewController.swift:27-101 | Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/ErasedNavigationStackController.swift:38-75 | Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/ErasedNavigationStackController.swift:88-131 | Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/ErasedNavigationStackController.swift:144-195 | Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/ErasedNavigationStackController.swift:208-255 | Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/MinimalObservationViewController.swift:18-65 | Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/StaticNavigationStackController.swift:57-108 | Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/StaticNavigationStackController.swift:121-168 \u2014 These 10 members share a duplicated core: a run of at least 50 identical tokens appears in every one of them. That run is NOT broken out as duplicated-block rows below \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 10 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 10 times."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/BasicsNavigationViewController.swift"},"region":{"startLine":13}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"874c82d00bce8e9de0507d067adae39b24dd4d77c8639b69a434f4a98d036c24"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (28 lines \u00D7 2): Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/StaticNavigationStackController.swift:57-84 | Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/StaticNavigationStackController.swift:121-148 \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 \u0060Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/StaticNavigationStackController.swift:57\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/CaseStudies/UIKit/StaticNavigationStackController.swift"},"region":{"startLine":57}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"65dba9d4f6d1c286e3427fcaf272dc68f623e515bc1f428874ad2e67fde4ccb8"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (17 lines \u00D7 3): Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/ErasedNavigationStackController.swift:173-189 | Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/ErasedNavigationStackController.swift:233-249 | Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/StaticNavigationStackController.swift:146-162 \u2014 before extracting anything, compare \u0060Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/ErasedNavigationStackController.swift\u0060 and \u0060Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/StaticNavigationStackController.swift\u0060 as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 7 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 84 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, 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":"Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/ErasedNavigationStackController.swift"},"region":{"startLine":173}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"91240b9c1e65d54a61cd4a6756cdd859fa46cefd3a9b6d343366cd0647111fe4"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (14 lines \u00D7 4): Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/ErasedNavigationStackController.swift:107-120 | Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/ErasedNavigationStackController.swift:170-183 | Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/ErasedNavigationStackController.swift:230-243 | Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/StaticNavigationStackController.swift:143-156 \u2014 before extracting anything, compare \u0060Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/ErasedNavigationStackController.swift\u0060 and \u0060Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/StaticNavigationStackController.swift\u0060 as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 7 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 84 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, 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 \u0060Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/ErasedNavigationStackController.swift:107\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":"Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/ErasedNavigationStackController.swift"},"region":{"startLine":107}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"86782a37b4c1e612d9687bc5c5814e1b7f674c61d935f06f8de681d89141b0f1"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (14 lines \u00D7 4): Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/ErasedNavigationStackController.swift:177-190 | Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/ErasedNavigationStackController.swift:237-250 | Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/StaticNavigationStackController.swift:90-103 | Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/StaticNavigationStackController.swift:150-163 \u2014 before extracting anything, compare \u0060Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/ErasedNavigationStackController.swift\u0060 and \u0060Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/StaticNavigationStackController.swift\u0060 as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 7 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 84 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, 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 \u0060Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/ErasedNavigationStackController.swift:177\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":"Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/ErasedNavigationStackController.swift"},"region":{"startLine":177}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"62083dc227bf50fa7988b18eba40f091dfba6c277580736ad003fc4bad0aa6e3"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (13 lines \u00D7 3): Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/ErasedNavigationStackController.swift:100-112 | Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/ErasedNavigationStackController.swift:156-168 | Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/ErasedNavigationStackController.swift:216-228 \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 \u0060Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/ErasedNavigationStackController.swift:100\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":"Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/ErasedNavigationStackController.swift"},"region":{"startLine":100}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"e726de4641b2905c59352a9065f3db5aee2fb2d429d0f954240b71485767ea0d"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (12 lines \u00D7 5): Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/BasicsNavigationViewController.swift:38-50 | Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/ErasedNavigationStackController.swift:180-191 | Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/ErasedNavigationStackController.swift:240-251 | Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/StaticNavigationStackController.swift:93-104 | Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/StaticNavigationStackController.swift:153-164 \u2014 there are 5 copies across 3 file(s) \u2014 more copies than files, so at least one file holds the block twice. Extract it once into a single shared function every call site can reach and call it from all 5 sites; resolving a subset leaves the remainder to drift apart. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at \u0060Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/BasicsNavigationViewController.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":"Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/BasicsNavigationViewController.swift"},"region":{"startLine":38}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"a50836a97dd9eb8d821fded840688aa6bfd4d25ed0ffa38dc412efbad7e97209"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (11\u201312 lines \u00D7 3): Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/BasicsNavigationViewController.swift:46-56 | Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/ConciseEnumNavigationViewController.swift:59-69 | Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/EnumControlsViewController.swift:76-87 \u2014 before extracting anything, compare \u0060Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/BasicsNavigationViewController.swift\u0060 and \u0060Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/ConciseEnumNavigationViewController.swift\u0060 as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 3 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 33 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, 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 \u0060Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/BasicsNavigationViewController.swift:46\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. 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. \u2605 These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, \u0060Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/EnumControlsViewController.swift:74\u0060 calls \u0060UIEdgeInsets\u0060 and \u0060Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/BasicsNavigationViewController.swift:44\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":"Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/BasicsNavigationViewController.swift"},"region":{"startLine":46}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"cb5cacc3de85b11c9439843369cb6f4f328c527a0b835a2824c6c9909a58f035"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (10\u201311 lines \u00D7 8): Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/BasicsNavigationViewController.swift:41-51 | Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/ConciseEnumNavigationViewController.swift:54-64 | Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/ErasedNavigationStackController.swift:63-72 | Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/ErasedNavigationStackController.swift:119-128 | Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/ErasedNavigationStackController.swift:183-192 | Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/ErasedNavigationStackController.swift:243-252 | Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/StaticNavigationStackController.swift:96-105 | Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/StaticNavigationStackController.swift:156-165 \u2014 before extracting anything, compare \u0060Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/BasicsNavigationViewController.swift\u0060 and \u0060Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/ConciseEnumNavigationViewController.swift\u0060 as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 3 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 33 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, 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 \u0060Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/BasicsNavigationViewController.swift:41\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":"Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/BasicsNavigationViewController.swift"},"region":{"startLine":41}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"037a934197350ca87f53db877c38ab32b4d066cfa064c32642f1f95d273ad74f"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (8\u201310 lines \u00D7 10): Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/BasicsNavigationViewController.swift:45-53 | Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/ConciseEnumNavigationViewController.swift:58-66 | Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/EnumControlsViewController.swift:75-84 | Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/ErasedNavigationStackController.swift:67-74 | Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/ErasedNavigationStackController.swift:123-130 | Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/ErasedNavigationStackController.swift:187-194 | Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/ErasedNavigationStackController.swift:247-254 | Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/MinimalObservationViewController.swift:42-50 | Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/StaticNavigationStackController.swift:100-107 | Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/StaticNavigationStackController.swift:160-167 \u2014 before extracting anything, compare \u0060Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/BasicsNavigationViewController.swift\u0060 and \u0060Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/ConciseEnumNavigationViewController.swift\u0060 as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 3 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 33 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, 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. \u2605 These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, \u0060Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/EnumControlsViewController.swift:74\u0060 calls \u0060UIEdgeInsets\u0060 and \u0060Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/BasicsNavigationViewController.swift:44\u0060 does not \u2014 after which the two agree again for 3 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/BasicsNavigationViewController.swift"},"region":{"startLine":45}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"3df0590f6e8ca5057c666f543b83384446f2997572fab3cc58ec497687795af9"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (10 lines \u00D7 4): Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/ErasedNavigationStackController.swift:46-55 | Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/ErasedNavigationStackController.swift:96-105 | Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/ErasedNavigationStackController.swift:152-161 | Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/ErasedNavigationStackController.swift:212-221 \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 \u0060Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/ErasedNavigationStackController.swift:46\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 before the matched lines, \u0060Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/ErasedNavigationStackController.swift:42\u0060 calls \u0060navigationDestination\u0060, \u0060NumberFeatureViewController\u0060 and \u0060Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/ErasedNavigationStackController.swift:210\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":"Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/ErasedNavigationStackController.swift"},"region":{"startLine":46}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"b697071ead1c5d8de9ccd5b9eda86ccc56a603c11469c6f787b61f0346700ef6"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (9 lines \u00D7 2): Examples/CaseStudies/SwiftUI/EnumNavigation.swift:51-61 | Examples/CaseStudies/SwiftUI/OptionalNavigation.swift:51-59 \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 \u0060Examples/CaseStudies/SwiftUI/EnumNavigation.swift:51\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 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":"Examples/CaseStudies/SwiftUI/EnumNavigation.swift"},"region":{"startLine":51}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"ba33df5e74eb0895536b9843f0355426a1b94ad89ddb31fa7db25b7c1ef9845b"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (9 lines \u00D7 2): Examples/CaseStudies/SwiftUI/EnumNavigation.swift:100-108 | Examples/CaseStudies/SwiftUI/OptionalNavigation.swift:87-95 \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 \u0060Examples/CaseStudies/SwiftUI/EnumNavigation.swift:100\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":"Examples/CaseStudies/SwiftUI/EnumNavigation.swift"},"region":{"startLine":100}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"ee9967688992351830a8c3fc092fd4e9449a3a1bb08661226288a26799af70ba"}},{"ruleId":"D4","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Duplicated block (5 lines \u00D7 2): Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/ErasedNavigationStackController.swift:80-84 | Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/StaticNavigationStackController.swift:113-117 \u2014 before extracting anything, compare \u0060Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/ErasedNavigationStackController.swift\u0060 and \u0060Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/StaticNavigationStackController.swift\u0060 as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 7 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 84 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, 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":"Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/ErasedNavigationStackController.swift"},"region":{"startLine":80}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"5a739827bebf43739325ae6e5d66de5c5d58ba95f4d4b69c44b65dd4d3727fbd"}},{"ruleId":"D6","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Low cohesion: Binding (LCOM4 4): Binding\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":"Sources/SwiftNavigation/Bind.swift"},"region":{"startLine":65}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"28160ee297f5d9aa8ea42700af2eb44dd59f81ad43908067697bd4d7659290af"}},{"ruleId":"D10","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Skipped test: testDestinationCannotReplaceOtherDestination: Skipped \u2014 throws XCTSkip"},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Tests/SwiftUINavigationTests/BindingTests.swift"},"region":{"startLine":39}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"984f640c2da5b083662166fbdb4c918d076f32a51c8d3e8b51f91eb12c0aa354"}},{"ruleId":"D10","level":"note","message":{"text":"No direct assertions: testMutateBinding: No conventional assertion call was detected, and 53 of 63 tests in \u0060CaseStudiesTests\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":"Examples/CaseStudiesTests/NavigationPathTests.swift"},"region":{"startLine":7}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"7bbe23c229a8785498a54fa51786b6b6d3aabb55618d35671990dae52d20831b"}},{"ruleId":"D10","level":"note","message":{"text":"No direct assertions: testHeterogenuousPath: No conventional assertion call was detected, and 53 of 63 tests in \u0060CaseStudiesTests\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":"Examples/CaseStudiesTests/NavigationPathTests.swift"},"region":{"startLine":35}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"befb66c91077e8411ed53afb845b53b839f38c22d3ff5e3a9d1fec038f1d2e56"}},{"ruleId":"D10","level":"note","message":{"text":"No direct assertions: testDeepLink: No conventional assertion call was detected, and 53 of 63 tests in \u0060CaseStudiesTests\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":"Examples/CaseStudiesTests/NavigationPathTests.swift"},"region":{"startLine":66}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"39d63498b2ed3449de510a87a84402f2d590a3e96d68cd200ca18202beca28d4"}},{"ruleId":"D10","level":"note","message":{"text":"No direct assertions: testPushAndPopStaticPath: No conventional assertion call was detected, and 53 of 63 tests in \u0060CaseStudiesTests\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":"Examples/CaseStudiesTests/NavigationPathTests.swift"},"region":{"startLine":81}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"8335fcf336a02967ceae83f8e4f0ebd2f6376b706f7cb94d295120d482be7804"}},{"ruleId":"D10","level":"note","message":{"text":"No direct assertions: testPushAndPopTypeErasedPath: No conventional assertion call was detected, and 53 of 63 tests in \u0060CaseStudiesTests\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":"Examples/CaseStudiesTests/NavigationPathTests.swift"},"region":{"startLine":121}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"7bfec8ec91a2366db1357726e03ac689c83b6fca333cf83c42d5a0ac1e5c2a60"}},{"ruleId":"D10","level":"note","message":{"text":"No direct assertions: testDeepLink_UnrecognizedType: No conventional assertion call was detected, and 53 of 63 tests in \u0060CaseStudiesTests\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":"Examples/CaseStudiesTests/NavigationPathTests.swift"},"region":{"startLine":175}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"24b9faf6933c4ca15058bdabead000f76850c88390233dcbf2ca50c751936e51"}},{"ruleId":"D10","level":"note","message":{"text":"No direct assertions: testAppend_UnrecognizedType: No conventional assertion call was detected, and 53 of 63 tests in \u0060CaseStudiesTests\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":"Examples/CaseStudiesTests/NavigationPathTests.swift"},"region":{"startLine":198}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"9e30566ced20eedf907c58cb33d521025fbd666757754dc90505ff18c5dee146"}},{"ruleId":"D10","level":"note","message":{"text":"No direct assertions: testPush_UnrecognizedType: No conventional assertion call was detected, and 53 of 63 tests in \u0060CaseStudiesTests\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":"Examples/CaseStudiesTests/NavigationPathTests.swift"},"region":{"startLine":224}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"f1354caa6a337e22b5065757de47bc96f44eae820d3088e55de4857397819218"}},{"ruleId":"D10","level":"note","message":{"text":"No direct assertions: testDecodePath: No conventional assertion call was detected, and 53 of 63 tests in \u0060CaseStudiesTests\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":"Examples/CaseStudiesTests/NavigationPathTests.swift"},"region":{"startLine":250}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"72f9c15a778aa7e5e1ad78b1f0d93b52c9e59a4fa334a9c0db2efddbce89c96c"}},{"ruleId":"D10","level":"note","message":{"text":"No direct assertions: testDecodePath_Laziness: No conventional assertion call was detected, and 53 of 63 tests in \u0060CaseStudiesTests\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":"Examples/CaseStudiesTests/NavigationPathTests.swift"},"region":{"startLine":289}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"2c29ac30c5e0f35b9b99529c52f75ed846c20af2671156283bd37d9176d766ec"}},{"ruleId":"D10","level":"note","message":{"text":"No direct assertions: testDecodePath_NestedNavigationDestination: No conventional assertion call was detected, and 53 of 63 tests in \u0060CaseStudiesTests\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":"Examples/CaseStudiesTests/NavigationPathTests.swift"},"region":{"startLine":328}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"176261679e12a7cd4c7148de775ff92e13e0cee8c588ba064050f581bdd9d3fe"}},{"ruleId":"D10","level":"note","message":{"text":"No direct assertions: testDecodePath_NestedNavigationDestination_UnrecognizedType: No conventional assertion call was detected, and 53 of 63 tests in \u0060CaseStudiesTests\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":"Examples/CaseStudiesTests/NavigationPathTests.swift"},"region":{"startLine":359}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"aac48fda1516fd7add35a3d9d8907a24f9e6159005a733ad568f4431eefbd562"}},{"ruleId":"D10","level":"note","message":{"text":"No direct assertions: testDecodePath_UnrecognizedType: No conventional assertion call was detected, and 53 of 63 tests in \u0060CaseStudiesTests\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":"Examples/CaseStudiesTests/NavigationPathTests.swift"},"region":{"startLine":401}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"a01276cae36d7f265f73cd96f488ad51fa9b24d751ab9eec5b642646cf1b74ce"}},{"ruleId":"D10","level":"note","message":{"text":"No direct assertions: testPushMultipleFeaturesAtOnce_LazyNavigationDestination: No conventional assertion call was detected, and 53 of 63 tests in \u0060CaseStudiesTests\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":"Examples/CaseStudiesTests/NavigationPathTests.swift"},"region":{"startLine":441}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"aebcf8413c89df31efd5ee2e5b48af0ed622e0f7d6035a8641208c6302188013"}},{"ruleId":"D10","level":"note","message":{"text":"No direct assertions: testPushMultipleFeaturesAtOnce_EagerNavigationDestination: No conventional assertion call was detected, and 53 of 63 tests in \u0060CaseStudiesTests\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":"Examples/CaseStudiesTests/NavigationPathTests.swift"},"region":{"startLine":468}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"c9ac7cc3e0f13b30ab47f2faa513f5dd161909600a07bd76a273ede45b0bdeab"}},{"ruleId":"D10","level":"note","message":{"text":"No direct assertions: testRegisterNavigationDestinationTypeMultipleTimes_LastOneWins: No conventional assertion call was detected, and 53 of 63 tests in \u0060CaseStudiesTests\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":"Examples/CaseStudiesTests/NavigationPathTests.swift"},"region":{"startLine":487}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"55260a7fd5b7542ee6dae82973c13cad0abf008a213657c21a73cd2d514e2953"}},{"ruleId":"D10","level":"note","message":{"text":"No direct assertions: testMutatingBinding: No conventional assertion call was detected, and 53 of 63 tests in \u0060CaseStudiesTests\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":"Examples/CaseStudiesTests/NavigationStackTests.swift"},"region":{"startLine":6}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"b4663c488cb3317114bd9b9dee8957916b2e1122f09bb159bd7068a2975613db"}},{"ruleId":"D10","level":"note","message":{"text":"No direct assertions: testAppendSameData: No conventional assertion call was detected, and 53 of 63 tests in \u0060CaseStudiesTests\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":"Examples/CaseStudiesTests/NavigationStackTests.swift"},"region":{"startLine":34}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"97f42ee2a05de01faf29936431a3c203911a500930126dc6b364e375621a30a5"}},{"ruleId":"D10","level":"note","message":{"text":"No direct assertions: testDeepLink: No conventional assertion call was detected, and 53 of 63 tests in \u0060CaseStudiesTests\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":"Examples/CaseStudiesTests/NavigationStackTests.swift"},"region":{"startLine":52}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"c4efbf34a3f52d4e0eaf0d134c04b22ccf997d0519b2ec3bb748b18abac8a1a6"}},{"ruleId":"D10","level":"note","message":{"text":"No direct assertions: testManualPopLast: No conventional assertion call was detected, and 53 of 63 tests in \u0060CaseStudiesTests\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":"Examples/CaseStudiesTests/NavigationStackTests.swift"},"region":{"startLine":70}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"a69a4fc6f058a41ca90376e975c1ec10686da688bcb52463ebe17ffdb91b0bc2"}},{"ruleId":"D10","level":"note","message":{"text":"No direct assertions: testManualPopMiddle: No conventional assertion call was detected, and 53 of 63 tests in \u0060CaseStudiesTests\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":"Examples/CaseStudiesTests/NavigationStackTests.swift"},"region":{"startLine":89}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"1dd7b0f13483220dad9e07850f07c478a5f63d2f0355ab264b1e3e169e0fd834"}},{"ruleId":"D10","level":"note","message":{"text":"No direct assertions: testAppendMultipleValuesAtOnce: No conventional assertion call was detected, and 53 of 63 tests in \u0060CaseStudiesTests\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":"Examples/CaseStudiesTests/NavigationStackTests.swift"},"region":{"startLine":107}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"54f191c7f96136119f81d8dd03a6a6e5bbcbaab20e39fbbc5c92ce63569df6ea"}},{"ruleId":"D10","level":"note","message":{"text":"No direct assertions: testRemoveMultipleValuesAtOnce: No conventional assertion call was detected, and 53 of 63 tests in \u0060CaseStudiesTests\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":"Examples/CaseStudiesTests/NavigationStackTests.swift"},"region":{"startLine":135}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"9ff0791a3b1645213161335121313b125e052aceee22080e2032cf163fba947d"}},{"ruleId":"D10","level":"note","message":{"text":"No direct assertions: testReorderStack: No conventional assertion call was detected, and 53 of 63 tests in \u0060CaseStudiesTests\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":"Examples/CaseStudiesTests/NavigationStackTests.swift"},"region":{"startLine":174}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"6534bbd6f000481df2f3b4be67ae51d82abc9ce96dfa3307c84a96896a47f5fa"}},{"ruleId":"D10","level":"note","message":{"text":"No direct assertions: testPresents_IsPresented: No conventional assertion call was detected, and 53 of 63 tests in \u0060CaseStudiesTests\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":"Examples/CaseStudiesTests/PresentationTests.swift"},"region":{"startLine":5}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"5559d6cd7d6f430eb475323a21588ed3ec8a80992ceaf12943ac500b56a975df"}},{"ruleId":"D10","level":"note","message":{"text":"No direct assertions: testPresents_Item: No conventional assertion call was detected, and 53 of 63 tests in \u0060CaseStudiesTests\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":"Examples/CaseStudiesTests/PresentationTests.swift"},"region":{"startLine":25}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"d7f6ff3ccdce3f71022a335b9e06a7e22e48d7585a82a8418fbdd20152b48e5e"}},{"ruleId":"D10","level":"note","message":{"text":"No direct assertions: testPresents_Dismissal: No conventional assertion call was detected, and 53 of 63 tests in \u0060CaseStudiesTests\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":"Examples/CaseStudiesTests/PresentationTests.swift"},"region":{"startLine":45}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"350d94d26e5ce78943ea170ed9c6a51492be0935928121cc9e01484f614d6176"}},{"ruleId":"D10","level":"note","message":{"text":"No direct assertions: testPresents_TraitDismissal: No conventional assertion call was detected, and 53 of 63 tests in \u0060CaseStudiesTests\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":"Examples/CaseStudiesTests/PresentationTests.swift"},"region":{"startLine":74}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"2d5c4e8227edfd59015c069d5c4ba589345b44fbf76ef79e29fc7d4d99fa01b7"}},{"ruleId":"D10","level":"note","message":{"text":"No direct assertions: testPresents_DeepLink: No conventional assertion call was detected, and 53 of 63 tests in \u0060CaseStudiesTests\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":"Examples/CaseStudiesTests/PresentationTests.swift"},"region":{"startLine":94}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"86d1e95887508830282123b92e444456caff8bff593afaad09b50d5cdc460ee0"}},{"ruleId":"D10","level":"note","message":{"text":"No direct assertions: testPresents_DeepLink_EarlyViewDidLoad: No conventional assertion call was detected, and 53 of 63 tests in \u0060CaseStudiesTests\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":"Examples/CaseStudiesTests/PresentationTests.swift"},"region":{"startLine":107}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"0dc46cd526af1d3574e20a0c08998671e6f35e707d9958f57bc61a10946104d4"}},{"ruleId":"D10","level":"note","message":{"text":"No direct assertions: testPresents_ChangePresentedScreenInPresented: No conventional assertion call was detected, and 53 of 63 tests in \u0060CaseStudiesTests\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":"Examples/CaseStudiesTests/PresentationTests.swift"},"region":{"startLine":140}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"1bb9dfcd33800db62defa7f66ddbceb156f6e619df6a2909ecf8d29c0a7c0e99"}},{"ruleId":"D10","level":"note","message":{"text":"No direct assertions: testPushViewController_IsPushed: No conventional assertion call was detected, and 53 of 63 tests in \u0060CaseStudiesTests\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":"Examples/CaseStudiesTests/PresentationTests.swift"},"region":{"startLine":166}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"c8f9644661468813eb3b4b9dde04afbd6980d652a480e0f04f9071d364e52170"}},{"ruleId":"D10","level":"note","message":{"text":"No direct assertions: testPushViewController_Item: No conventional assertion call was detected, and 53 of 63 tests in \u0060CaseStudiesTests\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":"Examples/CaseStudiesTests/PresentationTests.swift"},"region":{"startLine":185}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"979ca6973bbed1d49e58b3c0350ced75ecde3f546472e73bc3a047954dddb1ed"}},{"ruleId":"D10","level":"note","message":{"text":"No direct assertions: testPushViewController_Pop_Represent: No conventional assertion call was detected, and 53 of 63 tests in \u0060CaseStudiesTests\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":"Examples/CaseStudiesTests/PresentationTests.swift"},"region":{"startLine":204}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"307b1181ae338522c83e9b8604b8994de2b0f2fad9fbea1a6d7617b10d457ddb"}},{"ruleId":"D10","level":"note","message":{"text":"No direct assertions: testPushViewController_TraitDismissal: No conventional assertion call was detected, and 53 of 63 tests in \u0060CaseStudiesTests\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":"Examples/CaseStudiesTests/PresentationTests.swift"},"region":{"startLine":229}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"04174c49d6fc77a6168bdc5299359a04c068b8ba1a9458a1bf5d4cb048d48a31"}},{"ruleId":"D10","level":"note","message":{"text":"No direct assertions: testPushViewController_DeepLink: No conventional assertion call was detected, and 53 of 63 tests in \u0060CaseStudiesTests\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":"Examples/CaseStudiesTests/PresentationTests.swift"},"region":{"startLine":248}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"ee99e6c7e6b7cfe7a79d64722f9383925565dded38157e9209c35a2b2e64b7bd"}},{"ruleId":"D10","level":"note","message":{"text":"No direct assertions: testPushViewController_DeepLink_MultipleScreens: No conventional assertion call was detected, and 53 of 63 tests in \u0060CaseStudiesTests\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":"Examples/CaseStudiesTests/PresentationTests.swift"},"region":{"startLine":260}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"f5df35889a422c2f1867bb2adbe097caf34418242d5e81a9c3bf2e4f8f9c8f66"}},{"ruleId":"D10","level":"note","message":{"text":"No direct assertions: testPushViewController_DeepLink_EarlyViewDidLoad: No conventional assertion call was detected, and 53 of 63 tests in \u0060CaseStudiesTests\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":"Examples/CaseStudiesTests/PresentationTests.swift"},"region":{"startLine":271}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"05fd435ca01b0c698ac57a8b03578458e9ba7af280b977ee5b8cd7f230f49b2f"}},{"ruleId":"D10","level":"note","message":{"text":"No direct assertions: testPushViewController_DismissMultipleScreens: No conventional assertion call was detected, and 53 of 63 tests in \u0060CaseStudiesTests\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":"Examples/CaseStudiesTests/PresentationTests.swift"},"region":{"startLine":283}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"d7b7e44af286e179b57f322cf2eb762949f8e4c3d8552aaa0a5759725b5591e3"}},{"ruleId":"D10","level":"note","message":{"text":"No direct assertions: testPushViewController_ManualPop: No conventional assertion call was detected, and 53 of 63 tests in \u0060CaseStudiesTests\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":"Examples/CaseStudiesTests/PresentationTests.swift"},"region":{"startLine":312}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"57bb343bd78d5e6531a1455743284b338f2cb48135f8ba2c2394ba3908d7d68d"}},{"ruleId":"D10","level":"note","message":{"text":"No direct assertions: testPresent_RepresentOnIdentityChange: No conventional assertion call was detected, and 53 of 63 tests in \u0060CaseStudiesTests\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":"Examples/CaseStudiesTests/PresentationTests.swift"},"region":{"startLine":339}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"c45b3edbbf122defaa7b6bd4805b7f2134bdde26e4ef4636650686580ed2b395"}},{"ruleId":"D10","level":"note","message":{"text":"No direct assertions: testPushFireAndForget_PushStateDriven: No conventional assertion call was detected, and 53 of 63 tests in \u0060CaseStudiesTests\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":"Examples/CaseStudiesTests/PresentationTests.swift"},"region":{"startLine":360}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"2c49b529e94d5c2baa0dd6e6fe8e5e6ad1ef103396fb690f389e82d21a8b11fa"}},{"ruleId":"D10","level":"note","message":{"text":"No direct assertions: testAnimatedPopFromModallyNavigationController: No conventional assertion call was detected, and 53 of 63 tests in \u0060CaseStudiesTests\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":"Examples/CaseStudiesTests/PresentationTests.swift"},"region":{"startLine":484}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"c619790e935780b8ddc5a98ff2755ac36a25f20b5930ac0f9e53dc273fb425d7"}},{"ruleId":"D10","level":"note","message":{"text":"No direct assertions: testOnDismissCalledForInteractiveDismissal: No conventional assertion call was detected, and 53 of 63 tests in \u0060CaseStudiesTests\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":"Examples/CaseStudiesTests/PresentationTests.swift"},"region":{"startLine":516}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"cb764c3c741606cee30828561cf4005cac35ee91802cacaef641b291b128b8b9"}},{"ruleId":"D10","level":"note","message":{"text":"No direct assertions: testPushViewController_ManualPopMultiple: No conventional assertion call was detected, and 53 of 63 tests in \u0060CaseStudiesTests\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":"Examples/CaseStudiesTests/PresentationTests.swift"},"region":{"startLine":582}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"30c75850fa8e240ea1deef48fa4bc7d42c514930a8cdb0986e4e367d45b71678"}},{"ruleId":"D10","level":"note","message":{"text":"No direct assertions: testDismissWhenNotPresented: No conventional assertion call was detected, and 53 of 63 tests in \u0060CaseStudiesTests\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":"Examples/CaseStudiesTests/RuntimeWarningTests.swift"},"region":{"startLine":5}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"2b8b816a13dbff4e0c5cc13f4936a8b446506312119195d8ed475aba21be7ef0"}},{"ruleId":"D10","level":"note","message":{"text":"No direct assertions: testNavigationDestination_WithoutNavigationController: No conventional assertion call was detected, and 53 of 63 tests in \u0060CaseStudiesTests\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":"Examples/CaseStudiesTests/RuntimeWarningTests.swift"},"region":{"startLine":21}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"9174756e9c374df6de6d53f54663940ec095cd487149770b5fc33f864acd305e"}},{"ruleId":"D10","level":"note","message":{"text":"No direct assertions: testPushValue_WithoutNavigationStack: No conventional assertion call was detected, and 53 of 63 tests in \u0060CaseStudiesTests\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":"Examples/CaseStudiesTests/RuntimeWarningTests.swift"},"region":{"startLine":39}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"ad5240375bb3acb83615a27c704ef1d97f6a548170bd15d87dbbee6e559fa709"}},{"ruleId":"D10","level":"note","message":{"text":"No direct assertions: testPushValue_WithoutNavigationController: No conventional assertion call was detected, and 53 of 63 tests in \u0060CaseStudiesTests\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":"Examples/CaseStudiesTests/RuntimeWarningTests.swift"},"region":{"startLine":58}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"5c5917705a07b2e2eac459be538f8ad78ac84f14577bec4b2f60d411d4cb6efc"}},{"ruleId":"D10","level":"note","message":{"text":"No direct assertions: testPush_WithoutNavigationController: No conventional assertion call was detected, and 53 of 63 tests in \u0060CaseStudiesTests\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":"Examples/CaseStudiesTests/RuntimeWarningTests.swift"},"region":{"startLine":77}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"3339ac40c4d3309f815cc5abc653186edba3ebde3bcb54c59a2d80ed65758fd6"}},{"ruleId":"D10","level":"note","message":{"text":"No direct assertions: testPush_WithoutNavigationStack: No conventional assertion call was detected, and 53 of 63 tests in \u0060CaseStudiesTests\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":"Examples/CaseStudiesTests/RuntimeWarningTests.swift"},"region":{"startLine":101}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"010c19316a0a5ea205ca288ff44459f2f3b3c030d3720baf0c3864a7336e7be8"}},{"ruleId":"D10","level":"note","message":{"text":"No direct assertions: testNavigationDestinationFor_WithoutNavigationController: No conventional assertion call was detected, and 53 of 63 tests in \u0060CaseStudiesTests\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":"Examples/CaseStudiesTests/RuntimeWarningTests.swift"},"region":{"startLine":125}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"7a1d14c55c03e11795cb1732b75bf877d3c6de6799373f55109e5fd245f88fe8"}},{"ruleId":"D10","level":"note","message":{"text":"No direct assertions: testNavigationDestinationFor_WithoutNavigationStackController: No conventional assertion call was detected, and 53 of 63 tests in \u0060CaseStudiesTests\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":"Examples/CaseStudiesTests/RuntimeWarningTests.swift"},"region":{"startLine":143}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"c172784fbd0155c8a425d47db88436705eb01678434ee96a6b3b06d02854b39f"}},{"ruleId":"D10","level":"note","message":{"text":"No direct assertions: basics: No conventional assertion call was detected, and 10 of 10 tests in \u0060SwiftNavigationMacrosTests\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/SwiftNavigationMacrosTests/CaseBindableMacroTests.swift"},"region":{"startLine":26}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"902219ef4cecf85fa7339c56fd7c775823fd3828b4513222ee8b6dfd34f901ab"}},{"ruleId":"D10","level":"note","message":{"text":"No direct assertions: casePathableOverlap: No conventional assertion call was detected, and 10 of 10 tests in \u0060SwiftNavigationMacrosTests\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/SwiftNavigationMacrosTests/CaseBindableMacroTests.swift"},"region":{"startLine":161}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"31a562699f2dbb178df2f6e93c611537170fc0201c29ca61ba69e3b6d1b61341"}},{"ruleId":"D10","level":"note","message":{"text":"No direct assertions: basics: No conventional assertion call was detected, and 10 of 10 tests in \u0060SwiftNavigationMacrosTests\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/SwiftNavigationMacrosTests/UITransactionEntryMacroTests.swift"},"region":{"startLine":16}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"86a6fc04cb22e472f9c3f01ce7b679d5cc1a99a1fda0227e4d01135fa557b628"}},{"ruleId":"D10","level":"note","message":{"text":"No direct assertions: optionalWithoutDefault: No conventional assertion call was detected, and 10 of 10 tests in \u0060SwiftNavigationMacrosTests\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/SwiftNavigationMacrosTests/UITransactionEntryMacroTests.swift"},"region":{"startLine":47}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"af8c8efb5556ebb64e297ab694c70861f5a3ff97cc9d5505cbb92e88f2773be8"}},{"ruleId":"D10","level":"note","message":{"text":"No direct assertions: inferredType: No conventional assertion call was detected, and 10 of 10 tests in \u0060SwiftNavigationMacrosTests\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/SwiftNavigationMacrosTests/UITransactionEntryMacroTests.swift"},"region":{"startLine":78}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"e5d77acb868ce3efc330d5a9e235af2c0f5a02d6209d64eaaf33f9c843bb349a"}},{"ruleId":"D10","level":"note","message":{"text":"No direct assertions: nonOptionalWithoutDefault: No conventional assertion call was detected, and 10 of 10 tests in \u0060SwiftNavigationMacrosTests\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/SwiftNavigationMacrosTests/UITransactionEntryMacroTests.swift"},"region":{"startLine":109}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"1e2f30341ef2a4358dc3ea57e6f677d6c3bfa1fa9680c79653339c372bf57d2d"}},{"ruleId":"D10","level":"note","message":{"text":"No direct assertions: appliedToLet: No conventional assertion call was detected, and 10 of 10 tests in \u0060SwiftNavigationMacrosTests\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/SwiftNavigationMacrosTests/UITransactionEntryMacroTests.swift"},"region":{"startLine":127}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"328e60dc9fef1df7054d2ee281d1639e655928eaee1f49907b20142126291df8"}},{"ruleId":"D10","level":"note","message":{"text":"No direct assertions: wrongContext: No conventional assertion call was detected, and 10 of 10 tests in \u0060SwiftNavigationMacrosTests\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/SwiftNavigationMacrosTests/UITransactionEntryMacroTests.swift"},"region":{"startLine":145}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"6ec59b0e534ad094a622e66bebf2821df932ef79550cd8aadba4ac1b85bebb76"}},{"ruleId":"D10","level":"note","message":{"text":"No direct assertions: topLevelContext: No conventional assertion call was detected, and 10 of 10 tests in \u0060SwiftNavigationMacrosTests\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/SwiftNavigationMacrosTests/UITransactionEntryMacroTests.swift"},"region":{"startLine":163}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"d138f386fd51b283c20a931bcdc97674f078adc324a09810e0878e649038d164"}},{"ruleId":"D10","level":"note","message":{"text":"No direct assertions: basics: No conventional assertion call was detected, and 10 of 10 tests in \u0060SwiftNavigationMacrosTests\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/SwiftNavigationMacrosTests/UITransactionEntryMacroTests.swift"},"region":{"startLine":185}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"48847aa77c78e796d5455a98554c6a6632b5f4be3fd82416d2da860dac5cf9f9"}},{"ruleId":"D10","level":"warning","message":{"text":"No assertions: testAlertState: This method\u0027s body runs code, and no assertion call was recognised in it. Recognised by name: Assert*, *Should*/ShouldBe*, Verify, Expect, Throws, Record, Received/DidNotReceive, MustHaveHappened/MustNotHaveHappened, EnsureSuccessStatusCode and *AndEnsure* \u2014 so verification routed through a helper of your own naming, through a base-class or callback object whose members hold the assertions, or through a harness that fails by throwing under some other name, is not visible to this check and is not counted here. Read it as \u0027no assertion this check knows how to see\u0027, and if that is right, add one."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Tests/SwiftUINavigationTests/AlertTests.swift"},"region":{"startLine":10}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"1196724e489736e7eecb129a7dd985b667229f0e0a4c03190c191288690818cb"}},{"ruleId":"D10","level":"warning","message":{"text":"No assertions: testDeinitIsolation: This method\u0027s body runs code, and no assertion call was recognised in it. Recognised by name: Assert*, *Should*/ShouldBe*, Verify, Expect, Throws, Record, Received/DidNotReceive, MustHaveHappened/MustNotHaveHappened, EnsureSuccessStatusCode and *AndEnsure* \u2014 so verification routed through a helper of your own naming, through a base-class or callback object whose members hold the assertions, or through a harness that fails by throwing under some other name, is not visible to this check and is not counted here. Read it as \u0027no assertion this check knows how to see\u0027, and if that is right, add one."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Tests/UIKitNavigationTests/UIControlTests.swift"},"region":{"startLine":176}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"054fa88402ae5b69e411219d64351d23d40a7a93e3126f7fe254bc22b202234a"}},{"ruleId":"D10","level":"warning","message":{"text":"No assertions: testPerceptionCheckingInNavigationStackController: This method\u0027s body runs code, and no assertion call was recognised in it. Recognised by name: Assert*, *Should*/ShouldBe*, Verify, Expect, Throws, Record, Received/DidNotReceive, MustHaveHappened/MustNotHaveHappened, EnsureSuccessStatusCode and *AndEnsure* \u2014 so verification routed through a helper of your own naming, through a base-class or callback object whose members hold the assertions, or through a harness that fails by throwing under some other name, is not visible to this check and is not counted here. Read it as \u0027no assertion this check knows how to see\u0027, and if that is right, add one."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Tests/UIKitNavigationTests/ViewControllerRepresentingTests.swift"},"region":{"startLine":8}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"a320443c5bed7b4ec802c5af83c7de93aba616e5b05c77a9cba8ca2a5c307ad6"}},{"ruleId":"D10","level":"note","message":{"text":"Test project verifies nothing: SwiftNavigationMacrosTests: No conventional assertion call was detected in 10 of 10 tests in \u0060SwiftNavigationMacrosTests\u0060 \u2014 the project as a whole, not one method. Two things look like this: verification that happens indirectly (an approval/verifier harness or BDD step methods), or a suite that genuinely checks nothing. If it is the latter, this project passes unconditionally and cannot fail."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Tests/SwiftNavigationMacrosTests/CaseBindableMacroTests.swift"},"region":{"startLine":26}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"888798bd89ed2e00cdf2cf791ba06e838558be5c094ce32252dd744c80a7c009"}},{"ruleId":"D12","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Dependency not covered by the committed resolution: swift-sharing: \u0060swift-sharing\u0060 is declared in Package.swift but has no entry in the committed \u0060Package.resolved\u0060 beside it, so its version is resolved rather than pinned. Resolve the package and commit the updated \u0060Package.resolved\u0060."},"locations":[],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"e49df024a47793e50fc283eb040ddf9c1c117e14db51257f50c03dcf860cbd32"}},{"ruleId":"D12","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Floating branch dependency: swift-case-paths: Dependency \u0060swift-case-paths\u0060 is resolved in SwiftNavigation.xcworkspace/xcshareddata/swiftpm/Package.resolved against branch \u0060macro-spec\u0060 rather than a released version \u2014 the project pins no immutable point, so resolving the packages again moves this dependency to whatever that branch holds at the time. Change the dependency rule in Xcode to a version requirement, or to an exact commit."},"locations":[],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"9342bf5970063f5d7b2309f27bca49d4b8694f402531bf8deae2d0f1ca9fcd2c"}},{"ruleId":"D15","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Hotspot: Sources/UIKitNavigation/Navigation/NavigationStackController.swift: Sources/UIKitNavigation/Navigation/NavigationStackController.swift changed 5 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 30 in NavigationStackController.viewDidLoad at line 67. 1 of those changes was a fix/bug commit, and the other 4 changed it for other reasons \u2014 this file is under both repair and feature pressure. Before the next change lands here, make sure the area it touches is under test, then split that area out of the file so the following change is smaller than this one \u2014 a file this often edited pays the complexity back every time. Counted over 2026-06-02..2026-08-31, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with \u0060git log --since=\u00272026-06-02 11:48:28 -07:00\u0027 --until=\u00272026-08-31 11:48:28 -07:00\u0027 --full-history --no-merges -- Sources/UIKitNavigation/Navigation/NavigationStackController.swift\u0060: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each \u2014 a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/UIKitNavigation/Navigation/NavigationStackController.swift"},"region":{"startLine":67}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"ede3d7aba0a02996fcf90697fe4beaf57d2f252c240dcbf3b50aec62172ff53e"}},{"ruleId":"D15","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Repeated repair: Sources/SwiftUINavigation/ConfirmationDialog.swift: Sources/SwiftUINavigation/ConfirmationDialog.swift changed 5 times in last 90 days and 3 of those changes were fix/bug commits, so repair is the majority of this file\u0027s churn. Its max cyclomatic complexity is 3 (its worst body is ConfirmationDialogModifier.body at line 174), UNDER the 15 threshold, so this is deliberately not filed as a churn \u00D7 complexity hotspot \u2014 the difficulty here is in the behaviour the file has to get right, not in its control flow, and refactoring it for complexity would be the wrong move. The repairs counted were: \u201CDocs fix\u201D; \u201CFix re-presenting of alerts/dialogs (#358)\u201D; \u201CAlert/dialog binding fixes (#355)\u201D. Each one is a case this code did not handle. Before the next change lands here, check that every one of them is pinned by a test that fails without its fix; where the same area keeps coming back, the durable fix is usually at the interface that keeps being misused rather than at the line that was last corrected. Counted over 2026-06-02..2026-08-31, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with \u0060git log --since=\u00272026-06-02 11:48:28 -07:00\u0027 --until=\u00272026-08-31 11:48:28 -07:00\u0027 --full-history --no-merges -- Sources/SwiftUINavigation/ConfirmationDialog.swift\u0060: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each \u2014 a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/SwiftUINavigation/ConfirmationDialog.swift"},"region":{"startLine":174}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"824c2348d3bf75108044cbf2f7fff538b556551e2a8a46a262940a84e6f5033d"}},{"ruleId":"D16","level":"note","message":{"text":"Off-boarding risk: anonymized user #1: If anonymized user #1 becomes unavailable, 13 significant file(s) lose their only recent owner: Sources/SwiftNavigation/ButtonState.swift, Sources/SwiftUINavigation/Alert.swift, Sources/SwiftUINavigation/ConfirmationDialog.swift, [e-mail redacted], Sources/SwiftNavigation/UINavigationPath.swift, Sources/SwiftUINavigation/Alert\u002BState.swift, Sources/SwiftNavigation/NSObject\u002BObserve.swift, Sources/SwiftUINavigation/ConfirmationDialog\u002BState.swift (\u002B5 more). Pair on, review, or document these before any departure."},"locations":[],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"93b277041d59ad612952737c26be77e941bbcde2e86aa77d02c6d7c9b1429799"}},{"ruleId":"D17","level":"warning","message":{"text":"TodoComment: // TODO: Should we hash the animation? \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/SwiftNavigation/ButtonState.swift"},"region":{"startLine":206}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"228d1f47e17b3fe705f1ad0b26517b53b9112326e8171bf6e6457f4b042ef541"}},{"ruleId":"D17","level":"warning","message":{"text":"TodoComment: // TODO: capture Font description using DSL similar to TextState and print here \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/SwiftNavigation/Traits/CustomDump.swift"},"region":{"startLine":128}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"9546eb9dd7eae689a7f152a7227fd25cdc4416a92eb2d84bc4d437921026314e"}},{"ruleId":"D17","level":"warning","message":{"text":"TodoComment: // TODO: This test works in 18.2 but fails in 18.4\u002B. Investigate. \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":"Examples/CaseStudiesTests/PresentationTests.swift"},"region":{"startLine":314}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"842f5fff63d6da974673d16b0e3f5ce294a68fcbf748cd135cfba60ed3dc004c"}},{"ruleId":"D17","level":"warning","message":{"text":"TodoComment: // TODO: Alert/dialog state \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":"Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/UIKitCaseStudies.swift"},"region":{"startLine":18}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"acba414051a4250229647413c502f47d226b2ef01f631f3aa1293a7e71d8ea2c"}},{"ruleId":"D17","level":"warning","message":{"text":"TodoComment: // TODO: state restoration \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":"Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/UIKitCaseStudies.swift"},"region":{"startLine":24}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"e8c29f30f619eb6940f18874c986b822ebbfe05ffe5ae7a963ad8cba43987fe3"}},{"ruleId":"D17","level":"warning","message":{"text":"TodoComment: // TODO: Deep link \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":"Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/UIKitCaseStudies.swift"},"region":{"startLine":27}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"5c6e7a0f5f3397eed9d9deb16c37e0cc70b9edd85b93eb01566ec2bbf1d10012"}},{"ruleId":"D17","level":"warning","message":{"text":"TodoComment: // TODO: Dismissal (show off from VCs and views) \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":"Examples/CaseStudies/UIKit/UIKitCaseStudies.swift"},"region":{"startLine":28}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"0cc0a0cb39e57176f2b043875a35127531d0b3ed9dd261e05c5bcba7ead2b8f8"}},{"ruleId":"D26","level":"note","message":{"text":"Projects may be oversized for their cohesion: 1 of 1 project(s) overshoot their size bounds, lowering Project Cohesion to 0.0/10. The most over is \u0060(repository root)\u0060 (9854 LoC, 110 module-visible types across 12 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":"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":"0dbb915274563a1a1c7710b67a8c19d2a107f22fcaf0daddfce999f66be50e9d"},"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"}},{"id":"A03:2025","toolComponent":{"name":"OWASP Top 10","guid":"7d1f0c2e-4b6a-4e39-9a51-0b2e8c3d5f61"}}]},{"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":"0c6d695c3e2dd54eae1731990daf7a0c5e59beab11e2ced59bf943af05c404ce"},"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"}},{"id":"A03:2025","toolComponent":{"name":"OWASP Top 10","guid":"7d1f0c2e-4b6a-4e39-9a51-0b2e8c3d5f61"}}]},{"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":"55e306507c8e36144dc213c73b871080d175d95deb96b03f653a179815ac6b16"},"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"}},{"id":"A03:2025","toolComponent":{"name":"OWASP Top 10","guid":"7d1f0c2e-4b6a-4e39-9a51-0b2e8c3d5f61"}}]},{"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":"4135bb51cd05816171063beee9a8ac0385f3e5385dfe80b1bc5251bea660e8b6"},"taxa":[{"id":"CWE-522","toolComponent":{"name":"CWE","guid":"c3a2b1d0-7f3e-4b2a-9c1d-5e6f7a8b9c0d"}},{"id":"CWE-829","toolComponent":{"name":"CWE","guid":"c3a2b1d0-7f3e-4b2a-9c1d-5e6f7a8b9c0d"}},{"id":"A06:2025","toolComponent":{"name":"OWASP Top 10","guid":"7d1f0c2e-4b6a-4e39-9a51-0b2e8c3d5f61"}},{"id":"CICD-SEC-6","toolComponent":{"name":"OWASP Top 10 CI/CD Security Risks","guid":"3c9b2a6e-5d14-4f7b-8e02-6a1d9c4b7f35"}}]},{"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":"c6ef2f316ca631b692d03c475bed7e473e93f3db6fa35d9ef86248c50808e234"},"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"}},{"id":"A03:2025","toolComponent":{"name":"OWASP Top 10","guid":"7d1f0c2e-4b6a-4e39-9a51-0b2e8c3d5f61"}}]},{"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":"247483f828b3782bd68a429f8bdba361c29de51e5be089a53259e3581c983944"},"taxa":[{"id":"CWE-522","toolComponent":{"name":"CWE","guid":"c3a2b1d0-7f3e-4b2a-9c1d-5e6f7a8b9c0d"}},{"id":"CWE-829","toolComponent":{"name":"CWE","guid":"c3a2b1d0-7f3e-4b2a-9c1d-5e6f7a8b9c0d"}},{"id":"A06:2025","toolComponent":{"name":"OWASP Top 10","guid":"7d1f0c2e-4b6a-4e39-9a51-0b2e8c3d5f61"}},{"id":"CICD-SEC-6","toolComponent":{"name":"OWASP Top 10 CI/CD Security Risks","guid":"3c9b2a6e-5d14-4f7b-8e02-6a1d9c4b7f35"}}]},{"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":"5c802ec97e672feaa32f710e6686a62b890e325cf5a04a8fb4136422a8a2ef74"},"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"}},{"id":"A03:2025","toolComponent":{"name":"OWASP Top 10","guid":"7d1f0c2e-4b6a-4e39-9a51-0b2e8c3d5f61"}}]},{"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":"13395fc53c7cb0f50a839d9cf572a19a04bf0dcfdadb3ba11244cf944dfac19a"},"taxa":[{"id":"CWE-522","toolComponent":{"name":"CWE","guid":"c3a2b1d0-7f3e-4b2a-9c1d-5e6f7a8b9c0d"}},{"id":"CWE-829","toolComponent":{"name":"CWE","guid":"c3a2b1d0-7f3e-4b2a-9c1d-5e6f7a8b9c0d"}},{"id":"A06:2025","toolComponent":{"name":"OWASP Top 10","guid":"7d1f0c2e-4b6a-4e39-9a51-0b2e8c3d5f61"}},{"id":"CICD-SEC-6","toolComponent":{"name":"OWASP Top 10 CI/CD Security Risks","guid":"3c9b2a6e-5d14-4f7b-8e02-6a1d9c4b7f35"}}]},{"ruleId":"D34","level":"note","message":{"text":"Orphaned files with no living knowledge: 1 of 44 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, example/demo and scaffolding-template trees and test files identified by path convention, largest first; 44 of the 80 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/AppKitNavigation/UITransaction.swift. 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":"D34","level":"note","message":{"text":"Orphaned file: No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/AppKitNavigation/UITransaction.swift"},"region":{"startLine":1}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"42c956df9d8b942861596241b37e12e4b48cc9b0dc55902df0e7bf4a5c7fed47"}},{"ruleId":"D35","level":"warning","message":{"text":"Change coupling: Alert.swift \u2194 ConfirmationDialog.swift: \u0060Sources/SwiftUINavigation/Alert.swift\u0060 and \u0060Sources/SwiftUINavigation/ConfirmationDialog.swift\u0060 change together 77% of the time (10 of the 13 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 10 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are \u0060938aecba\u0060 Fix re-presenting of alerts/dialogs (#358); \u00605c16d3a4\u0060 Alert/dialog binding fixes (#355); \u006070fd5463\u0060 Re-present alerts on identity change (#352) \u2014 run \u0060git show\u0060 on any of them."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/SwiftUINavigation/Alert.swift"},"region":{"startLine":1}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"d6145574aabfff16a1b58c838c9046d7e4de0b0d7447957ad3a966aa405c2f31"}},{"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"},"taxa":[{"id":"CICD-SEC-9","toolComponent":{"name":"OWASP Top 10 CI/CD Security Risks","guid":"3c9b2a6e-5d14-4f7b-8e02-6a1d9c4b7f35"}}]},{"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"},"taxa":[{"id":"CICD-SEC-9","toolComponent":{"name":"OWASP Top 10 CI/CD Security Risks","guid":"3c9b2a6e-5d14-4f7b-8e02-6a1d9c4b7f35"}}]},{"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"},"taxa":[{"id":"CICD-SEC-9","toolComponent":{"name":"OWASP Top 10 CI/CD Security Risks","guid":"3c9b2a6e-5d14-4f7b-8e02-6a1d9c4b7f35"}}]},{"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"},"taxa":[{"id":"CICD-SEC-8","toolComponent":{"name":"OWASP Top 10 CI/CD Security Risks","guid":"3c9b2a6e-5d14-4f7b-8e02-6a1d9c4b7f35"}}]},{"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":"90ef8645d5d250a2cdd6c4ddecf434c2439a3eaf0b71b0b76b3e93b4d1bb9e49"},"taxa":[{"id":"CICD-SEC-5","toolComponent":{"name":"OWASP Top 10 CI/CD Security Risks","guid":"3c9b2a6e-5d14-4f7b-8e02-6a1d9c4b7f35"}}]},{"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":"318bbb3992e518b8d03be785b994dc874459af06685b2f8afa054c431ff36b02"},"taxa":[{"id":"CICD-SEC-5","toolComponent":{"name":"OWASP Top 10 CI/CD Security Risks","guid":"3c9b2a6e-5d14-4f7b-8e02-6a1d9c4b7f35"}}]},{"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":"65d87ec21c1ecf43a0424ab644272e64330044f506a9f75bd32965b5f8696841"},"taxa":[{"id":"CICD-SEC-5","toolComponent":{"name":"OWASP Top 10 CI/CD Security Risks","guid":"3c9b2a6e-5d14-4f7b-8e02-6a1d9c4b7f35"}}]},{"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"},"taxa":[{"id":"CICD-SEC-3","toolComponent":{"name":"OWASP Top 10 CI/CD Security Risks","guid":"3c9b2a6e-5d14-4f7b-8e02-6a1d9c4b7f35"}}]},{"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":"M2","level":"note","message":{"text":"No architecture diagram/doc: No C4/Structurizr/PlantUML/Mermaid/Graphviz/D2 diagram, no drawn diagram named for the architecture, no file named \u0060architecture\u0060 or \u0060design\u0060 in any markup this check reads, and nothing in the README, docs or contributor guides that announces the shape \u2014 no \u0060## Architecture\u0060 heading, no \u0022architecture overview\u0022/\u0022high-level design\u0022 phrasing, no \u0022the architecture is \u2026\u0022 introduction, no guided code tour. A shape laid out in prose that never names itself as the architecture is not visible to this check, and neither is one kept outside the repository, so this row reports the absence of a re-findable shape document \u2014 not evidence that nobody wrote the shape down."},"locations":[],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"0c190e7c159d1850ee706c3ac4486e151e8a4fe169de4bf61436b9f399654f06"}},{"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 3872 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":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":".github/workflows/ci.yml"},"region":{"startLine":7}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"6e54424179c892f03ef2fd003130ac4bd43f39bbf3b1ca0a0143e25acb80ec87"}},{"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"}},{"ruleId":"X10","level":"note","message":{"text":"Duplicated predicate: \u0060ProcessInfo.processInfo.environment[\u0022ENABLE_ALL_TRAITS\u0022] != nil || ProcessInfo.processInfo.environment[\u0022SPI_GENERATE_DOCS\u0022] != nil\u0060 appears character-identically in 3 files \u2014 Package.swift, [e-mail redacted], [e-mail redacted]. It is one line, so the duplication detector\u0027s token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Package.swift"},"region":{"startLine":204}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"8b7c6cad7dcf9f3993d918ec9ea1798863e3aee8cc8a57ca0de31428bc655b01"}},{"ruleId":"X10","level":"note","message":{"text":"Duplicated predicate: \u0060canImport(AppKit) \u0026\u0026 !targetEnvironment(macCatalyst)\u0060 appears character-identically in 3 files \u2014 Sources/AppKitNavigation/AppKitAnimation.swift, Sources/AppKitNavigation/UIBinding.swift, Sources/AppKitNavigation/UITransaction.swift. It is one line, so the duplication detector\u0027s token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/AppKitNavigation/AppKitAnimation.swift"},"region":{"startLine":1}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"56031dcecb5fab1e1c838888b4da254c78b5534e46f39101152f595a7aed5fec"}},{"ruleId":"X10","level":"note","message":{"text":"Duplicated predicate: \u0060canImport(UIKit) \u0026\u0026 !os(tvOS) \u0026\u0026 !os(watchOS)\u0060 appears character-identically in 5 files \u2014 Sources/UIKitNavigation/Bindings/UIColorWell.swift, Sources/UIKitNavigation/Bindings/UIDatePicker.swift, Sources/UIKitNavigation/Bindings/UISlider.swift, Sources/UIKitNavigation/Bindings/UIStepper.swift. It is one line, so the duplication detector\u0027s token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/UIKitNavigation/Bindings/UIColorWell.swift"},"region":{"startLine":1}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"d3582cb1888b73eb89f73ab48987e8ef8d41b1882c72f60ae9f642ea69ef2f95"}},{"ruleId":"X10","level":"note","message":{"text":"Duplicated predicate: \u0060lhs.base == rhs.base \u0026\u0026 lhs.keyPath == rhs.keyPath\u0060 appears character-identically in 2 files \u2014 Sources/SwiftNavigation/Traits/CasePaths.swift, Sources/SwiftNavigation/UIBinding.swift. It is one line, so the duplication detector\u0027s token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/SwiftNavigation/Traits/CasePaths.swift"},"region":{"startLine":73}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"7508772eccba06dc958c7b3c7777cedf52e7359483a6c0820cedb73e6becfabf"}},{"ruleId":"X10","level":"note","message":{"text":"Duplicated predicate: \u0060lhs.title == rhs.title \u0026\u0026 lhs.message == rhs.message \u0026\u0026 lhs.buttons == rhs.buttons\u0060 appears character-identically in 2 files \u2014 Sources/SwiftNavigation/AlertState.swift, Sources/SwiftNavigation/ConfirmationDialogState.swift. It is one line, so the duplication detector\u0027s token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home."},"locations":[{"physicalLocation":{"artifactLocation":{"uri":"Sources/SwiftNavigation/AlertState.swift"},"region":{"startLine":182}}}],"partialFingerprints":{"codehealthFindingId/v1":"7270ddc83f5fc8a970cc49f3bab5d98f9cd3ac4f9699ed044503f4cf2552488f"}}],"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-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-1395","guid":"800e09e7-c11a-8654-9fa6-86f398995fed","name":"Dependency on Vulnerable Third-Party Component","shortDescription":{"text":"Dependency on Vulnerable Third-Party Component"},"helpUri":"https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/1395.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-353","guid":"09d7e902-d4ee-f05d-ae6c-0a1554d0c18f","name":"Missing Support for Integrity Check","shortDescription":{"text":"Missing Support for Integrity Check"},"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-506","guid":"401d6455-56e3-0552-9a39-f77461673e3f","name":"Embedded Malicious Code","shortDescription":{"text":"Embedded Malicious Code"},"helpUri":"https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/506.html"},{"id":"CWE-522","guid":"71fb233e-ce6a-ae57-9419-ef8373540b09","name":"Insufficiently Protected Credentials","shortDescription":{"text":"Insufficiently Protected Credentials"},"helpUri":"https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/522.html"},{"id":"CWE-77","guid":"332c8ade-6612-9f56-a06b-d8d90b1a8750","name":"Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in a Command (\u0027Command Injection\u0027)","shortDescription":{"text":"Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in a Command (\u0027Command Injection\u0027)"},"helpUri":"https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/77.html"},{"id":"CWE-78","guid":"2e31ceaf-c7ae-2e5e-9661-cfb1362789cf","name":"Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an OS Command (\u0027OS Command Injection\u0027)","shortDescription":{"text":"Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an OS Command (\u0027OS Command Injection\u0027)"},"helpUri":"https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/78.html"},{"id":"CWE-79","guid":"fd45580b-e8c4-fc5e-8c2f-aa8fab0b4dbf","name":"Improper Neutralization of Input During Web Page Generation (\u0027Cross-site Scripting\u0027)","shortDescription":{"text":"Improper Neutralization of Input During Web Page Generation (\u0027Cross-site Scripting\u0027)"},"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-829","guid":"13c33925-97fb-5a5e-b40c-56d328b8a4d7","name":"Inclusion of Functionality from Untrusted Control Sphere","shortDescription":{"text":"Inclusion of Functionality from Untrusted Control Sphere"},"helpUri":"https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/829.html"},{"id":"CWE-89","guid":"6d08fdad-37eb-c150-bbf0-d7d946863407","name":"Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an SQL Command (\u0027SQL Injection\u0027)","shortDescription":{"text":"Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an SQL Command (\u0027SQL Injection\u0027)"},"helpUri":"https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/89.html"},{"id":"CWE-937","guid":"16f316ae-415c-b354-a59b-1f7905f756e9","name":"Using Components with Known Vulnerabilities","shortDescription":{"text":"Using Components with Known Vulnerabilities"},"helpUri":"https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/937.html"},{"id":"CWE-94","guid":"75e7f50c-6c2f-dd52-bf40-bf6c52b861fd","name":"Improper Control of Generation of Code (\u0027Code Injection\u0027)","shortDescription":{"text":"Improper Control of Generation of Code (\u0027Code Injection\u0027)"},"helpUri":"https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/94.html"}]},{"name":"OWASP Top 10","guid":"7d1f0c2e-4b6a-4e39-9a51-0b2e8c3d5f61","version":"2025","organization":"OWASP Foundation","informationUri":"https://top10.owasp.org/2025/","isComprehensive":false,"shortDescription":{"text":"The OWASP Top 10:2025 web application security risks."},"taxa":[{"id":"A03:2025","guid":"168e227c-7735-2e57-bc6e-997affe644c5","name":"Software Supply Chain Failures","shortDescription":{"text":"Software Supply Chain Failures"},"helpUri":"https://top10.owasp.org/2025/A03_2025-Software_Supply_Chain_Failures/"},{"id":"A05:2025","guid":"87e86033-3231-8458-8e4a-5cb82743553a","name":"Injection","shortDescription":{"text":"Injection"},"helpUri":"https://top10.owasp.org/2025/A05_2025-Injection/"},{"id":"A06:2025","guid":"491554d7-b8e4-9652-91a9-53700dc92ece","name":"Insecure Design","shortDescription":{"text":"Insecure Design"},"helpUri":"https://top10.owasp.org/2025/A06_2025-Insecure_Design/"},{"id":"A07:2025","guid":"334ddd78-539d-d35c-83dd-253647eb7eaf","name":"Authentication Failures","shortDescription":{"text":"Authentication Failures"},"helpUri":"https://top10.owasp.org/2025/A07_2025-Authentication_Failures/"},{"id":"A08:2025","guid":"84b0c297-710e-9a5f-9335-936ecb260c36","name":"Software or Data Integrity Failures","shortDescription":{"text":"Software or Data Integrity Failures"},"helpUri":"https://top10.owasp.org/2025/A08_2025-Software_or_Data_Integrity_Failures/"}]},{"name":"OWASP Top 10 CI/CD Security Risks","guid":"3c9b2a6e-5d14-4f7b-8e02-6a1d9c4b7f35","organization":"OWASP Foundation","informationUri":"https://owasp.org/www-project-top-10-ci-cd-security-risks/","isComprehensive":false,"shortDescription":{"text":"The OWASP Top 10 CI/CD Security Risks."},"taxa":[{"id":"CICD-SEC-3","guid":"458c83a6-ebf7-cf55-8cc3-b4d949bbf271","name":"Dependency Chain Abuse","shortDescription":{"text":"Dependency Chain Abuse"},"helpUri":"https://owasp.github.io/www-project-top-10-ci-cd-security-risks/CICD-SEC-03-Dependency-Chain-Abuse"},{"id":"CICD-SEC-5","guid":"cc7f4610-8859-e654-9029-d5f97d992220","name":"Insufficient PBAC (Pipeline-Based Access Controls)","shortDescription":{"text":"Insufficient PBAC (Pipeline-Based Access Controls)"},"helpUri":"https://owasp.github.io/www-project-top-10-ci-cd-security-risks/CICD-SEC-05-Insufficient-PBAC"},{"id":"CICD-SEC-6","guid":"f2ee2486-b260-2952-a41f-6b67fa713940","name":"Insufficient Credential Hygiene","shortDescription":{"text":"Insufficient Credential Hygiene"},"helpUri":"https://owasp.github.io/www-project-top-10-ci-cd-security-risks/CICD-SEC-06-Insufficient-Credential-Hygiene"},{"id":"CICD-SEC-8","guid":"b6b2dacf-a168-4957-876e-a8c73ee00eb0","name":"Ungoverned Usage of 3rd Party Services","shortDescription":{"text":"Ungoverned Usage of 3rd Party Services"},"helpUri":"https://owasp.github.io/www-project-top-10-ci-cd-security-risks/CICD-SEC-08-Ungoverned-Usage-of-3rd-Party-Services"},{"id":"CICD-SEC-9","guid":"b3d36727-0395-5b51-94c4-5e173d62eab3","name":"Improper Artifact Integrity Validation","shortDescription":{"text":"Improper Artifact Integrity Validation"},"helpUri":"https://owasp.github.io/www-project-top-10-ci-cd-security-risks/CICD-SEC-09-Improper-Artifact-Integrity-Validation"}]}],"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":16,"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."]}]}