Public report — core-js, published 1 Oct 2026.
Concrete security findings (which rule fired, in which file, on which line; CVE IDs, secret matches,
dependency versions) are REDACTED in this version; ask the repo owner for the full report.
Public
Codebase surveyMeasured under the Code Assurance Index · rubric rubric-2026.09.18 (frozen) · verify this surveyFiledcd_0195b7a466d2450fa80d92cde799f07d
Filed 1 October 2026, 17:25 UTC
Public
Medium · 53,386 LoC · 11 projects · rebuild ~0.8 person-years · weakest lens: Readiness (53%)
Findings by grade
68 critical247 serious23 minor34 could not be resolved — could be critical — see Limitations
This survey was produced by
Watchdog
Producer
Canine Development
Analyzer
Watchdog engine 1.0.0
Measured
1 October 2026, 17:02 UTC
A measurement, not a certificate. The Code Assurance Index does not certify,
approve or guarantee this codebase; it records a reproducible number and the evidence it was computed from. The
standard is authored by Canine Development, who also build Watchdog — its only implementation today. That is said
here so the number is checked rather than believed.
Grounded in facts. Every number here is computed, not narrated — reproducible, tool-backed, and traceable to a line of code. How to trust this ▸
317findings with an exact file:lineof 338 — the remainder are repo-wide signals (a dimension-level measurement, not a single line); open any file:line and verify
54/132dimensions across the health lenses53386 LoC · 11 projects — wide & deep
The system holds an adequate standing with a health score of 58%, indicating a workable asset that carries real operational risk. While the architecture is robust and performance is excellent, the foundation is not yet secure enough for confident, high-velocity delivery. The codebase is medium-sized, comprising over 53,000 lines of production code, with a rebuild cost estimated at roughly €110,000. This represents significant value tied up in the current state, making efficiency in maintenance critical to protecting that investment.
The most pressing issue is a lack of automated security guardrails. Without static analysis integrated into the build pipeline, security regressions can slip through to production, creating exposure that is difficult to detect and costly to fix. This gap means every release carries an unquantified risk of introducing vulnerabilities, which could lead to severe compliance issues or data breaches. Addressing this is not just a technical fix but a fundamental requirement for business trust and regulatory compliance.
A second theme is the hidden velocity tax on development. Code quality signals suggest that complexity and duplication average a moderate level, which acts as a drag on productivity. Every change in these weaker areas likely costs 5–11% more effort than in clean code. Over time, this compounds, slowing down feature delivery and increasing the cost of ownership. This inefficiency is a silent drain on resources that reduces the team’s ability to respond to market changes quickly.
The system’s strength lies in its solid architectural design and high performance, which provide a stable platform for future growth. However, operational readiness is a concern, with only 53% of the necessary safeguards in place. To focus first, the team should integrate a security scanning step into the continuous integration process. This single action offers the highest return on investment, paying for itself within months by preventing costly security debt and reducing the risk of production incidents. This step is essential before addressing other refinements.
How the score is built — each lens's share of the headlineWidth is the lens's weight in the worst-heaviest fold (the weakest area pulls hardest); colour is that lens's own band. A lens fixes the score in proportion to its width.
AC7 · Accessibility enforcement below the top rung
A full-fidelity diff against the previous run's complete recorded findings — line-move tolerant: a finding that only shifted line counts as unchanged, only genuinely new titles/files surface here.
0.8× (at 58% quality) — the last 20% of quality is most of the work
Size & shape
Medium · effort split not classified (source measured from disk; the effort-tier breakdown is a C#-only syntax walk)
This codebase represents roughly ~0.8 person-years of build effort (about ~€110,000 to rebuild). Its weakest lens is Readiness at 53% — the part of that asset most exposed by the findings below.
How we model this: boilerplate at a scaffolding rate + logic × domain Standard (×1.0) — standard service × a 0.8× quality factor, at €60–95/h; indicative, ±~30% · size measured directly from source · effort from total production LoC as straight-line logic (the tier split is a C#-only syntax walk), a conservative lower bound. Indicative only — most sensitive to the hourly rate and the domain tier (both tunable in config).
Top priorities
The highest-leverage moves; the full ranked list is in the Roadmap below.
1
Add a SAST step to CI running what this repository's stack ships: CodeQL's javascript-typescript pack, `semgrep --config=p/javascript`, or eslint-plugin-security — so a security regression fails the build instead of landing.
The release job declares an environment, but its protection rules are not visible from the repository — confirm required reviewers are attached, or publish as a draft release so a bad build can be stopped before users can download it.
The top-ranked fix costs roughly 3–10 engineer-days once. Not doing it costs about 3.6–21.4 engineer-days every year, paid as drag on the ~28,531 lines this team changes annually — a bill that arrives whether or not anyone books it. On those figures the fix breaks even in roughly 2–34 months and is free after that. Method, stated so this is not read as a quotation: debt from the ranked task's effort band; interest = annual changed lines (measured, annualised from the 90-day window) ÷ an ASSUMED 150–400 lines per engineer-day × the 5–11% drag implied by the code-quality signals; breaking point = debt ÷ annual interest. A modelled planning range built from measured inputs and one named assumption — not a quotation, a valuation, or a certified figure.
Evidence: D15 churn: 7,035 line(s) changed over a 90-day window ⇒ ~28,531/year · D1/D2/D4/D6 code quality: averaging 6.0/10 ⇒ a 5–11% drag on each change · top-ranked remediation: Medium effort ⇒ about 3–10 engineer-day(s)
→ Do the top-ranked fix now if this code will still be yours in 34 months.
Value concentrated against a weak lens · Medium · Value at risk
This is a Medium asset (~0.8 person-years to rebuild), and its weakest lens is Readiness at 53%. The operational and business risk on an asset this size concentrates there — that's where remediation buys the most protection.
→ Direct remediation budget at Readiness first — highest risk-reduction per euro on an asset this size.
Highest-leverage move · Medium · Leverage
Of everything flagged, the best return on effort is: Add a SAST step to CI running what this repository's stack ships: CodeQL's javascript-typescript pack, `semgrep --config=p/javascript`, or eslint-plugin-security — so a security regression fails the build instead of landing. The rest can wait behind it.
Evidence: priority ranking: top of 5 ranked by impact/effort
→ Add a SAST step to CI running what this repository's stack ships: CodeQL's javascript-typescript pack, `semgrep --config=p/javascript`, or eslint-plugin-security — so a security regression fails the build instead of landing.
A velocity tax on every change · Medium · Economics
The code-quality signals (complexity, duplication, cohesion) average 6.0/10, which acts as a tax on every change in the weaker areas: modifications there plausibly cost on the order of 5–11% more than in clean code, and the tax compounds as the codebase grows. (A modelled estimate, not a measured fact.)
Evidence: D1/D2/D4/D6 code quality: averaging 6.0/10 across the code-quality signals actually measured
→ Pay it down where churn is highest — the hotspots — not everywhere; that's where the tax is actually paid.
Architecture — module dependency graph
Project dependencies, layered top-to-bottom; arrows show direction. Any dashed red edge points upward or sideways — a layering smell or cycle. A clean layered graph has none.
At a glance — Code Health · 54% · Adequate · gated by D1, D2, D3, R1 ·
Findings mapped to OWASP categories; the specific CVEs/secrets are in the Security dimension cards below and findings.md (redacted only on the public version of this report).
OWASP category
Findings
Severity
A03:2021 — Injection
64
High / Critical
A06:2021 — Vulnerable & Outdated Components
6
High / Critical
Roadmap
First, integrate static analysis into the CI pipeline to block security regressions before they land. Second, verify deployment protection rules or use draft releases to prevent bad builds from reaching users. Third, clean up dependencies by removing unused packages and explicitly declaring imports. Fourth, migrate remaining JavaScript files to TypeScript to improve type safety. Finally, add and run type checking scripts in CI to ensure code integrity.
Ranked by impact ÷ effort. "Helps" is the estimated gain on the 0–100 health score.
Do this
Helps
Effort
Dimension
Add a SAST step to CI running what this repository's stack ships: CodeQL's javascript-typescript pack, `semgrep --config=p/javascript`, or eslint-plugin-security — so a security regression fails the build instead of landing.
The release job declares an environment, but its protection rules are not visible from the repository — confirm required reviewers are attached, or publish as a draft release so a bad build can be stopped before users can download it.
Every finding carries one of four grades. Three say how serious it is. The fourth says this
survey could not settle it — and it is a grade, not a gap.
Critical — 68
A definite problem that already costs you something and drags the score down: a
missing authorisation check, a dependency with a known exploit, a build that does not reproduce. Failure here
tends to cause failures elsewhere.
Serious — 247
Likely wrong, but not failing yet. It degrades
the codebase over a longer horizon and can cause failures elsewhere — not urgent this week, not something to
carry for two years either.
Minor — 23
Recorded, with no effect on how the codebase functions.
Present so the survey is complete, not because it needs doing.
Could not be resolved — 34
Something this survey could not settle
from the outside, and which could be critical or serious. Either a control was required and no
positive evidence of it exists in the repository — a backup job that nothing shows was ever restored from proves
nothing about restores — or our own analysis could not run over that part of the tree. This is not a clean
result. These are excluded from the score rather than awarded a pass, so the number on the cover neither
rewards nor penalises them: if you act on this survey without resolving them, you carry that risk yourself. Each
one is named under Limitations.
Methodology & how to trust this report
Watchdog is a deep, periodic assessment — run each sprint, monthly, or quarterly, taking the time to go wider and deeper than a quick check and surfacing in one coherent report what you'd otherwise piece together from a dozen separate tools. It scores deterministically: the same commit yields the same score, every run. 50 of 54 evaluated dimensions are computed purely by tools and static analysis (confidence 1.0); 4 documentation/naming judgement(s) are LLM-assisted and labelled advisory. Overall confidence is 0.9 — the weighted average across measured dimensions; it falls as more of the score leans on LLM-assisted judgement and rises when it's fully tool-backed.
Every figure here is one of three kinds, and we label which: ✓ Measured — a deterministic fact (LoC, complexity, coverage); ~ Modeled — an estimate from a stated model (cost, effort, value-at-risk), always a range with its assumptions, never a precise fact; ◐ Advisory — an LLM prose judgement. We never present a modelled estimate as if it were measured. Perfect or absent scores carry their provenance too (ADR-0011): ✓ Tool-verified means the property itself was measured across the surface; ○ Nothing flagged means the probes came back clean — a claim bounded by what a repository can show; ⊘ Not evidenced means a working control (a tested restore, an automated rollback) showed no positive evidence — absence of evidence is not evidence of a control, so it's excluded from the score rather than awarded a spurious 10; ◐ Sampled · advisory marks an LLM verdict over a bounded sample — advisory, never a deterministic measurement.
What we checked — 54 dimensions across the health lenses
Each chip is a dimension scored from real signals across architecture, testing, dependencies, security & compliance, documentation, git-history and code quality — in one coherent pass. A surface report typically covers a handful.
How to trust any code-health report — three questions
Can you open the finding? Real findings cite a repo-relative file and line you can open at the cited line — never an absolute scratch path. Here, 317 of 338 do; the remainder are repo-wide signals — a dimension-level measurement, not a single line. (Every path in this report is repo-relative by construction: paths are normalized at the producer and the report is rejected if any rooted path leaks through.)
Is there a tool behind the number? Every score below names the method that produced it — Roslyn, git, a scanner, or (for a handful of documentation/naming dimensions) an LLM labelled sampled · advisory — not a narrative.
Does re-running give the same result? Run it again on the same commit and the score — and this report, byte for byte — is identical. A report whose numbers move between runs is describing the run, not the code.
This report answers yes to all three. That's the bar to hold any assessment to.
Tools & methods
The actual versions used this run (captured at analysis time) — re-run on the same commit for the identical score.
Method
Backs
Version
Evaluator
Roslyn static analysis
Complexity, cohesion, coupling, dead code, API surface, layering
What ran differently this time — a tool absent, degraded, or that fell back to an estimate. Named openly, not folded silently into the scores. A degraded run also records its exact cause in diagnostics.md.
D8 Code Coverage — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. Coverage NOT MEASURED: the JavaScript/TypeScript half could not be measured — the JavaScript/TypeScript suite(s) run through a browser-driven runner the coverage collector does not drive — tests/unit-karma/ (karma) — a gap in the analyzer, not something this repository is missing. Coverage is excluded from the score rather than counted as a near-zero. This is OUR limitation, not a defect in the repo. In the meantime, commit (or publish into the working tree) the lcov/Cobertura report your CI produces and the real number is read on the next scan. You can widen what we reach: optional: commit the lcov/Cobertura report your CI produces, and the real number is read on the next scan.
D11 Test Reliability — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. Test source is present (.ts, .js, .mjs) and the reliability runner does support this ecosystem — it drives jest, vitest, mocha and egg-bin — but every JavaScript/TypeScript test package this repository declares runs its suite in a real browser, which the re-runner has no way to launch. `tests/unit-karma` declares `karma` and its `scripts.test` is absent. So flakiness couldn't be assessed. Not scored — this is a gap in the analyzer's browser-driven test support, not a missing .ts/.js/.mjs runner and not a finding about this repository.
D16 Bus Factor — not measured this run — This is a true statement about the repository that carries nothing for its owner to act on, so it is reported here rather than as a defect in their code. Single-maintainer repository — bus factor is not applicable (142 contributor(s) across 7927 commit(s) sampled, automation and bot accounts excluded). One of them holds 95% of the history; the other 141 hold 0% each on average, below the 5% at which there is somebody to hand the work to. That is a single maintainer with drive-by contributors, not a team whose knowledge has concentrated — so the bus factor is not applicable and there is nothing here for the owner to act on.
D22 Internal API Consistency — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. D22 identifies the intentionally-exposed surface from `IsPackable` and `.Contracts` project names, MSBuild conventions read off the loaded project set. This target exposed no such projects, so the probe never ran; this says nothing about whether the repository has a public API. This repository commits no C#/VB source at all, so there was never an MSBuild project set to read these conventions off. That is OUR side and it is a COLLECTOR gap, not an environment fault: it declares a published package (packages/core-js-builder/package.json), but no published-package marker D22 reads admitted any project here, so this ecosystem's public API has no collector, and the remedy is to write one — no change to the scan image can close it.
D44 Platform End-of-Life — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This dimension reads a project's own statement about the platform it runs on: a TargetFramework in a .NET project file, a .nvmrc or .python-version, a capped requires-python, a Rust toolchain file or Cargo.toml rust-version, a .go-version, .java-version, .ruby-version, .tool-versions or .sdkmanrc, a go.mod go directive, a Maven or Gradle Java level or toolchain, a Gemfile's ruby directive, a mix.exs elixir requirement, a rebar.config minimum_otp_vsn, a pubspec.yaml SDK constraint, a build.sbt scalaVersion, or a framework major pinned by a dependency constraint. This repository carries none of them, so nothing about its platform was established. That is a gap in this analyzer's coverage, NOT a finding that the platform is supported — a language whose runtime is declared elsewhere (Package.swift, a Dockerfile) is simply not read here yet.
AX6 Interface segregation — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is computed over the public interfaces this run's compilations declare, and none was loaded, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
C2 Access Controls — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. These authorization controls are read from declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names and guard methods in a C# source model, and none was loaded on this run, so there was nothing to gather. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository lacks authorization controls.
C3 Audit Trail — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. These audit controls are read from declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names and guard methods in a C# source model, and none was loaded on this run, so there was nothing to gather. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository lacks audit controls.
C4 Data Retention — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. These retention controls are read from declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names and guard methods in a C# source model, and none was loaded on this run, so there was nothing to gather. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository lacks retention controls.
C5 Data-Subject Rights — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. These data-subject rights controls are read from declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names and guard methods in a C# source model, and none was loaded on this run, so there was nothing to gather. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository lacks data-subject rights controls.
ED5 Idempotency — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check finds retry-prone mutations by walking the repository's declared types, and NONE was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to look at. That is a limit of the analyzer's reach — it reads .NET projects — not a finding that this repository has no command handlers or message consumers.
GD1 Unfinished & placeholder code — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
IC1 Incompleteness & stubs — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
P1 CI/CD gates — measured, with a gap in what it reached — Watchdog measured this, but not all of it. What it did not reach is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — so the numbers on that dimension cover less than the repository, and the part left out is not evidence that it would have passed. A CI pipeline exists and the word "test" appears, but no explicit test-runner invocation (your stack's test command, or a test job) was matched — so either the gate runs tests through a step this pass could not recognise, or "test" is incidental here (a path, "latest", a reporter). Which of the two it is cannot be settled from this dimension's evidence; the coverage dimensions report whether a suite exists at all. You can widen what we reach: name the test runner explicitly in the pipeline step (your stack's test command, or a job named for the suite) so the gate is unambiguous to a reader and to this pass.
P5 DR & Backup — not measured this run — This is a true statement about the repository that carries nothing for its owner to act on, so it is reported here rather than as a defect in their code. No backup/snapshot/replication config, RTO/RPO or restore-procedure documentation was found — and no production persistence was detected either (no data-access packages, no data-store services, no database resources), so there is nothing in this repository whose loss a DR control would recover. If this system's data lives in a platform or ops repo we can't see, that's where the DR evidence belongs.
R10 Code Duplication — measured, with a gap in what it reached — Watchdog measured this, but not all of it. What it did not reach is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — so the numbers on that dimension cover less than the repository, and the part left out is not evidence that it would have passed. 59 further occurrence(s) are not listed individually; the score already reflects all 99.
S1 Web-Security Posture — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. These web-security controls are read from declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names and guard methods in a C# source model, and none was loaded on this run, so there was nothing to gather. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository lacks web-security controls.
X1 Async correctness — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X12 Unreachable branch — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X13 Undrained process stream — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X14 Bypassable address classification — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X15 Unvalidated length from an untrusted reader — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X16 Unfloored truncation loop — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X17 Uncapped recursion over a caller-supplied document — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X18 Disposal-pattern correctness — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X19 Unrestored process-global state — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X2 Cancellation propagation — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X20 Mistyped argument guard — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X21 Side-effecting pattern guard — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X22 Contradicted release guard — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X23 Unguarded diagnostic materialisation — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X27 Collection changed while being enumerated — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check reads C# syntax, and Java and Rust source only, and no C# was loaded and no Java or Rust was found in this repository, so it had nothing of this repository's product to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X28 Index access outside its own emptiness guard — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check reads C# syntax, and Scala source only, and no C# was loaded and no Scala was found in this repository, so it had nothing of this repository's product to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X3 Exception handling — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X30 Support guard that admits what it rejects — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check reads C# syntax, and Scala source only, and no C# was loaded and no Scala was found in this repository, so it had nothing of this repository's product to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X4 Structured logging — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X5 Nullable reference types — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
Repo exclusion declarations (.gitattributes linguist-generated/vendored, .editorconfig generated_code): none declared — every source file was scored.
Limitations & what we did not check
Watchdog assesses the repository exactly as committed, and only the repository. By design it does not reach outside the source tree: the live cloud account, the running CI/CD pipeline, the host's branch-protection and approval rules, the production configuration, or a restore actually exercised against a backup are all out of scope. That boundary is a feature, not a gap — a repo-relative, deterministic scan re-runs identically on any commit and every finding opens at a real file and line, where a live audit can neither be reproduced nor traced. The visible consequence is that controls which leave no in-repo evidence are reported as "not evidenced" and excluded from the score rather than awarded a number a static scan cannot justify.
Per-dimension blind spots
For each dimension that was measured, what a static, repo-only scan structurally cannot see — the honest edge of the measurement, not a failure of it.
D1 Cyclomatic Complexity: Cyclomatic complexity counts branches statically — it cannot tell an essential decision tree from accidental tangle, nor see complexity that lives in data or configuration (large switch-case token tables, DSL lexers/parsers, data-as-code rule tables) rather than control flow: a tokenizer's many single-character cases read as high complexity though each branch is trivial.
D2 Cognitive Complexity: Cognitive-complexity heuristics approximate how hard code is to follow; genuine domain difficulty and well-named intent that eases reading are not captured.
D3 God Classes: "God class" is sized by members and responsibilities visible in the type — a deliberately broad facade over a coherent subsystem can read the same as an accidental grab-bag. For front-end JS the file-length check is cohesion-aware (a single-responsibility module — one class/IIFE — earns a 3× threshold), but cohesion is approximated from top-level declarations, not true dependency structure.
D4 Code Duplication: Duplication is token-similarity — an in-process token-stream comparison over sliding windows, with type-aware normalization — so it finds copy-paste, not semantic duplication expressed differently. Committed machine-written code (scaffolded migrations, designer/codegen output, protobuf/OpenAPI stubs, model snapshots) is EXCLUDED — its repetition is the tool's, not the team's — so the score reflects hand-written duplication only.
D5 Coupling: Coupling is measured between projects/assemblies — runtime coupling through DI, reflection, messaging or shared databases is invisible to a static reference graph.
D6 Cohesion (LCOM4): LCOM4 cohesion is syntactic — it infers connectivity from which methods touch which fields/methods by name, not from real runtime behaviour or intent.
D9 Test Distribution: The test-pyramid shape is inferred from project/folder naming and references, with a single test host bucketed per-file by its path tier and content signals — a suite that names tiers unconventionally and gives no per-file signal can still be mis-bucketed.
D10 Test Quality: Assertion density is structural — it cannot tell a meaningful behavioural assertion from a trivial one, only that an assertion is present.
D12 Dependency Hygiene: Dependency health reads manifests and lockfiles — a vulnerability in a vendored/copied dependency, or risk from how a dependency is actually used, is outside this view.
D13 Secret Scanning: Secret detection is signature- and entropy-based on the current tree — a secret that does not match a known pattern, or one already rotated, will not be flagged (a clean scan is "nothing matched", not "no secrets exist").
D14 License Compliance: License compatibility is checked against declared package metadata and a policy — mislabelled or missing license metadata, and obligations that depend on how you distribute, are not resolved here.
D15 Churn × Complexity Hotspots: Churn hotspots come from git history — a freshly imported or squashed repository has no churn signal, and recent rewrites can mask a historically risky file.
D17 Explicit Debt: Acknowledged-debt signals (TODO/FIXME, suppressions, dead code) are textual — undocumented debt that nobody marked, and debt that lives in design rather than annotations, is invisible. Committed machine-written code (scaffolded migrations, designer/codegen output, generated stubs) is excluded — it is never the team's dead code to delete.
D19 Documentation Quality: Documentation quality is judged by an LLM over a bounded sample of docs — it reads what is written, not whether the docs match the running system, and it is advisory, not a measurement. Its critique rows are drawn from a closed category vocabulary and each row means the same thing in every run, so two scans can be compared row by row; the SET that fires is still a sample, and does not repeat exactly. Measured on one frozen input, six scans at one engine SHA: 2-5 critique rows per scan, 8 distinct rows across the six, 3 of those 8 seen in only one scan. So a D19 row is evidence about the documentation, but a COUNT of D19 rows is not a quantity — never read a change in it as an improvement or a regression.
D21 Naming Consistency: Naming quality is an LLM judgement over a bounded sample — it assesses clarity/consistency of the names it sees, not domain-correctness, and is advisory.
D26 Project Cohesion: Project focus is sized from members/namespaces per project — a project that is broad by deliberate design reads the same as one that has sprawled.
D27 Navigability: Indirection/navigability is structural — it measures hops to follow a call, not whether that indirection buys real flexibility or just ceremony.
D28 Secrets (history): Secret-history scanning sweeps the git log for known patterns — a secret that predates the available history, or never matched a signature, is not found (clean means "nothing matched in the history we can see").
D29 Static Analysis (SAST): SAST findings are pattern-based (semgrep) — it finds classes of bug it has rules for; logic flaws, auth/authorization gaps and issues needing runtime context are out of reach (and clean means "no rule matched").
D30 Dependency Vulnerabilities: CVE matching depends on accurate package/version metadata and on the advisory databases — a vulnerability with no published advisory, or in code not declared as a dependency, is not seen. Coverage needs a RESOLVED graph: an unpinned requirements.txt, or a pom without a resolved build, yields partial coverage rather than a clean verdict. An ecosystem the analyzer cannot scan is reported as unmeasured, never as clean.
D34 Knowledge Freshness: Freshness is decayed commit RECENCY, not comprehension — code read often but rarely committed reads as orphaned, and stable code that genuinely needs no changes is penalised the same as forgotten code; bot/squash commits distort it like the bus factor.
D35 Change Coupling: Change coupling is co-change in COMMITS — files split across separate commits, or coupled only through a shared config/build step, read as uncoupled, and a sweeping commit (rename/format) is excluded so it doesn't couple everything. It shows that files change together, not WHY: a high coupling can be a healthy cohesive pair as readily as a hidden leak.
D43 Malicious Dependencies: Only packages some vulnerability database has already NAMED as malicious are seen — a compromise published in the last hours, or never reported at all, is invisible here, and this dimension reading 10 is not evidence that a dependency is trustworthy. There is no typosquat or dependency-confusion analysis: a package nobody has reported is simply absent from the feeds. Coverage is the dependency scan's: an ecosystem that could not be scanned is disclosed as unmeasured, never as clean.
AC2 Forms & labels: Label association is read from static markup — a label wired up at runtime (JS-set aria-labelledby, framework-injected ids) reads as missing, a present label says nothing about whether its text is correct. A known UI-library field component (e.g. a JSX <TextField>) is now checked conservatively — flagged only when it carries NO label/aria-label/aria-labelledby/id/name — but wrapper/context-labelled libraries (Chakra/Radix FormControl+FormLabel) aren't statically visible (possible false positive) and non-JSX lowercased components are still skipped. A click handler on a plain element is now asked for a name too (it is a control the author declared), but the subtree test that answers it is deliberately generous: any DYNAMIC text expression in the subtree counts as a name, so an icon chosen by a ternary ({cond ? <IconA/> : <IconB/>}) reads as named, and a glyph component from a library the icon-import list does not know still names its parent. A clean result is "no unlabelled control found", not a labelling proof.
AC5 ARIA correctness: ARIA correctness is checked against the static role/attribute shape — roles/attributes set dynamically aren't seen, a valid role says nothing about whether it matches the element's real behaviour, and required-state checks are suppressed when a JSX spread could supply them. The two-branch toggle check (a control whose state is conveyed only by which of two mutually exclusive branches renders) reads CONDITIONALS THAT ARE ATTRIBUTES — Vue v-if/v-else/v-show and Alpine x-if/x-show — so the same toggle written as a Svelte {#if} block or a JSX ternary is control flow the markup model never projects as a branch and is not seen at all.
AC7 A11y enforcement: Enforcement is scored from in-repo config/CI evidence only — an a11y gate enforced in external tooling with no in-repo trace can't be credited, and a configured linter is presence, not proof the rules actually run or block a merge.
AX10 Code composition: Role is inferred from namespace/folder convention, not semantics — a domain concept living in a folder named "Services" reads as application, and the split is lines-of-code, not business value. The business-logic-share score is a SOFT, FLOORED signal: it contributes to the Architecture lens but is floored at the Critical gate, so an infrastructure-heavy design (a gateway, an ETL, a driver) is legitimately low without being nuked to zero.
M4 Documentation accuracy: Onboarding quality is an LLM read of the docs/setup present — it cannot run the onboarding or measure how long a real new joiner takes; the verdict is sampled and advisory.
P4 Deployment & Rollback: Approval/branch-protection rules live in repository settings the scan cannot see — only their in-repo evidence (config files, workflows) is checked, so a control enforced purely in the host's settings reads as "not evidenced".
P6 Release Hygiene: Rollback/observability controls are inferred from repo artefacts (pipelines, dashboards-as-code) — controls configured in external tooling, with no in-repo trace, cannot be credited.
The LLM boundary
LLM-set scores this run (4): D19, D21, D26, M4 (model: Local LLM). For these, a model reads a bounded sample and sets the numeric score; each names its own sample and method on its card. They are sampled and advisory by design: they vary at the margins between runs and are never a deterministic measurement. Every other score in this report is tool-computed at confidence 1.0.
What it measures: How tangled the control flow is — methods with many branches are hard to test and change.
Method: Cyclomatic complexity per method (1 + decision points), computed exhaustively across production source; test projects separated by convention. Deterministic.
69 method(s) exceeded the cyclomatic complexity threshold of 15; the worst was parse at 196. A further 1 method(s) were over the threshold but excluded as flat dispatchers (a long switch/match over independent cases: many branches, almost no nesting), the largest being web.url.constructor.isIgnoredCodePoint at 20 — they are counted neither in the figure above nor in this dimension's score.
+ 45 more group(s) — more in Appendix A; the complete list is findings.md.
What to do
Resolve the 3 exports (cyclomatic 22) finding(s) in Cyclomatic Complexity — start with collection.js, targets-parser.js, make-built-in.js. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (3 warning-level).
Resolve the 2 exports (cyclomatic 36) finding(s) in Cyclomatic Complexity — start with export.js, collection.js. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 warning-level).
Resolve the 2 exports (cyclomatic 26) finding(s) in Cyclomatic Complexity — start with typed-array-constructor.js, string-parse.js. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 warning-level).
Enforce Cyclomatic Complexity in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.
Detailed fixes: d1_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.
What it measures: How hard the code is for a person to follow, beyond raw branching.
Method: Cognitive complexity per method (Sonar-style nesting-penalized score), computed exhaustively over production code, excluding test projects. Deterministic.
+ 78 more group(s) — more in Appendix A; the complete list is findings.md.
What to do
Resolve the 2 exports (cognitive 48) finding(s) in Cognitive Complexity — start with typed-array-constructor.js, export.js. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 warning-level).
Resolve the 2 exports (cognitive 32) finding(s) in Cognitive Complexity — start with export.js, targets-parser.js. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 warning-level).
Resolve the 2 exports (cognitive 31) finding(s) in Cognitive Complexity — start with string-parse.js, collection.js. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 warning-level).
Enforce Cognitive Complexity in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.
Detailed fixes: d2_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.
Do you agree with this assessment?
D3 · God Classes2.5 / 10Weak✓ Tool-verified
What it measures: Over-large classes that try to do too much ("god classes").
Method: God-class detection by line and method-count thresholds per logical type (partial classes unified), filtered for generated code and registration/contract false positives. Deterministic.
Resolve the 2 FunctionTooLong finding(s) in God Classes — start with playground.js, main.js. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 warning-level).
Resolve the 1 FileTooLong finding(s) in God Classes — start with web.url.constructor.js. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
Enforce God Classes in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.
Detailed fixes: d3_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.
What it measures: Copy-pasted code that should be shared instead.
Method: Code duplication via token-stream sliding windows with type-aware normalization (locals masked, type names preserved), density-scored per KLoC of production code. Deterministic.
What it measures: Whether volatile projects sit underneath others that depend on them (so their churn ripples upward), and whether project dependencies form cycles. A widely-depended-on but stable shared/kernel project is healthy, not penalised.
Method: Dependency cycles via elementary-DFS over real .csproj references, plus Martin instability (afferent/efferent) per project. Exhaustive over the reference graph, deterministic.
Coverage: Exhaustive · type-level: afferent/efferent coupling + cycles computed over every production type — the population is all types, not a name convention.
6 production modules (npm), 0 dependency cycle(s), 0 unstable depended-on module(s). Read from the build's own module declarations, and main-sequence distance (abstractness) is not computed for these modules yet.
What it measures: Whether a class's methods are focused on a single responsibility.
Method: LCOM4 cohesion per production class with at least two methods: connected components of methods sharing state or calls, computed syntactically. Deterministic, not a proxy.
Coverage: Exhaustive · type-level: LCOM4 cohesion computed over every production class — the population is all types, not a name convention.
D9 · Test Distribution10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified
What it measures: Whether the test suite has a healthy mix of unit / integration / end-to-end tests.
Method: Test projects classified (Unit/Integration/BDD/E2E) from compiled metadata; test methods counted exhaustively across projects with placement-agnostic disk fallback. Deterministic.
2 test methods: 2 unit, 0 integration, 0 BDD, 0 e2e. The JavaScript/TypeScript suite contributes 2 `it`/`test` case(s) across 2 test file(s) declaring at least one; its tier split is read from package names and paths only.
✓ On the Gold path — maintain.
Detailed fixes: d9_recommendation.md.
Do you agree with this assessment?
D10 · Test Quality10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified
What it measures: Whether the tests truly assert behaviour rather than just running the code.
Method: Per-test assertions, skips, and mock references analyzed via Roslyn; structured skip-reason tags (BUG:/ENV:) separate documented deferrals from debt. Deterministic.
2 skipped (2 with a documented reason), 0 zero-assertion, no mocking-framework packages referenced (hand-written doubles or no mocking) across 2 tests.
What it measures: Whether dependencies are current, secure, and not bloated.
Method: Manifest scan via dotnet list package across all projects; worst-signal-per-package deduction (saturating for vulnerabilities, capped-linear for deprecation/outdated) per KLoC. Exhaustive, deterministic.
3 outdated direct production npm dependency(ies) of 14 graded, 2 pinning defect(s), across 18 package.json (3 of them the product) and 16 committed lockfile(s). Development dependencies are deliberately not graded: this dimension grades what SHIPS. Whether any of these packages is DEPRECATED or UNMAINTAINED is not graded — registry.npmjs.org's latest-version answer carries neither, and release age does not stand in for a maintenance status. Whether any is UNUSED is not graded either: that is a source question, and the frontend dependency lens (R8) answers it in this same run. Known CVEs in this dependency graph are D30's question, read from the manifest there.
Floating npm dependency: mkdirp · ×2
Outdated (npm): mkdirp · ×3
What to do
Resolve the 2 Floating npm dependency finding(s) in Dependency Hygiene. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 warning-level).
Enforce Dependency Hygiene in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Verified — provenance only; does not change the score.
Detailed fixes: d12_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.
What it measures: Whether any secrets (keys, tokens, passwords) have leaked into the code.
Method: In-process native secret scanner (entropy plus signature patterns) across all tracked files; no external tool. A clean result is a measured 10, not no-data zero. Deterministic.
What it measures: Whether the licenses of third-party packages are compatible with your policy.
Method: Third-party package licenses resolved from declared package metadata and checked against the configured policy (allow/deny/copyleft). Deterministic; clean = no incompatible license found at metadata depth.
0 of 14 shipped npm package(s) use a banned license. Licences were resolved from registry.npmjs.org over the 14 production dependency(ies) this repository's committed lockfile resolves, across 3 product package.json manifest(s). Its 99 `devDependencies` declaration(s) are excluded: a consumer installs none of them. ★ DEPTH: this is the DIRECT production set the lockfile resolves, NOT the transitive closure — only one of the four lock dialects this pass reads states a full graph, so a banned licence pulled in only by a dependency's OWN dependencies is outside this verdict, exactly as the JVM arm's declaration-site verdict is. ★ Each licence is the one the registry publishes for the package's CURRENT release rather than for the pinned version, which is the same caveat the Hex and RubyGems arms carry. This repository publishes itself under MIT, which is its own choice and is not judged here.
What it measures: Files that change often and are also complex — the riskiest hotspots.
Method: Per production file churn times cyclomatic complexity over a rolling window, computed from git and Roslyn/JS/Razor analysis. Exhaustive, deterministic per commit date.
What it measures: Acknowledged debt left in the code — TODOs, dead code, suppressed warnings.
Method: Roslyn syntactic debt markers (suppressions/TODO/FIXME/HACK/empty-catch/commented-code/Obsolete) plus SymbolFinder dead-code analysis; weighted-debt-per-KLoC density deducted 2.0x per unit. Deterministic, exhaustive.
0 deducted task-comment markers across 0 LoC (0.0/KLoC) → score 10.0. Task comments only: this repository's language is read without a compiler, so D17's suppression, dead-code and commented-out-code arms did not run and this score counts fewer marker kinds than a .NET repository's would.
What it measures: Whether the project's documentation is clear, complete, and useful.
Method: Judged by language model at low temperature (0.0-0.1) on a deterministic doc sample (READMEs plus first 25 architecture docs), with two-pass stability filtering. Advisory, sampled.
The repository's root README is excellent: it opens with a welcoming paragraph, links to the roadmap and future blog posts, states what `core-js` is (a modular standard library), lists its features (ECMAScript up to 2026, polyfills for promises/symbols/collections/typed arrays, Web standards like URLSearchParams), and ends with a strong fundraising call. The README also links to the architecture/design docs (102 markdown files) and is well-structured with an outline of all visible sections present in the document body. This repository is a long open-source project with extensive documentation: the READMEs and architecture/Docs markdown files are well written for an audience that reads them directly (the root README gives overview, installation, usage, contribution guidance, and licence; the docs/web/docs/usage.md file is a complete install-and-usage guide). The content is rich but largely non-structured — each document opens with a paragraph under its title and then a clipped outline listing all sections present in the body (e.g. 'So, what's next?', 'What is [`core-js`](https://github.com/zloirock/core-js)?', 'Let's start the next part...') rather than an ordered list of topics; this makes it hard to navigate without scanning through each one. The main defect is unstructured content that is not yet clear which sections are present and which are missing.
What to do
Improve Documentation Quality — currently 8.0/10. — The repository's root README is excellent: it opens with a welcoming paragraph, links to the roadmap and future blog posts, states what `core-js` is (a modular standard library), lists its features (ECMAScript up to 2026, polyfills for promises/symbols/collections/typed arrays, Web standards like URLSearchParams), and ends with a strong fundraising call. The README also links to the architecture/design docs (102 markdown files) and is well-structured with an outline of all visible sections present in the document body. This repository is a long open-source project with extensive documentation: the READMEs and architecture/Docs markdown files are well written for an audience that reads them directly (the root README gives overview, installation, usage, contribution guidance, and licence; the docs/web/docs/usage.md file is a complete install-and-usage guide). The content is rich but largely non-structured — each document opens with a paragraph under its title and then a clipped outline listing all sections present in the body (e.g. 'So, what's next?', 'What is [`core-js`](https://github.com/zloirock/core-js)?', 'Let's start the next part...') rather than an ordered list of topics; this makes it hard to navigate without scanning through each one. The main defect is unstructured content that is not yet clear which sections are present and which are missing.
What it measures: Whether names — types, methods, variables — are clear and consistent.
Method: Judged by language model at low temperature (0.0-0.1) on a deterministic random symbol sample (fixed size, not exhaustive), with disclosed confidence band. Advisory, sampled.
What it measures: How far you must trace to follow a call — low indirection and co-located slices read easier.
Method: Call indirection (interface hops, cross-namespace calls, slice-locality scaled) over a sampled set of method invocations, size-aware baseline. Sampled; confidence discounted by symbol-resolution gaps.
Coverage: Slice locality from the first namespace segments, SAMPLED (≤400 methods) — not exhaustive.
24 % of calls cross a namespace and 0 % go through an interface, but 100 % of collaborators are co-located — so a call's collaborators sit together and tracing stays easy. Baseline: small — navigation cost is tolerated.
What it measures: Whether any secrets were ever committed — scanned across the full git history, not just now.
Method: Secret scan via TWO gitleaks detect passes in an isolated checkout — the full git history, then a second --no-git pass over the working tree as it stands — merged and de-duplicated by (rule, file, line); each match flagged High. Both invocations are recorded in the audit trail. Exhaustive; when the tool is absent, or when its output cannot be parsed into the expected shape, the dimension is WITHHELD as an explicit measurement gap on our side — unscored and excluded from the lens, never a hedged middling score.
What it measures: Real static-analysis (SAST) findings — likely security bugs in the code, any language.
Method: Polyglot static analysis via semgrep across the repo using the pinned, image-baked p/security-audit + p/owasp-top-ten rulesets (no scan-time registry fetch); severity rules (ERROR/WARNING/INFO) map to a full-band severity-weighted score. Exhaustive, deterministic; degrades on parse failure.
Coverage: semgrep pattern rules over all files — exhaustive for the rule set, blind to classes of bug without a rule (clean = no rule matched).
64 finding(s): 0 critical, 62 high, 2 medium, 0 low. 38 unpinned-GitHub-Actions row(s) are reported here but scored by D36 (supply-chain provenance), which measures that posture as `pinned_actions` — one pinning decision is charged once, not once per lens. semgrep hit a parse error in 2 file(s) — `deno/corejs/index.js`, `website/src/playground.html` (line 25, line 44) — so no absence of findings in the named regions is evidence of anything; rows reported elsewhere in those files are real. Fix the syntax error (or exclude the file deliberately) and re-scan to cover them. Separately, one or more rules could not re-parse an embedded snippet in 3 file(s) (e.g. a workflow `run:` block read as shell). Those files WERE scanned and their other rows are unaffected; only those rules' view of those snippets is missing.
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
+ 2 more group(s) — more in Appendix A; the complete list is findings.md.
What to do
Resolve the 18 REDACTED finding(s) in Static Analysis (SAST) — start with REDACTED (7), REDACTED (7), REDACTED (4). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (18 issue-level).
Resolve the 4 REDACTED finding(s) in Static Analysis (SAST) — start with REDACTED (2), REDACTED (2). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (4 issue-level).
No action in Static Analysis (SAST) — all 38 REDACTED finding(s) are reported here at file:line but scored by D36 (supply-chain provenance), so none is charged to this dimension. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (38 issue-level, 0 of them charged here).
Detailed fixes: d29_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.
What it measures: Whether any dependency has a known published vulnerability (CVE), direct or transitive, in ANY ecosystem the repository declares — Dart pub, Elixir and Erlang via Hex, Go modules, Java and Kotlin via Maven/Gradle, JavaScript/npm, .NET/NuGet, PHP/Composer, Python/PyPI, RubyGems, Rust/Cargo and Swift.
Method: Dependency-CVE scan across every ecosystem the repository declares, scored ONCE. Three sources are unioned and deduplicated by advisory identity (rule id + alias closure, CVE<->GHSA) scoped to package+version, keeping the worst severity: `osv-scanner --recursive` over osv.dev for Dart pub, Elixir/Hex (and Erlang, whose `rebar.lock` syft first converts to a CycloneDX SBOM the scanner reads, with rows attributed back to the lock), Go, Java and Kotlin via Maven/Gradle (and Scala, whose sbt build's pinned direct declarations are written into a CycloneDX SBOM the scanner reads, with rows attributed back to the build file), npm, PHP/Composer, Python/PyPI, RubyGems, Rust/Cargo and Swift; `trivy fs --scanners vuln` for npm lockfiles; and `dotnet list package --vulnerable --include-transitive` for NuGet (with per-advisory collapse of the project x target-framework fan-out), plus a DECLARED-dependency arm that resolves a published gem's gemspec against rubygems.org where no Gemfile.lock is committed. `SeverityScore(c,h,m,l, normalizer 8.0)`. NotApplicable only when NO ecosystem is readable; if any applicable ecosystem could not be scanned the findings are REPORTED and the score is withheld. Supersedes the npm and OSV arms, retired 2026-09-05.
Resolve the 3 High CVE finding(s) in Dependency Vulnerabilities — start with REDACTED (3). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (3 issue-level).
Resolve the 2 Medium CVE finding(s) in Dependency Vulnerabilities — start with REDACTED (2). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 warning-level).
Resolve the 1 Low CVE finding(s) in Dependency Vulnerabilities — start with REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 recommendation-level).
Detailed fixes: d30_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.
What it measures: Whether anyone still has living knowledge of each file, or it has been orphaned — last understood long ago by someone now gone quiet. The sibling of the bus factor: D16 asks who owns it, D34 asks whether anyone still knows it.
Method: File orphaning as total living-knowledge decay below one focused-commit's worth within a year, computed per-file from the D16 decay model. Exhaustive, deterministic over fixed history.
Every significant source file has living knowledge — recently and meaningfully worked. Counted over 83 of the 3257 production source files in this repository: the rest are under the ~2,400-byte size floor this dimension measures over.
What it measures: Whether files that change together actually belong together — pairs that repeatedly co-change in git history despite having no explicit code dependency, surfacing the hidden/logical coupling (and boundaries in the wrong place) a static scan can't see.
Method: Pairwise co-occurrence over the per-commit file sets in git history (production source only — tests and generated dropped): Degree-of-Coupling = shared ÷ min individual revisions, reported above noise floors (each file ≥10 revisions, ≥5 shared commits, ≥50% strength); sweeping commits excluded. Deterministic over fixed history.
Coverage: Population: PRODUCTION source files only — test and generated files are dropped before pairing, so a class co-changing with its own test (trivially ~100%) can't drown the real production↔production coupling. Pairs ranked by Degree-of-Coupling. A non-source file is never a coupling PARTICIPANT either: documentation, schemas, config and data files are dropped with the rest, so a code↔docs pair — a command and the reference page that restates it — is not reported however strongly the two co-change; nor is coupling that runs THROUGH a build step or config file.
Resolve the 3 Boundary-crossing change coupling finding(s) in Change Coupling — start with data.mjs, modules-by-versions.mjs, export.js. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (3 issue-level).
Resolve the 12 Change coupling finding(s) in Change Coupling — start with es.string.search.js, es.string.replace.js, esnext.async-disposable-stack.constructor.js. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (12 warning-level).
Resolve the 1 Change-coupling hub finding(s) in Change Coupling — start with es.string.match.js. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
Detailed fixes: d35_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.
What it measures: Whether the build pipeline provides supply-chain integrity — generated provenance/attestation, signed artifacts (cosign/sigstore), an SBOM, and pinned build actions. Presence of the configuration, not a runtime guarantee.
Method: Supply-chain provenance/signing read deterministically from CI/build config (.github/workflows, .gitlab-ci.yml, azure-pipelines, Jenkinsfile, .circleci) + the release surface: four signals — generated provenance/attestation (SLSA/in-toto/actions-attest), artifact signing (cosign/sigstore/gitsign), an SBOM (syft/sbom-action/*.spdx.json/*.cdx.json), and SHA-pinned build actions — scored 10·present/denom. NotApplicable without a build pipeline. Detects configuration presence, not runtime enforcement.
What it measures: Whether the repository publishes a coordinated-vulnerability-disclosure policy (SECURITY.md or security.txt) with a reporting contact, so finders know how to report a vulnerability. Presence of a policy file with a contact, not whether the policy is adequate or honoured.
Method: Vulnerability-disclosure policy read deterministically from the repo: a SECURITY.md (root/.github/docs) or .well-known/security.txt / security.txt, regex-checked for a reporting contact (email / URL / mailto). Present + contact → 10; present without a contact → 4; NotApplicable when no policy file exists (it may live off-repo). Detects the policy file's presence + contact, not its adequacy.
What it measures: Whether any dependency the repository declares is published as MALICIOUS rather than merely vulnerable — a package that is an attacker's work, in any ecosystem osv-scanner reads. Scored apart from D30 because the answer is binary: there is no safe version to upgrade to, and the fix is to remove the package and rotate every credential it could have read.
Method: The same dependency scan D30 reads, partitioned on the scanner's own classification rather than rescanned: a row is MALICIOUS when its id is in the `MAL-` space (the ossf/malicious-packages feed) OR its `database_specific.cwe_ids` carries `CWE-506` ("Embedded Malicious Code"). Both channels are structural; the summary text is deliberately NOT read, because a malicious-package record whose summary says only "Critical severity vulnerability" is a real shape ([GHSA redacted]) and a text matcher misses it. Scored BINARY: any surviving row is 0, whatever its severity and however many CVEs sit beside it — a hostile dependency is not a quantity. Applicability and degradation are D30's: NotApplicable only when no ecosystem is readable, and an unscannable ecosystem degrades rather than reading clean. SCORED, not informational.
No dependency in any ecosystem this repository declares is published as malicious.
✓ On the Gold path — maintain.
Detailed fixes: d43_recommendation.md.
Do you agree with this assessment?
Frontend & cross-cutting dimensions
R = React/JS · M = Maturity · P = Readiness.
AC2 · Forms & labels10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged
Other · Accessibility — Whether form controls have a programmatic label (an associated label, aria-label or aria-labelledby), buttons have text, links have an accessible name, a click handler on a plain element names the control it declares, fieldsets have a non-empty legend, known UI-library field components carry a label prop, and a placeholder isn't used as the only label. Static markup readiness, not a WCAG conformance claim.
Method: Static markup-model scan: inputs/selects/textareas checked for an associated label[for]/wrapping label/aria-label/aria-labelledby (per document), buttons for accessible text, fieldsets for a legend; placeholder-only labelling flagged. Deterministic, hard fact per control.
Coverage: Population: form controls, buttons, links, fieldsets and known UI-library field components in the PARSED MARKUP files only (.html/.htm/.cshtml/.razor/.vue/.svelte/.jsx/.tsx); components, hidden subtrees and spread/dynamic-attribute elements are skipped, so a control whose label arrives through a spread or a runtime expression is deliberately not judged. Markup built in script — tagged-template (html`…`) UIs and hyperscript DOM factories — is not read at all.
Other · Accessibility — Whether ARIA is used correctly — valid non-abstract roles, the ARIA state a role requires, valid (non-misspelled) aria-* attribute names, in-enum values for token-typed aria-* attributes, and no aria-hidden on (or wrapping) a focusable element. Static markup readiness, not a WCAG conformance claim.
Method: Static markup-model scan: role values checked against the WAI-ARIA role set (abstract/invalid flagged), required ARIA state for a role, and aria-hidden on a focusable element. Deterministic, role/attribute level.
Coverage: Population: elements in the PARSED MARKUP files (.html/.htm/.cshtml/.razor/.vue/.svelte/.jsx/.tsx) that carry a role or an aria-* attribute; roles and token values are checked against the ARIA enums exhaustively within that set. An expression-valued (dynamic) role or aria-* value is skipped rather than guessed, and markup built in script — tagged-template (html`…`) UIs and hyperscript DOM factories — is not read at all.
Do you agree with this assessment?
AC7 · A11y enforcement4.0 / 10Weak✓ Tool-verified
Other · Accessibility — Whether accessibility is ENFORCED in the toolchain — an accessibility checker configured over the markup (an a11y lint rule set, e.g. eslint-plugin-jsx-a11y or vuejs-accessibility where the project lints JavaScript) and an automated accessibility assertion wired into tests or CI (axe/pa11y/Lighthouse or an equivalent) — on the Documented→Verified→Prevented ladder.
Method: Repo config/CI scan: an accessibility checker configured over the markup (an a11y lint rule set such as eslint-plugin-jsx-a11y / vuejs-accessibility where JavaScript is linted) and an automated accessibility assertion in tests or CI (axe/pa11y/Lighthouse or equivalent), graded on the Documented→Verified→Prevented rungs. Deterministic, presence/rung detection.
Coverage: Population: the repository's own tooling configuration — lint config, test and CI files — NOT the markup. It is read for a configured accessibility checker and an automated accessibility assertion (axe/pa11y/Lighthouse, or a native-toolkit equivalent), and it credits an INVOCATION, never a mention: a licence filename, an import comment or a doc reference earns no rung. Enforcement configured entirely outside the repository leaves no evidence here and cannot be credited.
No accessibility enforcement found — no a11y linter (an a11y linter that can read your UI — no component framework was detected, so the JSX/Vue ESLint plugins would have nothing to lint; use an HTML-template a11y linter (html-eslint, htmlhint) or run axe/pa11y over the rendered pages) and no axe/pa11y/Lighthouse in tests or CI. Start with the linter to catch issues at author time. What was searched, so you can tell an absence from a miss: the 3 markup file(s) this pass actually assessed, the linter configuration checked in beside them, and this repository's test and CI files — matched by name against the accessibility checkers this dimension carries. An audit run outside the repository, a hosted scanner, or a check whose name is not one of those, is not seen here.
What to do
Enforce accessibility in the toolchain: add an a11y linter that can read your UI — no component framework was detected, so the JSX/Vue ESLint plugins would have nothing to lint; use an HTML-template a11y linter (html-eslint, htmlhint) or run axe/pa11y over the rendered pages, then assert with your test runner's axe binding (jest-axe, vitest-axe, cypress-axe or @axe-core/playwright) in tests, then gate axe/pa11y/Lighthouse in CI.
Other · Architecture — How the codebase splits by code ROLE — domain, application, infrastructure, test, generated. The significance map behind the knowledge/coupling weighting, and a DDD signal in its own right: a thin domain core under fat infrastructure is the anemic-domain smell, quantified. How each file's role is decided, because the split is only as good as that: a generated name or a build-output tree makes it Generated, a test project makes it Test, and otherwise the file's NAMESPACE and PATH words are matched against fixed vocabularies in a fixed ORDER — domain, then infrastructure, then application — so a file whose words hit two layers is counted under the earlier one. A production file matching none of them counts as application, so that share reads 'application or unclassified' rather than a measured application layer. Roles come from naming convention, never from what the code does. On this repository the split was taken from the source tree on disk rather than from a loaded .NET workspace, so a file's role is decided by its PATH segments alone — no declared namespace was available to add to the evidence — and generated output is excluded from the census entirely rather than counted as a generated share.
Method: Roslyn line-count by code ROLE: every source file classified Domain/Application/Infrastructure/Test/Generated by namespace + path convention (the shared CodeRoleClassifier), then significant lines summed per role. Deterministic; the advisory score is the business-logic (domain+application) share of production code.
Coverage: Population: ALL source files, each bucketed into ONE of five roles (Domain/Application/Infrastructure/Test/Generated) by namespace + path convention — a file whose layer isn't named in the convention falls to Application (the neutral default), and the split is line-count, not semantic depth or business value.
What to do
The domain core is a small share of production code, but most of the rest matched no layer vocabulary at all — so this is not yet an anemic-domain finding. The namespace/path convention could not place that code, which makes the composition above a statement about the naming, not about the design. Name the layers (or check that the repository's conventions differ from the ones this check knows) before reading a thin domain into it.
Other · Architecture — Whether the project-reference graph is acyclic (cycles block independent build/deploy and signal eroding boundaries).
Method: Project reference cycles via elementary-DFS over real .csproj references, using the engine shared with D5/D7; cyclic versus acyclic. Exhaustive, deterministic.
Other · Architecture — Whether dependencies point inward (Domain ← Application ← Infrastructure/Web) — the clean-architecture dependency rule, checked across the project graph.
Method: Layer violations by name-segment inference (Domain/Core to Application to Infrastructure/Web) over the project-reference graph. Exhaustive over all projects, deterministic.
Maturity · Maturity — Whether the repo and its projects have a README, and whether it's substantive and current.
Method: Filesystem scan: README presence, word count, and headings for depth; git history for staleness. Exhaustive across root and project dirs, deterministic.
What to do
Add a 'Testing' section to the root README — how to run the test suite.
Add a README to the 6 of 11 project(s) that lack one — worth up to 1.1 pts.
Maturity · Maturity — Whether key decisions (ADRs) and the high-level shape (C4/diagrams) are written down.
Method: Filesystem scan: ADR folder/naming conventions or content, plus Mermaid/PlantUML/C4/architecture.md discovery. Exhaustive, deterministic.
No Architecture Decision Records found — no conventional ADR directory, no numbered `NNNN-title` documents in any markup this check reads, and nothing ADR-shaped by content. Design rationale recorded elsewhere (a design-notes tree, a mailing list, pull-request discussion) is not visible to this check and is not re-findable per decision, so a future maintainer cannot ask why one choice was made and get an answer.
No C4/Structurizr/PlantUML/Mermaid/Graphviz/D2 diagram, no drawn diagram named for the architecture, no file named `architecture` or `design` in any markup this check reads, and nothing in the README, docs or contributor guides that announces the shape — no `## Architecture` heading, no "architecture overview"/"high-level design" phrasing, no "the architecture is …" introduction, no guided code tour. A shape laid out in prose that never names itself as the architecture is not visible to this check, and neither is one kept outside the repository, so this row reports the absence of a re-findable shape document — not evidence that nobody wrote the shape down.
What to do
Record significant decisions one document per decision — dated, stating the context, the decision and its consequences — and keep them together wherever your design docs already live (a conventional `docs/adr/` tree, with each file named `NNNN-title` in whatever markup those docs already use, is the most discoverable form).
Add a C4 context/container diagram (Structurizr, PlantUML or Mermaid) or an architecture.md overview.
Maturity · Maturity — Whether the README actually describes the code that exists (LLM-judged, advisory).
Method: Judged by language model at low temperature: README accuracy versus actual projects, within a disclosed tolerance. Advisory, not a measured number.
Do you agree with this assessment?
P1 · CI/CD gates8.5 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified
Readiness · Readiness — Whether an automated pipeline builds and tests every change.
Method: Filesystem scan: CI workflow files (.github/workflows, .gitlab-ci.yml, etc.) for build and test stages. Exhaustive, deterministic.
What to do
Run the test suite in CI via an explicit runner step (`pytest` for the toolchain this pipeline already uses) and gate merges on it.
Do you agree with this assessment?
P10 · Library API & versioning10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged
Readiness · Readiness — For a library: a deliberate (small) public API surface and explicit semantic versioning so consumers can depend on it safely.
Method: Roslyn scan: public API surface area and semantic-versioning markers (SemVer attributes, changelog entries) for libraries; off .NET, a library is the ecosystem's publication act (an npm package that is not private and names an entry point, a PyPI distribution with a build system, a Rust library crate, a Maven/Gradle module that publishes, a Go module with no package main, a gemspec, a Composer library, a SwiftPM library product, a pub.dev or Hex package), its surface is the share of types the language model records as public (Rust, Swift, Java, Kotlin, Go, Dart; not measured where the model records no type visibility or, as in TypeScript, only module-level export), and its version is read from the manifest, a semver CHANGELOG, release tooling or semver git tags. Exhaustive, deterministic.
Readiness · Readiness — Whether SAST, secret/dependency scanning and performance benchmarking are wired in (presence, not runtime).
Method: Filesystem scan: SAST configuration, dependency-update automation, secret scanning, and a benchmark harness or benchmark step — in this repository's own ecosystem. Exhaustive, deterministic.
No static application security testing detected. For this repository's stack, add CodeQL's javascript-typescript pack, `semgrep --config=p/javascript`, or eslint-plugin-security as a CI step. What was searched, so you can tell an absence from a miss: the 11259 CI workflow file(s) in this repository, and the scanner and linter configuration checked in beside them. A scan that runs outside CI, one configured in your forge's web UI rather than in a committed file, or a tool whose name is none of those this check carries, is not seen — if that is your case the row is wrong, and saying so is more useful than adding a second scanner.
What to do
Add a SAST step to CI running what this repository's stack ships: CodeQL's javascript-typescript pack, `semgrep --config=p/javascript`, or eslint-plugin-security — so a security regression fails the build instead of landing.
Enable Dependabot/Renovate or a dependency-review gate.
Add gitleaks/trufflehog in CI to block PRs that introduce committed secrets.
Readiness · Readiness — Whether releases are automated and safely reversible (probes, rolling updates, approval gates) — from manifests/pipeline files, not the live environment.
Method: Filesystem scan: deployment manifests/IaC (K8s YAML, Helm, Terraform) for rolling updates, probes, approval gates, migration hooks. Exhaustive, deterministic.
What to do
The release job declares an environment, but its protection rules are not visible from the repository — confirm required reviewers are attached, or publish as a draft release so a bad build can be stopped before users can download it.
Readiness · Performance — Whether asynchronous code stays responsive — it avoids sync-over-async blocking (a .NET .Wait()/.GetAwaiter().GetResult(), a time.sleep or blocking HTTP call inside a Python coroutine, a *Sync call inside an async JavaScript function, block_on inside a Rust async fn, runBlocking inside a Kotlin suspend function, block() inside a Reactor publisher) that stalls a thread or event loop and risks deadlock, and, where the code is a reusable library on .NET, awaits with ConfigureAwait(false) so it never captures and stalls its caller's context.
Method: Production-source scan: sync-over-async blocking counted everywhere — .Wait()/.GetAwaiter().GetResult() in .NET; off .NET, read from the language model, a blocking call inside an async function (Python, TS/JS, Rust, Kotlin) or inside a Java method returning a Reactor Mono/Flux — and, for a .NET library with ≥5 awaits, the share of awaits using ConfigureAwait(false). Deterministic, syntax/text detection.
Do you agree with this assessment?
R1 · Type Safety0.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified
React / JS · Code Health — How much of the frontend is typed TypeScript vs untyped JavaScript.
Method: Frontend file inventory: the share of typed TypeScript vs untyped JavaScript across the source tree. Deterministic, exhaustive over frontend files.
2 typed · 4124 plain JS — the untyped files are packages/core-js-builder/config.js, packages/core-js-builder/index.js, packages/core-js-compat/compat.js, packages/core-js-compat/get-modules-list-for-target-version.js, packages/core-js-compat/helpers.js, packages/core-js-compat/index.js (+4118 more).
What to do
Migrate the remaining .js/.jsx files to TypeScript.
React / JS · Code Health — Near-exact copy-pasted blocks of substantial extent across the frontend (the D4 clone algorithm over JS/TS tokens, D-386): a block is reported only where its copies still agree on most of their own identifiers and literals, or were renamed as they were pasted but kept most of their constants, and where the copies carry enough code to stand on their own or the copied extent reaches 30 lines — so a re-implementation sharing neither names nor values, and a small pasted declaration, are both found and deliberately not reported, and a clean R10 is not a claim that nothing was copied.
Method: Near-exact copy-pasted blocks of substantial extent across the frontend (the D4 clone algorithm run over JS/TS tokens). Masking finds the candidates; a block is reported when its copies still agree on most of their own identifiers and literals, or when a renamed copy still agrees on most of its constants, AND the copies carry enough code to stand on their own — or when the copied extent reaches 30 lines. So a re-implementation sharing neither names nor values, and a small pasted declaration, are deliberately not counted. Deterministic.
27 duplicated blocks under packages/core-js/ have copies in at least two of the sibling directories actual, es, full, internals, modules — 10 of them are reported below, and 17 are counted here but not reported individually: those copies match on shape but no longer clear R10's bar for an individually reported row — either they kept neither their own names nor their values, or what was copied is too small to stand on its own (it reports near-exact duplication only, and only of substantial extent). What this row states is the concentration, which the detector measured over all 27 and which does not depend on how exactly each block's copies still match. That concentration is one structural fact, not 27 local ones: the siblings replicate behaviour none of them owns, which is the shape of a missing shared module — a common library every sibling imports — rather than 27 separate extractions. Check first whether the siblings are deliberately standalone deliverables (scaffold templates, demo apps that must stay copy-pasteable); where they are, the duplication is the design and the per-block rows are the ones to act on. — packages/core-js/internals/async-iterator-map.js:26
packages/core-js/modules/es.async-disposable-stack.constructor.js:17 · packages/core-js/modules/es.disposable-stack.constructor.js:15 — the two spans are one implementation copied and then locally edited — 496 tokens are still identical, in the same order in both files, with only local edits between them. The copies have already begun to drift, which is this row's finding: an edit made to one and not the other changes behaviour silently. Diff the two spans first to learn what genuinely differs, then extract the shared core into one module both sites use, passing the differences in as parameters — or, if one copy exists only because the other could not be imported from its context, make one of them the single source the other is generated or re-exported from. If one copy is no longer reachable, delete it rather than letting it shadow the live one. — packages/core-js/modules/es.async-disposable-stack.constructor.js:17
packages/core-js/modules/es.iterator.drop.js:14 · packages/core-js/modules/es.iterator.take.js:14 — the two spans are one implementation copied and then locally edited — 239 tokens are still identical, in the same order in both files, with only local edits between them. The copies have already begun to drift, which is this row's finding: an edit made to one and not the other changes behaviour silently. Diff the two spans first to learn what genuinely differs, then extract the shared core into one module both sites use, passing the differences in as parameters — or, if one copy exists only because the other could not be imported from its context, make one of them the single source the other is generated or re-exported from. If one copy is no longer reachable, delete it rather than letting it shadow the live one. — packages/core-js/modules/es.iterator.drop.js:14
packages/core-js/modules/esnext.promise.all-keyed.js:12 · packages/core-js/modules/esnext.promise.all-settled-keyed.js:12 — the two spans are one implementation copied and then locally edited — 285 tokens are still identical, in the same order in both files, with only local edits between them. The copies have already begun to drift, which is this row's finding: an edit made to one and not the other changes behaviour silently. Diff the two spans first to learn what genuinely differs, then extract the shared core into one module both sites use, passing the differences in as parameters — or, if one copy exists only because the other could not be imported from its context, make one of them the single source the other is generated or re-exported from. If one copy is no longer reachable, delete it rather than letting it shadow the live one. — packages/core-js/modules/esnext.promise.all-keyed.js:12
packages/core-js/modules/esnext.async-iterator.filter.js:12 · packages/core-js/modules/esnext.async-iterator.flat-map.js:13 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — packages/core-js/modules/esnext.async-iterator.filter.js:12
packages/core-js/modules/es.iterator.filter.js:14 · packages/core-js/modules/es.iterator.map.js:14 — the two spans are one implementation copied and then locally edited — 154 tokens are still identical, in the same order in both files, with only local edits between them. The copies have already begun to drift, which is this row's finding: an edit made to one and not the other changes behaviour silently. Diff the two spans first to learn what genuinely differs, then extract the shared core into one module both sites use, passing the differences in as parameters — or, if one copy exists only because the other could not be imported from its context, make one of them the single source the other is generated or re-exported from. If one copy is no longer reachable, delete it rather than letting it shadow the live one. — packages/core-js/modules/es.iterator.filter.js:14
packages/core-js/internals/async-iterator-map.js:26 · packages/core-js/modules/esnext.async-iterator.filter.js:28 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 directories, so the shared home is a decision rather than an obvious spot: check first whether one of them already owns this behaviour, and otherwise put the extracted module somewhere all of the sites already reach rather than making one of them depend on another. — packages/core-js/internals/async-iterator-map.js:26
packages/core-js/internals/async-iterator-iteration.js:24 · packages/core-js/modules/esnext.async-iterator.reduce.js:9 — the two spans are one implementation copied and then locally edited — 126 tokens are still identical, in the same order in both files, with only local edits between them. The copies have already begun to drift, which is this row's finding: an edit made to one and not the other changes behaviour silently. Diff the two spans first to learn what genuinely differs, then extract the shared core into one module both sites use, passing the differences in as parameters — or, if one copy exists only because the other could not be imported from its context, make one of them the single source the other is generated or re-exported from. If one copy is no longer reachable, delete it rather than letting it shadow the live one. — packages/core-js/internals/async-iterator-iteration.js:24
packages/core-js/modules/es.promise.all-settled.js:12 · packages/core-js/modules/es.promise.all.js:12 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — packages/core-js/modules/es.promise.all-settled.js:12
packages/core-js/modules/es.iterator.every.js:16 · packages/core-js/modules/es.iterator.find.js:16 · packages/core-js/modules/es.iterator.for-each.js:16 · packages/core-js/modules/es.iterator.some.js:16 — the 4 copies sit in sibling files in one directory, so check first whether one of them (or an existing module there) already owns this behaviour and the others should call it; otherwise extract it into one module in that directory and have each site call it. There is one copy in each of 4 separate files rather than several in one place, so check first whether these are sibling modules that each declare their own version of one shape — one per entity, per provider, per language. Where they are, no single extracted module collapses them: each module still has to be written, and what recurs is the TEMPLATE. The moves that do collapse a template are to generate these modules from the set they enumerate, or to replace the repeated construction with one factory each site calls with its own values — and where the set is the point, each module pinning one distinct thing, the repetition IS the enumeration and there is nothing to delete. — packages/core-js/modules/es.iterator.every.js:16
packages/core-js/modules/es.iterator.find.js:16 · packages/core-js/modules/es.iterator.some.js:16 — the 2 copies sit in sibling files in one directory, so check first whether one of them (or an existing module there) already owns this behaviour and the others should call it; otherwise extract it into one module in that directory and have each site call it. — packages/core-js/modules/es.iterator.find.js:16
packages/core-js/modules/esnext.map.reduce.js:12 · packages/core-js/modules/esnext.set.reduce.js:12 — the 2 copies sit in sibling files in one directory, so check first whether one of them (or an existing module there) already owns this behaviour and the others should call it; otherwise extract it into one module in that directory and have each site call it. — packages/core-js/modules/esnext.map.reduce.js:12
packages/core-js/modules/web.atob.js:16 · packages/core-js/modules/web.btoa.js:12 — the two spans are one implementation copied and then locally edited — 88 tokens are still identical, in the same order in both files, with only local edits between them. The copies have already begun to drift, which is this row's finding: an edit made to one and not the other changes behaviour silently. Diff the two spans first to learn what genuinely differs, then extract the shared core into one module both sites use, passing the differences in as parameters — or, if one copy exists only because the other could not be imported from its context, make one of them the single source the other is generated or re-exported from. If one copy is no longer reachable, delete it rather than letting it shadow the live one. — packages/core-js/modules/web.atob.js:16
packages/core-js/internals/string-cooked.js:7 · packages/core-js/modules/es.string.raw.js:7 — the two spans are one implementation copied and then locally edited — 94 tokens are still identical, in the same order in both files, with only local edits between them. The copies have already begun to drift, which is this row's finding: an edit made to one and not the other changes behaviour silently. Diff the two spans first to learn what genuinely differs, then extract the shared core into one module both sites use, passing the differences in as parameters — or, if one copy exists only because the other could not be imported from its context, make one of them the single source the other is generated or re-exported from. If one copy is no longer reachable, delete it rather than letting it shadow the live one. — packages/core-js/internals/string-cooked.js:7
packages/core-js/modules/es.array.push.js:11 · packages/core-js/modules/es.array.unshift.js:10 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — packages/core-js/modules/es.array.push.js:11
packages/core-js/modules/es.regexp.dot-all.js:8 · packages/core-js/modules/es.regexp.sticky.js:8 — the 2 copies sit in sibling files in one directory, so check first whether one of them (or an existing module there) already owns this behaviour and the others should call it; otherwise extract it into one module in that directory and have each site call it. — packages/core-js/modules/es.regexp.dot-all.js:8
packages/core-js/modules/esnext.map.emplace.js:13 · packages/core-js/modules/esnext.weak-map.emplace.js:13 — the 2 copies sit in sibling files in one directory, so check first whether one of them (or an existing module there) already owns this behaviour and the others should call it; otherwise extract it into one module in that directory and have each site call it. — packages/core-js/modules/esnext.map.emplace.js:13
packages/core-js/modules/es.array.with.js:15 · packages/core-js/modules/es.typed-array.with.js:17 — the two spans are one implementation copied and then locally edited — 104 tokens are still identical, in the same order in both files, with only local edits between them. The copies have already begun to drift, which is this row's finding: an edit made to one and not the other changes behaviour silently. Diff the two spans first to learn what genuinely differs, then extract the shared core into one module both sites use, passing the differences in as parameters — or, if one copy exists only because the other could not be imported from its context, make one of them the single source the other is generated or re-exported from. If one copy is no longer reachable, delete it rather than letting it shadow the live one. — packages/core-js/modules/es.array.with.js:15
packages/core-js/modules/es.regexp.constructor.js:53 · packages/core-js/modules/es.regexp.constructor.js:77 — the two spans are one implementation copied and then locally edited — 77 tokens are still identical, in the same order in both spans, with only local edits between them. The copies have already begun to drift, which is this row's finding: an edit made to one and not the other changes behaviour silently. Diff the two spans first to learn what genuinely differs, then extract the shared core into one module both sites use, passing the differences in as parameters — or, if one copy exists only because the other could not be imported from its context, make one of them the single source the other is generated or re-exported from. If one copy is no longer reachable, delete it rather than letting it shadow the live one. — packages/core-js/modules/es.regexp.constructor.js:53
packages/core-js/modules/es.string.ends-with.js:12 · packages/core-js/modules/es.string.starts-with.js:12 — the 2 copies sit in sibling files in one directory, so check first whether one of them (or an existing module there) already owns this behaviour and the others should call it; otherwise extract it into one module in that directory and have each site call it. — packages/core-js/modules/es.string.ends-with.js:12
packages/core-js/modules/esnext.async-iterator.filter.js:40 · packages/core-js/modules/esnext.async-iterator.reduce.js:50 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — packages/core-js/modules/esnext.async-iterator.filter.js:40
packages/core-js/modules/esnext.observable.constructor.js:88 · packages/core-js/modules/esnext.observable.constructor.js:139 — the two spans are one implementation copied and then locally edited — 56 tokens are still identical, in the same order in both spans, with only local edits between them. The copies have already begun to drift, which is this row's finding: an edit made to one and not the other changes behaviour silently. Diff the two spans first to learn what genuinely differs, then extract the shared core into one module both sites use, passing the differences in as parameters — or, if one copy exists only because the other could not be imported from its context, make one of them the single source the other is generated or re-exported from. If one copy is no longer reachable, delete it rather than letting it shadow the live one. — packages/core-js/modules/esnext.observable.constructor.js:88
packages/core-js/internals/async-iterator-map.js:11 · packages/core-js/modules/esnext.async-iterator.filter.js:12 · packages/core-js/modules/esnext.async-iterator.flat-map.js:13 — the 3 copies are spread across 3 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — packages/core-js/internals/async-iterator-map.js:11
packages/core-js/modules/es.iterator.filter.js:32 · packages/core-js/modules/es.iterator.flat-map.js:53 · packages/core-js/modules/es.iterator.map.js:25 — the 3 copies are spread across 3 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — packages/core-js/modules/es.iterator.filter.js:32
packages/core-js/modules/esnext.async-iterator.drop.js:36 · packages/core-js/modules/esnext.async-iterator.take.js:35 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — packages/core-js/modules/esnext.async-iterator.drop.js:36
packages/core-js/internals/async-from-sync-iterator.js:48 · packages/core-js/internals/async-from-sync-iterator.js:60 — all 2 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — packages/core-js/internals/async-from-sync-iterator.js:48
packages/core-js/modules/es.array.splice.js:28 · packages/core-js/modules/es.array.to-spliced.js:24 — the 2 copies sit in sibling files in one directory, so check first whether one of them (or an existing module there) already owns this behaviour and the others should call it; otherwise extract it into one module in that directory and have each site call it. — packages/core-js/modules/es.array.splice.js:28
packages/core-js/modules/es.iterator.zip-keyed.js:16 · packages/core-js/modules/es.iterator.zip.js:15 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — packages/core-js/modules/es.iterator.zip-keyed.js:16
packages/core-js/modules/esnext.math.imulh.js:8 · packages/core-js/modules/esnext.math.umulh.js:8 — the 2 copies sit in sibling files in one directory, so check first whether one of them (or an existing module there) already owns this behaviour and the others should call it; otherwise extract it into one module in that directory and have each site call it. — packages/core-js/modules/esnext.math.imulh.js:8
packages/core-js/modules/es.map.get-or-insert-computed.js:13 · packages/core-js/modules/es.weak-map.get-or-insert-computed.js:26 — the two spans are one implementation copied and then locally edited — 56 tokens are still identical, in the same order in both files, with only local edits between them. The copies have already begun to drift, which is this row's finding: an edit made to one and not the other changes behaviour silently. Diff the two spans first to learn what genuinely differs, then extract the shared core into one module both sites use, passing the differences in as parameters — or, if one copy exists only because the other could not be imported from its context, make one of them the single source the other is generated or re-exported from. If one copy is no longer reachable, delete it rather than letting it shadow the live one. — packages/core-js/modules/es.map.get-or-insert-computed.js:13
packages/core-js/modules/es.map.get-or-insert.js:6 · packages/core-js/modules/es.weak-map.get-or-insert.js:6 — the 2 copies sit in sibling files in one directory, so check first whether one of them (or an existing module there) already owns this behaviour and the others should call it; otherwise extract it into one module in that directory and have each site call it. — packages/core-js/modules/es.map.get-or-insert.js:6
packages/core-js/modules/es.promise.any.js:11 · packages/core-js/modules/es.promise.race.js:8 — the two spans are one implementation copied and then locally edited — 79 tokens are still identical, in the same order in both files, with only local edits between them. The copies have already begun to drift, which is this row's finding: an edit made to one and not the other changes behaviour silently. Diff the two spans first to learn what genuinely differs, then extract the shared core into one module both sites use, passing the differences in as parameters — or, if one copy exists only because the other could not be imported from its context, make one of them the single source the other is generated or re-exported from. If one copy is no longer reachable, delete it rather than letting it shadow the live one. — packages/core-js/modules/es.promise.any.js:11
packages/core-js/modules/es.uint8-array.from-base64.js:5 · packages/core-js/modules/es.uint8-array.to-base64.js:17 — the two spans are one implementation copied and then locally edited — 54 tokens are still identical, in the same order in both files, with only local edits between them. The copies have already begun to drift, which is this row's finding: an edit made to one and not the other changes behaviour silently. Diff the two spans first to learn what genuinely differs, then extract the shared core into one module both sites use, passing the differences in as parameters — or, if one copy exists only because the other could not be imported from its context, make one of them the single source the other is generated or re-exported from. If one copy is no longer reachable, delete it rather than letting it shadow the live one. — packages/core-js/modules/es.uint8-array.from-base64.js:5
packages/core-js/modules/es.uint8-array.to-base64.js:20 · packages/core-js/modules/es.uint8-array.to-hex.js:8 — the two spans are one implementation copied and then locally edited — 67 tokens are still identical, in the same order in both files, with only local edits between them. The copies have already begun to drift, which is this row's finding: an edit made to one and not the other changes behaviour silently. Diff the two spans first to learn what genuinely differs, then extract the shared core into one module both sites use, passing the differences in as parameters — or, if one copy exists only because the other could not be imported from its context, make one of them the single source the other is generated or re-exported from. If one copy is no longer reachable, delete it rather than letting it shadow the live one. — packages/core-js/modules/es.uint8-array.to-base64.js:20
packages/core-js/modules/web.url.can-parse.js:26 · packages/core-js/modules/web.url.parse.js:13 — the 2 copies sit in sibling files in one directory, so check first whether one of them (or an existing module there) already owns this behaviour and the others should call it; otherwise extract it into one module in that directory and have each site call it. — packages/core-js/modules/web.url.can-parse.js:26
packages/core-js/modules/web.url.constructor.js:1021 · packages/core-js/modules/web.url.constructor.js:1041 — all 2 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — packages/core-js/modules/web.url.constructor.js:1021
packages/core-js/stable/instance/entries.js:8 · packages/core-js/stable/instance/for-each.js:8 · packages/core-js/stable/instance/keys.js:8 · packages/core-js/stable/instance/values.js:8 — the 4 copies sit in sibling files in one directory, so check first whether one of them (or an existing module there) already owns this behaviour and the others should call it; otherwise extract it into one module in that directory and have each site call it. There is one copy in each of 4 separate files rather than several in one place, so check first whether these are sibling modules that each declare their own version of one shape — one per entity, per provider, per language. Where they are, no single extracted module collapses them: each module still has to be written, and what recurs is the TEMPLATE. The moves that do collapse a template are to generate these modules from the set they enumerate, or to replace the repeated construction with one factory each site calls with its own values — and where the set is the point, each module pinning one distinct thing, the repetition IS the enumeration and there is nothing to delete. — packages/core-js/stable/instance/entries.js:8
packages/core-js/internals/array-iteration-from-last.js:5 · packages/core-js/internals/array-iteration.js:7 — the two spans are one implementation copied and then locally edited — 56 tokens are still identical, in the same order in both files, with only local edits between them. The copies have already begun to drift, which is this row's finding: an edit made to one and not the other changes behaviour silently. Diff the two spans first to learn what genuinely differs, then extract the shared core into one module both sites use, passing the differences in as parameters — or, if one copy exists only because the other could not be imported from its context, make one of them the single source the other is generated or re-exported from. If one copy is no longer reachable, delete it rather than letting it shadow the live one. — packages/core-js/internals/array-iteration-from-last.js:5
packages/core-js/internals/set-is-disjoint-from.js:12 · packages/core-js/internals/set-is-superset-of.js:11 — the two spans are one implementation copied and then locally edited — 75 tokens are still identical, in the same order in both files, with only local edits between them. The copies have already begun to drift, which is this row's finding: an edit made to one and not the other changes behaviour silently. Diff the two spans first to learn what genuinely differs, then extract the shared core into one module both sites use, passing the differences in as parameters — or, if one copy exists only because the other could not be imported from its context, make one of them the single source the other is generated or re-exported from. If one copy is no longer reachable, delete it rather than letting it shadow the live one. — packages/core-js/internals/set-is-disjoint-from.js:12
packages/core-js/modules/es.array.find-index.js:6 · packages/core-js/modules/es.array.find.js:6 — the 2 copies sit in sibling files in one directory, so check first whether one of them (or an existing module there) already owns this behaviour and the others should call it; otherwise extract it into one module in that directory and have each site call it. — packages/core-js/modules/es.array.find-index.js:6
What to do
Act on each finding's own remediation rather than one rule: the move depends on what recurs. Where the copies are executable blocks, give the shared part one home and call it from each site; where they are declarations, a listing, a specialisation already delegating to its base, or one shape repeated per entity, there is no call site and the move is a shared type, a generated set or a factory — sometimes there is nothing to extract.
React / JS · Code Health — Per-function cyclomatic/cognitive complexity from the token-level function scanner (D-386) — real branching, not a regex heuristic.
Method: Per-function cyclomatic/cognitive complexity from a token-level function scanner (real branching, not a regex heuristic), computed over every frontend function. Deterministic.
parse has cyclomatic complexity 196 and cognitive complexity 364; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — packages/core-js/modules/web.url.constructor.js:447
structuredCloneInternal has cyclomatic complexity 98 and cognitive complexity 86; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive sits below cyclomatic here, so much of the count is breadth — arms side by side rather than stacked — and splitting per arm would leave a function per arm; group the work between the checks into named steps instead. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — packages/core-js/modules/web.structured-clone.js:189
sumPrecise has cyclomatic complexity 40 and cognitive complexity 60; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — packages/core-js/modules/es.math.sum-precise.js:38
exports has cyclomatic complexity 36 and cognitive complexity 48; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — packages/core-js-pure/override/internals/export.js:44
run has cyclomatic complexity 36 and cognitive complexity 39; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — tests/unit-global/es.string.split.js:9
exports has cyclomatic complexity 33 and cognitive complexity 46; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — packages/core-js/internals/iterator-define.js:28
exports has cyclomatic complexity 31 and cognitive complexity 82; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — packages/core-js/internals/uint8-from-base64.js:72
parseIPv6 has cyclomatic complexity 31 and cognitive complexity 74; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — packages/core-js/modules/web.url.constructor.js:206
RegExp has cyclomatic complexity 30 and cognitive complexity 33; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — packages/core-js/modules/es.regexp.constructor.js:139
exec has cyclomatic complexity 28 and cognitive complexity 29; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — packages/core-js/internals/regexp-exec.js:47
decode has cyclomatic complexity 27 and cognitive complexity 82; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — packages/core-js/internals/url-percent-coding.js:72
tryToTransfer has cyclomatic complexity 26 and cognitive complexity 34; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — packages/core-js/modules/web.structured-clone.js:430
exports has cyclomatic complexity 26 and cognitive complexity 31; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — packages/core-js/internals/string-parse.js:43
(anonymous) has cyclomatic complexity 25 and cognitive complexity 29; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. (×2) — tests/unit-global/web.structured-clone.js:9, tests/unit-pure/web.structured-clone.js:18
exports has cyclomatic complexity 22 and cognitive complexity 24; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — packages/core-js/internals/make-built-in.js:26
(anonymous) has cyclomatic complexity 21 and cognitive complexity 36; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — packages/core-js/modules/es.string.split.js:66
NumericRangeIterator has cyclomatic complexity 21 and cognitive complexity 19; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive sits below cyclomatic here, so much of the count is breadth — arms side by side rather than stacked — and splitting per arm would leave a function per arm; group the work between the checks into named steps instead. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — packages/core-js/internals/numeric-range-iterator.js:20
exports has cyclomatic complexity 20 and cognitive complexity 31; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — packages/core-js/internals/iterate.js:22
isDisallowedCodePoint has cyclomatic complexity 20 and cognitive complexity 18; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive sits below cyclomatic here, so much of the count is breadth — arms side by side rather than stacked — and splitting per arm would leave a function per arm; group the work between the checks into named steps instead. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — packages/core-js/modules/web.url.constructor.js:97
What to do
Break down the listed branch-heavy functions; aim P95 cyclomatic ≤ 5.
Do you agree with this assessment?
R3 · Large Files10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified
React / JS · Code Health — How many source files exceed the large-file threshold.
Method: Components/modules exceeding the large-file threshold, counted exhaustively across the frontend source tree. Deterministic.
Do you agree with this assessment?
R4 · Test Coverage9.9 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified
React / JS · Readiness — Static test reachability (D-386): the share of production files reachable from any test via the import graph — measured without running anything.
Method: Static test reachability: the share of production files reachable from any test via the import graph — measured without running anything. Deterministic.
No test imports this module directly or transitively. Import reachability cannot see a test that executes a file by path instead of importing it, nor one that drives it through a running browser by navigating to a URL — if neither does, no test reaches this one. (×17) — scripts/build-compat/data.mjs, REDACTED, scripts/update-version.mjs, …
React / JS · Readiness — How outdated the npm dependencies are (a maturity signal). JS/npm CVEs are scored separately in D30 (JS/npm Dependency Vulnerabilities).
Method: npm dependency staleness from manifest/registry metadata (a maturity signal; JS/npm CVEs are scored separately in D30, which answers dependency vulnerabilities for every ecosystem). Deterministic.
Do you agree with this assessment?
R6 · Tooling6.7 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified
React / JS · Readiness — Whether the project wires up test, lint and typecheck — detected from each package.json script's COMMAND (eslint / tsc / vitest / jest / playwright), not just its name, and corroborated against CI-workflow invocations so a tool run only in CI still counts.
Method: package.json scanned for test/lint/typecheck script wiring. Deterministic presence check.
test ✓ · lint ✓ · typecheck ✗ — read from this repository's package.json scripts and corroborated against its CI workflows. A script counts when its name or command matches the step: `test` for the suite, `lint` or `prettier` for linting, `typecheck`/`type-check`/`tsc` for type checking. ✗ therefore means no script or CI step under those names was found, NOT that the step is absent from your pipeline — a task invoked by a runner this check does not read, or named something else entirely, is not seen and is worth confirming before acting on a cross. A ✓ means the wiring is DECLARED — a script or CI step under those names exists. It is not a statement that the step passes, or that it runs at all: nothing here installs a dependency or executes a suite.
What to do
Add `tsc --noEmit` as package.json scripts and run them in CI.
Do you agree with this assessment?
R7 · Dead Code10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified
React / JS · Code Health — Files unreachable from every application/tooling/test entry point, and exports nothing imports (module-graph reachability, D-386).
Method: Dead code: files unreachable from every application/tooling/test entry point plus exports nothing imports, via module-graph reachability. Deterministic, exhaustive over the import graph.
153 file(s) (~490 LoC) were excluded from dead-code analysis. This package DOES declare main/module/exports — but every declared target is missing from the scanned tree, which is what a build-output entry (dist/, lib/, out/) looks like before the package is built. Point a declared target at the source entry, or build the package before scanning, so reachability can follow it. — packages/core-js-pure
React / JS · Readiness — npm dependency truthfulness (D-386): unused dependencies, imports not declared anywhere, and type-/test-only packages shipped as production deps.
Method: npm dependency truthfulness: unused dependencies, imports declared nowhere, and type-/test-only packages shipped as production deps — from the manifest + import graph. Deterministic.
Declared in scripts/check-actions/package.json but never imported anywhere in that package or its workspace members — no static import reaches it. Usually that is dead weight and attack surface, but two shapes are indistinguishable from source and are NOT dead: an optional or native peer that another dependency loads dynamically at runtime, and a package a build, docs or test step installs and invokes separately. Confirm which of the three this is before removing it.
Declared in scripts/check-dependencies/package.json but never imported anywhere in that package or its workspace members — no static import reaches it. Usually that is dead weight and attack surface, but two shapes are indistinguishable from source and are NOT dead: an optional or native peer that another dependency loads dynamically at runtime, and a package a build, docs or test step installs and invokes separately. Confirm which of the three this is before removing it.
Declared in tests/observables/package.json but never imported anywhere in that package or its workspace members — no static import reaches it. Usually that is dead weight and attack surface, but two shapes are indistinguishable from source and are NOT dead: an optional or native peer that another dependency loads dynamically at runtime, and a package a build, docs or test step installs and invokes separately. Confirm which of the three this is before removing it.
What to do
Remove unused dependencies, declare unlisted imports explicitly, and demote type-/test-only packages to devDependencies.
React / JS · Architecture — Import cycles in the module graph (D-386) — files that can only be understood and changed together.
Method: Import cycles in the module graph, detected exhaustively over JS/TS imports (the same cycle detection as the .NET coupling dimension). Deterministic.
Do you agree with this assessment?
X24 · Document value interpolated into markup unescaped10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged
Other · Security — Whether text read out of the document being converted is escaped before it is written into generated markup — a value the document's author chose, interpolated into an attribute the surrounding literal delimits, can close that attribute and open another.
Method: Roslyn semantic model over the whole compilation: a string-typed `Value`/`InnerText`/`InnerXml`/`Text` member declared inside `DocumentFormat.OpenXml` or `System.Xml` is a taint SOURCE, propagated through assignments, returns, arguments, tuple elements and string composition to its transitive closure, then read at interpolated-string holes that sit in a markup position the surrounding literal itself delimits. Escaper/encoder calls and enclosing validator conditions cut the flow. Flow- and container-insensitive by construction. A second arm needs no provenance at all and reports a type that CONTRADICTS ITSELF — the same expression escaped at one delimited markup hole and interpolated raw at another hole in the same markup position of the same type, which the type's own escaping proves is a defect without knowing where the value came from. On a repository with no .NET source it reads JavaScript/TypeScript off the token stream with the same rule: a DOM read of raw document text (`getAttribute`, `textContent`, `innerText`, `nodeValue`) is the source, propagated through local bindings and string composition, and judged at template-literal and concatenation holes in the same two delimited markup positions; escapers and validating conditions cut it, and documentation-site, test, vendored and minified scripts are not read. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.
Other · Code Health — Whether a value the caller is invited to supply is the value the type actually uses — a constructor parameter stored in a private field that nothing ever reads while the default it was given is spelled out a second time at the site that should have read it, a keyed lookup that falls back to a different setting than the one its key names while the same type falls back to the matching one for that same key, or a culture-sensitive parse given no format provider by a type that feeds its own settable culture to the same kind of parse elsewhere. Either way, every caller who supplies a value silently gets something else.
Method: Roslyn syntax: private instance fields of a non-partial type assigned in a constructor from one of its own parameters with a `??` fallback, checked for whether anything in the type body reads the field and whether that same fallback expression is spelled out again outside the constructor; and `??` fallbacks onto a member access from a lookup call carrying exactly one string literal, grouped by that key across the type and checked for a fallback member whose folded name disagrees with the key while a sibling site for the same key agrees with it. On a repository with no .NET source the first two arms read JavaScript/TypeScript off the engine’s own token stream (tests included, bundles and vendored paths not): a `#x`, `private` or `private` parameter-property instance field filled in the constructor from a parameter (or one member of one) through `??`/`||` or a parameter default, never read anywhere in the file by name, whose constructed default is spelled again in the class body; and `lookup("key") ?? s.member` grouped by key per class, or per module outside every class. The culture arm has no JavaScript counterpart: its parses take no locale. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.
Do you agree with this assessment?
X29 · Per-element action decided by a fixed element10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged
Other · Code Health — Whether a decision taken once per element is taken ABOUT that element — a test inside a counted loop that reads a fixed subscript of the very collection its guarded statement indexes by the loop variable applies element zero's answer to all of them, so the elements that differ from it are all handled wrongly, and in the same direction.
Method: Roslyn syntax only, no semantic model: every `for` statement declaring exactly ONE loop variable, and every `if` inside its body that is not under a nested loop or a lambda. A site enters the population when the `if`’s condition never mentions the loop variable while the statement it guards indexes some collection by that variable ALONE (`c[i]`; `c[i + 1]` and `c[i, j]` are outside it). A finding additionally needs the AGREEING TWIN at the same-collection grain: the condition must read THAT SAME collection at a subscript that does not move — written into the condition, or reached through a local declared BEFORE the loop, so an alias bound inside the body is not followed. Both collection expressions must be simple identifiers. On a repository with no .NET source the same rule reads JavaScript/TypeScript off the engine’s own token stream (tests included, bundles and vendored paths not): a `for (let|var|const x = …; …; …)` with one declarator and a braced body, an alias followed only when it is declared before the loop in a block that encloses it and never assigned inside the loop. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.
Do you agree with this assessment?
WCAG coverage — what static analysis assessed
Statically assessed 3 of 55 WCAG 2.2 Level A/AA success criteria (5%; ≈6% of the 50 WCAG 2.1 AA criteria for EN 301 549). The other 52 require runtime or manual evaluation. Partial signal only (a clean result is necessary, not sufficient; static analysis fully verifies none). This is accessibility readiness, not a conformance claim — a WCAG conformance claim requires manual evaluation (WCAG-EM 1.0).
The score is the rank-weighted fold of these lenses (worst-heaviest), each including its meta-dimensions; a lens with a Critical contributor is capped at Fair (its band reads "gated by …") and is never the strongest area however high its average.
Unscored — 3 check(s) recorded observations but carry no score
These checks ran and found something, but they do not carry a score — either by design (an advisory check reports evidence rather than grading it) or because they could not be scored here. They are excluded from the score for that reason, not because there was nothing to see.
X10 Duplicated predicate — 3 observation(s) recorded · Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score.
X6 Hand-rolled structured-format parsing — 1 observation(s) recorded · Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score.
X7 Silent fallback defaults — 5 observation(s) recorded · Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score.
Not evidenced — 4 control(s) we could not find positive evidence for
These checks grade a working control, and the repository shows no evidence of one. That is deliberately not scored as a zero: a repository cannot show an ops runbook, a database TTL or an infrastructure-side audit log, so absence of evidence here is not evidence the control is missing. It is also not a statement that the check is irrelevant to this codebase — the thing it grades applies; we just could not see it. Excluded from the score either way.
C3 Audit Trail — Not assessed: these audit controls are read from a source model (declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names, guard methods) that was not loaded for this repository — because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. Absence of an idiom this check recognises is NOT evidence that this repository lacks audit controls: it may implement them entirely in its own ecosystem. This is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
C4 Data Retention — Not assessed: these retention controls are read from a source model (declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names, guard methods) that was not loaded for this repository — because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. Absence of an idiom this check recognises is NOT evidence that this repository lacks retention controls: it may implement them entirely in its own ecosystem. This is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
C5 Data-Subject Rights — Not assessed: these data-subject rights controls are read from a source model (declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names, guard methods) that was not loaded for this repository — because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. Absence of an idiom this check recognises is NOT evidence that this repository lacks data-subject rights controls: it may implement them entirely in its own ecosystem. This is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
P5 DR & Backup — not evidenced — repo shows no backup/RTO/RPO controls; absence of evidence is not evidence of a working control
Not included — 71 check(s) not relevant to this codebase
These checks had nothing to measure here (no tests, no git history, the codebase is small, or the architecture style doesn't apply), so they're omitted above rather than scored low.
AC1 Text alternatives — No image/media element found in the parsed markup — AC1 not applicable here.
AC3 Page structure — No structural check found in the parsed markup — AC3 not applicable here.
AC4 Keyboard semantics — No interactive element found in the parsed markup — AC4 not applicable here.
AC6 Visual & motion safety — No styled element found in the parsed markup — AC6 not applicable here.
AX1 Captive dependencies — Not applicable: this repository's JavaScript imports no dependency-injection container and defines no container of its own — nothing that both registers and resolves bindings, and nothing that names two lifetimes — so nothing holds one lifetime's instance while handing out another's.
AX2 Stateful singletons — Not applicable: TypeScript/JavaScript runs each process's requests on one event loop, so no two requests write a shared object at the same instant (interleaving across an await is a different defect).
AX5 Architecture & structure — not assessed — architecture style/structure is computed from a project graph (projects, types, module namespaces) that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
AX6 Interface segregation — not assessed — interface segregation is computed over a type surface that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
AX7 Slice cohesion — not applicable — not a vertical-slice architecture
AX8 Test isolation — no test/production split to check
AX9 CQS / query purity — no CQRS query handlers detected — query purity is not applicable to this codebase
AXB2 Runtime readiness — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
AXR1 Runtime accessibility — the dev server did not expose a crawlable HTTP endpoint in time — no runtime evidence This is a statement about this run, not a statement about your application: nothing here says the surface is inaccessible, only that it was never rendered.
C1 Data Protection — No personal data detected in a persisted data model — no PII-named field (email, firstName, dateOfBirth, phoneNumber, …) or stored credential on a TypeORM/MikroORM/sequelize-typescript/NestJS-Mongoose entity, a Mongoose schema, a Sequelize or Drizzle table, a Knex migration or a Prisma model — and no database or data-store client in the source either, so this repository keeps no data at rest for these controls to protect. If it does persist personal data (through a hosted backend configured outside this repository, for instance), the controls belong to wherever that data is stored.
C2 Access Controls — Not assessed: these authorization controls are read from a source model (declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names, guard methods) that was not loaded for this repository — because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. Absence of an idiom this check recognises is NOT evidence that this repository lacks authorization controls: it may implement them entirely in its own ecosystem. This is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
D11 Test Reliability — Test reliability not included — no browser-driven test runner (karma)
D16 Bus Factor — single-maintainer repository — bus factor is not applicable
D18 Solution Shape — D18 scores the shape of a .NET solution; this repository has no .NET solution or project files, so the dimension does not apply.
D20 ADR Quality — N/A — ADRs are expected on deployable products with a user-facing host, not consumed libraries; no ADR log is required here.
D22 Internal API Consistency — The exposed public-API surface could not be collected — no C#/VB projects loaded.
D23 Boundary Type-Coupling — No bounded-context organisation was detected either — neither a context-shaped layout nor 2+ sibling source directories each declaring an aggregate root. Declaring this codebase's bounded contexts (≥2) would let cross-boundary type coupling be assessed. Declare them in `.codehealth/config.yaml` at the repository root (create it if absent), mapping each context name to the module-path or namespace prefixes that belong to it — e.g. `architecture:` → `contexts:` → `Billing: ["src/billing", "Acme.Billing"]`, `Catalog: ["src/catalog", "Acme.Catalog"]`.
D24 Comment Value — No inline comments to assess — comment value is not applicable here.
D25 ADR Conformance — no ADRs to check
D31 IaC & Container Security — No Infrastructure-as-Code or container manifests found (Dockerfile, Docker Compose, Terraform, Kubernetes/Helm, CloudFormation, ARM, Bicep, Ansible); nothing to scan.
D32 Data Compliance (PII/GDPR) — No personal data was found crossing a boundary the PII/GDPR ruleset checks — nothing written to a log or console sink, placed in a URL or query string, or persisted to browser storage. That is a clean result for the LEAK surface only: this ruleset detects personal data escaping, it does not inventory the personal data a repository holds, so it is not evidence that this repository has no personal-data surface. The personal-data map (Appendix C) and the C1-C5 compliance cards are what speak to that.
D39 IL Efficiency — D39 measures the IL emitted by a .NET build; this repository has no .NET solution or project files, so the dimension does not apply.
D40 Network Egress Confinement — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; network egress policy is a cluster-native control that may live at the platform/firewall layer, so there is nothing to assess here.
D41 Kernel & Syscall Confinement — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; seccomp/AppArmor/SELinux confinement is a workload-level control, so there is nothing to assess here.
D42 Runtime Threat Enforcement — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; runtime threat-detection and admission-control policy are cluster-level controls, so there is nothing to assess here.
D44 Platform End-of-Life — Platform end-of-life not assessed — this repository declares no platform this pass reads
D7 Architectural Integrity — no checkable ADRs, and no project-reference graph for the cycle pass to read — so this dimension makes no claim about dependency cycles in either direction (where this repository's language has an import-cycle lens, cycles are reported there). Architectural integrity not assessed
D8 Code Coverage — Coverage not measured — JavaScript/TypeScript suite
DM1 Domain Modelling — not scored — this repository shows none of the 3 signals this lens looks for
ED1 Event-Driven — not scored — this repository shows none of the 3 signals this lens looks for
ED5 Idempotency — This check finds retry-prone mutations (command handlers and message/event consumers) by walking the repository's declared types, and none was loaded here, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
ES1 Event Sourcing — not scored — this repository shows none of the 3 signals this lens looks for
GD1 Unfinished & placeholder code — no source files were read — this check reads C# syntax, and none was loaded for this repository. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
IC1 Incompleteness & stubs — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
P12 CI test-gate honesty — Reported, not scored — and nothing was matched here. The coverage check applies to any stack, and the automatic-re-run check to any GitHub-Actions workflow, but the checks for excluded tests, skipped tests and sleep-based synchronisation currently recognise only some ecosystems' test-runner idioms, so on a repository built with another stack the zeros below mean 'not checked', not 'clean'.
P2 Observability — This repository's JavaScript/TypeScript source (6 module(s), 3270 file(s) read) declares no entry point and bootstraps no server, and nothing here deploys a service — it is a library, run inside whatever hosts it, so production observability (structured logging, tracing/metrics, health checks) is N/A. If it grows a binary or a service, the dimension reactivates.
P7 Outbound HTTP resilience — not applicable — no HTTP server, API framework or worker entry point was found in the JavaScript/TypeScript source, so there is no service whose uptime a failing dependency could take down
P8 Schema migrations — no ORM, schema-migration tool or schema auto-create was found in this repository's dependency manifests or source, so there is no database schema for this check to judge
P9 Domain vs controller coverage — no coverage report found on disk — produce a coverage report in a standard format (lcov — `vitest --coverage`, `jest --coverage`, `bun test --coverage --coverage-reporter=lcov`, or `nyc`) and commit it — a hosted scan measures a clone of the repository, so a report that exists only in a working tree, a CI runner's or your own, never reaches it; the artefact is commonly gitignored, so `git add -f` that one file (or un-ignore its path) and commit it alongside the code it measures, or wire coverage collection into CI, to enable this cross-layer check
PF1 Benchmark discipline — Not applicable: no benchmark suite was found. This check searched for tinybench, mitata, benchmark.js, benny or vitest `bench(...)` calls in files that import them (or `*.bench.*` files), or one of those in a package.json, and for a `*benchmark*` script that this repository's CI runs. Benchmarks are credited as a bonus, so their absence is neither scored nor deducted.
PF2 Allocation hygiene — Not applicable: TypeScript/JavaScript runs on a garbage-collected runtime that gives a program no allocation-control idiom to choose on a hot path — no pools, stack allocation or value types — so allocation awareness is not something this code can be rated on.
R11 Import Boundaries — No recognizable feature-sliced/layered src layout — boundary rules not applicable.
S1 Web-Security Posture — Not assessed: these web-security controls are read from a source model (declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names, guard methods) that was not loaded for this repository — because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. Absence of an idiom this check recognises is NOT evidence that this repository lacks web-security controls: it may implement them entirely in its own ecosystem. This is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
SC1 Supply-chain hygiene — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
X1 Async correctness — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
X12 Unreachable branch — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X13 Undrained process stream — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X14 Bypassable address classification — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X15 Unvalidated length from an untrusted reader — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X16 Unfloored truncation loop — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X17 Uncapped recursion over a caller-supplied document — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X18 Disposal-pattern correctness — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X19 Unrestored process-global state — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X2 Cancellation propagation — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
X20 Mistyped argument guard — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X21 Side-effecting pattern guard — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X22 Contradicted release guard — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X23 Unguarded diagnostic materialisation — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X26 Unsynchronised callback handoff — Not applicable: this check looks for a collection written by a callback on one thread while the body waiting on it touches it on another, and in this repository's languages no collection is reachable from two threads at once. TypeScript/JavaScript runs every callback on the one thread that owns its objects: a callback runs only when the body waiting on it has yielded, never alongside it, and a worker thread receives a COPY of what it is sent. A SharedArrayBuffer carries raw bytes, never an Array, Map or Set, so no collection is reachable from two threads at once. Not a gap in the analyzer and not a finding about your code.
X27 Collection changed while being enumerated — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
X28 Index access outside its own emptiness guard — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
X3 Exception handling — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
X30 Support guard that admits what it rejects — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
X32 Type resolved by simple name across every loaded assembly — This check is about how a .NET program searches the assemblies loaded into its process for a type, and this repository contains no .NET source, so there is nothing here for it to assess. Not a gap in the analyzer and not a finding about your code.
X4 Structured logging — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
X5 Nullable reference types — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
X9 Subsumed condition operand — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
Appendix A — Findings (grouped)
The findings behind the scores, grouped by severity, then by dimension and kind. The high-severity issues are enumerated in full below; items per group are capped at 25 with any overflow stated explicitly per group, never silently truncated. The complete machine-readable list of every finding (all severities) is the companion findings.md in this report's bundle.
Boundary-crossing change coupling: data.mjs ↔ index.js packages/core-js-compat/src/data.mjs— `packages/core-js-compat/src/data.mjs` (context core-js-compat) and `packages/core-js/web/index.js` (context core-js) sit in DIFFERENT parts of the tree yet change together 67% of the time (10 of the 15 commits that touched whichever of the two files changed less often, counting a file under its earlier names as well — a repo-wide or module-wide sweep is evidence about the sweep rather than about any pair inside it and is left out of BOTH sides of this ratio, while a dependency bump, a formatter/rename sweep, or a commit whose edit to one of the two files was a tool directive such as //go:generate or whitespace only is left out of the shared count ONLY, so the two sides are not taken over identical commit sets) — the bounded-context boundary may be in the wrong place, or one context is leaking into the other. This is the behavioural boundary violation a static scan can't see. You can check this without leaving the row: of the 10 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `6dd0aa78` add `URL.parse`; `a6a0e29e` add `value` argument of `URLSearchParams.prototype.{ has, delete }`; `32fcbab6` add `URL.canParse` method — run `git show` on any of them.
Boundary-crossing change coupling: modules-by-versions.mjs ↔ index.js packages/core-js-compat/src/modules-by-versions.mjs— `packages/core-js-compat/src/modules-by-versions.mjs` (context core-js-compat) and `packages/core-js/web/index.js` (context core-js) sit in DIFFERENT parts of the tree yet change together 67% of the time (10 of the 15 commits that touched whichever of the two files changed less often, counting a file under its earlier names as well — a repo-wide or module-wide sweep is evidence about the sweep rather than about any pair inside it and is left out of BOTH sides of this ratio, while a dependency bump, a formatter/rename sweep, or a commit whose edit to one of the two files was a tool directive such as //go:generate or whitespace only is left out of the shared count ONLY, so the two sides are not taken over identical commit sets) — the bounded-context boundary may be in the wrong place, or one context is leaking into the other. This is the behavioural boundary violation a static scan can't see. You can check this without leaving the row: of the 10 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `6dd0aa78` add `URL.parse`; `a6a0e29e` add `value` argument of `URLSearchParams.prototype.{ has, delete }`; `32fcbab6` add `URL.canParse` method — run `git show` on any of them.
Boundary-crossing change coupling: export.js ↔ export.js packages/core-js-pure/override/internals/export.js— `packages/core-js-pure/override/internals/export.js` (context core-js-pure) and `packages/core-js/internals/export.js` (context core-js) sit in DIFFERENT parts of the tree yet change together 61% of the time (14 of the 23 commits that touched whichever of the two files changed less often, counting a file under its earlier names as well — a repo-wide or module-wide sweep is evidence about the sweep rather than about any pair inside it and is left out of BOTH sides of this ratio, while a dependency bump, a formatter/rename sweep, or a commit whose edit to one of the two files was a tool directive such as //go:generate or whitespace only is left out of the shared count ONLY, so the two sides are not taken over identical commit sets) — the bounded-context boundary may be in the wrong place, or one context is leaking into the other. This is the behavioural boundary violation a static scan can't see. You can check this without leaving the row: of the 14 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `82ab7962` minor fix of prototype methods export logic in the pure version; `4d45cfab` rename `noTargetGet` -> `dontCallGetSet` option; `ef0aac76` improve polyfilled functions `.name` and `.toString()` in many differ… — run `git show` on any of them.
R4 · Test Coverage· No test reaches this file · ×17
No test reaches this file scripts/build-compat/data.mjs— No test imports this module directly or transitively. Import reachability cannot see a test that executes a file by path instead of importing it, nor one that drives it through a running browser by navigating to a URL — if neither does, no test reaches this one.
No test reaches this file REDACTED— No test imports this module directly or transitively. Import reachability cannot see a test that executes a file by path instead of importing it, nor one that drives it through a running browser by navigating to a URL — if neither does, no test reaches this one.
No test reaches this file scripts/update-version.mjs— No test imports this module directly or transitively. Import reachability cannot see a test that executes a file by path instead of importing it, nor one that drives it through a running browser by navigating to a URL — if neither does, no test reaches this one.
No test reaches this file scripts/bundle-package/bundle-package.mjs— No test imports this module directly or transitively. Import reachability cannot see a test that executes a file by path instead of importing it, nor one that drives it through a running browser by navigating to a URL — if neither does, no test reaches this one.
No test reaches this file scripts/check-dependencies/check-dependencies.mjs— No test imports this module directly or transitively. Import reachability cannot see a test that executes a file by path instead of importing it, nor one that drives it through a running browser by navigating to a URL — if neither does, no test reaches this one.
No test reaches this file scripts/check-compat-data-mapping.mjs— No test imports this module directly or transitively. Import reachability cannot see a test that executes a file by path instead of importing it, nor one that drives it through a running browser by navigating to a URL — if neither does, no test reaches this one.
No test reaches this file scripts/clean-and-copy.mjs— No test imports this module directly or transitively. Import reachability cannot see a test that executes a file by path instead of importing it, nor one that drives it through a running browser by navigating to a URL — if neither does, no test reaches this one.
No test reaches this file scripts/check-unused-modules.mjs— No test imports this module directly or transitively. Import reachability cannot see a test that executes a file by path instead of importing it, nor one that drives it through a running browser by navigating to a URL — if neither does, no test reaches this one.
No test reaches this file scripts/downloads-by-versions.mjs— No test imports this module directly or transitively. Import reachability cannot see a test that executes a file by path instead of importing it, nor one that drives it through a running browser by navigating to a URL — if neither does, no test reaches this one.
No test reaches this file scripts/build-compat/entries.mjs— No test imports this module directly or transitively. Import reachability cannot see a test that executes a file by path instead of importing it, nor one that drives it through a running browser by navigating to a URL — if neither does, no test reaches this one.
No test reaches this file scripts/zxi.mjs— No test imports this module directly or transitively. Import reachability cannot see a test that executes a file by path instead of importing it, nor one that drives it through a running browser by navigating to a URL — if neither does, no test reaches this one.
No test reaches this file scripts/prepare-monorepo.mjs— No test imports this module directly or transitively. Import reachability cannot see a test that executes a file by path instead of importing it, nor one that drives it through a running browser by navigating to a URL — if neither does, no test reaches this one.
No test reaches this file scripts/build-indexes.mjs— No test imports this module directly or transitively. Import reachability cannot see a test that executes a file by path instead of importing it, nor one that drives it through a running browser by navigating to a URL — if neither does, no test reaches this one.
No test reaches this file scripts/build-compat/modules-by-versions.mjs— No test imports this module directly or transitively. Import reachability cannot see a test that executes a file by path instead of importing it, nor one that drives it through a running browser by navigating to a URL — if neither does, no test reaches this one.
No test reaches this file scripts/build-compat/index.mjs— No test imports this module directly or transitively. Import reachability cannot see a test that executes a file by path instead of importing it, nor one that drives it through a running browser by navigating to a URL — if neither does, no test reaches this one.
No test reaches this file scripts/check-actions/check-actions.mjs— No test imports this module directly or transitively. Import reachability cannot see a test that executes a file by path instead of importing it, nor one that drives it through a running browser by navigating to a URL — if neither does, no test reaches this one.
No test reaches this file scripts/prepare.mjs— No test imports this module directly or transitively. Import reachability cannot see a test that executes a file by path instead of importing it, nor one that drives it through a running browser by navigating to a URL — if neither does, no test reaches this one.
Change coupling: es.string.search.js ↔ es.string.split.js packages/core-js/modules/es.string.search.js— `packages/core-js/modules/es.string.search.js` and `packages/core-js/modules/es.string.split.js` change together 94% of the time (16 of the 17 commits that touched whichever of the two files changed less often, counting a file under its earlier names as well — a repo-wide or module-wide sweep is evidence about the sweep rather than about any pair inside it and is left out of BOTH sides of this ratio, while a dependency bump, a formatter/rename sweep, or a commit whose edit to one of the two files was a tool directive such as //go:generate or whitespace only is left out of the shared count ONLY, so the two sides are not taken over identical commit sets) with no explicit dependency between them. They sit in the same directory, but in this ecosystem each file is its own module — a sibling reference still needs an import — so the missing import edge is real: the coupling runs through shared behaviour, not a declared dependency. If they duplicate structure, extract the common part into one unit; otherwise the coupling is hidden and worth breaking. You can check this without leaving the row: of the 16 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `f99ddfa6` Don't call well-known Symbol methods for RegExp on primitive values (…; `ae1c6609` consider `document.all` as an object in some missed cases; `1ca8fb72` some simplification — run `git show` on any of them.
Change coupling: es.string.replace.js ↔ es.string.search.js packages/core-js/modules/es.string.replace.js— `packages/core-js/modules/es.string.replace.js` and `packages/core-js/modules/es.string.search.js` change together 94% of the time (16 of the 17 commits that touched whichever of the two files changed less often, counting a file under its earlier names as well — a repo-wide or module-wide sweep is evidence about the sweep rather than about any pair inside it and is left out of BOTH sides of this ratio, while a dependency bump, a formatter/rename sweep, or a commit whose edit to one of the two files was a tool directive such as //go:generate or whitespace only is left out of the shared count ONLY, so the two sides are not taken over identical commit sets) with no explicit dependency between them. They sit in the same directory, but in this ecosystem each file is its own module — a sibling reference still needs an import — so the missing import edge is real: the coupling runs through shared behaviour, not a declared dependency. If they duplicate structure, extract the common part into one unit; otherwise the coupling is hidden and worth breaking. You can check this without leaving the row: of the 16 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `f99ddfa6` Don't call well-known Symbol methods for RegExp on primitive values (…; `ae1c6609` consider `document.all` as an object in some missed cases; `1ca8fb72` some simplification — run `git show` on any of them.
Change coupling: esnext.async-disposable-stack.constructor.js ↔ esnext.disposable-stack.constructor.js packages/core-js/modules/esnext.async-disposable-stack.constructor.js— `packages/core-js/modules/esnext.async-disposable-stack.constructor.js` and `packages/core-js/modules/esnext.disposable-stack.constructor.js` change together 91% of the time (10 of the 11 commits that touched whichever of the two files changed less often, counting a file under its earlier names as well — a repo-wide or module-wide sweep is evidence about the sweep rather than about any pair inside it and is left out of BOTH sides of this ratio, while a dependency bump, a formatter/rename sweep, or a commit whose edit to one of the two files was a tool directive such as //go:generate or whitespace only is left out of the shared count ONLY, so the two sides are not taken over identical commit sets). Neither file is a module — they declare no import/export and are loaded together into one shared scope by a script tag or a bundle — so there is no dependency edge that COULD be declared between them, and this pass cannot tell a real relationship from a coincidence of release. Read the pair before acting: if one defines what the other uses through the shared global, that is the coupling, and making it explicit (a module boundary, or one named object they both go through) is what removes it; if they duplicate structure, extract the common part; if neither holds, the co-change is incidental and there is nothing to do. You can check this without leaving the row: of the 10 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `5b69af04` use `null` instead of `undefined` as an empty placeholder in some cases; `d1fd92bb` use `undefined` insted of `null` for cleaning internal `(Async)Dispos…; `096cb451` move validation of pending stacks to helper — run `git show` on any of them.
Change coupling: es.string.ends-with.js ↔ es.string.starts-with.js packages/core-js/modules/es.string.ends-with.js— `packages/core-js/modules/es.string.ends-with.js` and `packages/core-js/modules/es.string.starts-with.js` change together 88% of the time (14 of the 16 commits that touched whichever of the two files changed less often, counting a file under its earlier names as well — a repo-wide or module-wide sweep is evidence about the sweep rather than about any pair inside it and is left out of BOTH sides of this ratio, while a dependency bump, a formatter/rename sweep, or a commit whose edit to one of the two files was a tool directive such as //go:generate or whitespace only is left out of the shared count ONLY, so the two sides are not taken over identical commit sets) with no explicit dependency between them. They sit in the same directory, but in this ecosystem each file is its own module — a sibling reference still needs an import — so the missing import edge is real: the coupling runs through shared behaviour, not a declared dependency. If they duplicate structure, extract the common part into one unit; otherwise the coupling is hidden and worth breaking. You can check this without leaving the row: of the 14 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `6d687424` drop fallbacks to native buggy `endsWith` / `startsWith` as useless -…; `3bcbad2d` avoid a check of the target in the internal `function-uncurry-this` h…; `0400deaa` some stylistic changes and minor fixes — run `git show` on any of them.
Change coupling: get-iterator-method.js ↔ is-iterable.js packages/core-js/internals/get-iterator-method.js— `packages/core-js/internals/get-iterator-method.js` and `packages/core-js/internals/is-iterable.js` change together 73% of the time (8 of the 11 commits that touched whichever of the two files changed less often, counting a file under its earlier names as well — a repo-wide or module-wide sweep is evidence about the sweep rather than about any pair inside it and is left out of BOTH sides of this ratio, while a dependency bump, a formatter/rename sweep, or a commit whose edit to one of the two files was a tool directive such as //go:generate or whitespace only is left out of the shared count ONLY, so the two sides are not taken over identical commit sets) with no explicit dependency between them. They sit in the same directory, but in this ecosystem each file is its own module — a sibling reference still needs an import — so the missing import edge is real: the coupling runs through shared behaviour, not a declared dependency. If they duplicate structure, extract the common part into one unit; otherwise the coupling is hidden and worth breaking. You can check this without leaving the row: of the 8 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `508e6d7e` some get-iterator fixes; `ae1c6609` consider `document.all` as an object in some missed cases; `5c9f9559` remove special cases for native prototypes from iterator helpers, rev… (at that commit the files were still `modules/core.get-iterator-method.js` and `modules/core.is-iterable.js`) — run `git show` on any of them.
Change coupling: es.array.sort.js ↔ es.typed-array.sort.js packages/core-js/modules/es.array.sort.js— `packages/core-js/modules/es.array.sort.js` and `packages/core-js/modules/es.typed-array.sort.js` change together 60% of the time (6 of the 10 commits that touched whichever of the two files changed less often, counting a file under its earlier names as well — a repo-wide or module-wide sweep is evidence about the sweep rather than about any pair inside it and is left out of BOTH sides of this ratio, while a dependency bump, a formatter/rename sweep, or a commit whose edit to one of the two files was a tool directive such as //go:generate or whitespace only is left out of the shared count ONLY, so the two sides are not taken over identical commit sets) with no explicit dependency between them. They sit in the same directory, but in this ecosystem each file is its own module — a sibling reference still needs an import — so the missing import edge is real: the coupling runs through shared behaviour, not a declared dependency. If they duplicate structure, extract the common part into one unit; otherwise the coupling is hidden and worth breaking. You can check this without leaving the row: of the 6 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `13d56107` align default sort comparators with the spec text; `0400deaa` some stylistic changes and minor fixes; `d07fee6d` reuse `internals/array-sort` in `URLSearchParams`, simplify it — run `git show` on any of them.
Change coupling: es.array.concat.js ↔ es.array.splice.js packages/core-js/modules/es.array.concat.js— `packages/core-js/modules/es.array.concat.js` and `packages/core-js/modules/es.array.splice.js` change together 58% of the time (7 of the 12 commits that touched whichever of the two files changed less often, counting a file under its earlier names as well — a repo-wide or module-wide sweep is evidence about the sweep rather than about any pair inside it and is left out of BOTH sides of this ratio, while a dependency bump, a formatter/rename sweep, or a commit whose edit to one of the two files was a tool directive such as //go:generate or whitespace only is left out of the shared count ONLY, so the two sides are not taken over identical commit sets) with no explicit dependency between them. They sit in the same directory, but in this ecosystem each file is its own module — a sibling reference still needs an import — so the missing import edge is real: the coupling runs through shared behaviour, not a declared dependency. If they duplicate structure, extract the common part into one unit; otherwise the coupling is hidden and worth breaking. You can check this without leaving the row: of the 7 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `5454a5d2` add some more workarounds for a Safari < 13 bug with silent ignore of…; `c04e4e15` fix a helper name; `373e276b` extract `doesNonExceededSafeInteger` helper — run `git show` on any of them.
Change coupling: es.array.slice.js ↔ es.array.splice.js packages/core-js/modules/es.array.slice.js— `packages/core-js/modules/es.array.slice.js` and `packages/core-js/modules/es.array.splice.js` change together 57% of the time (8 of the 14 commits that touched whichever of the two files changed less often, counting a file under its earlier names as well — a repo-wide or module-wide sweep is evidence about the sweep rather than about any pair inside it and is left out of BOTH sides of this ratio, while a dependency bump, a formatter/rename sweep, or a commit whose edit to one of the two files was a tool directive such as //go:generate or whitespace only is left out of the shared count ONLY, so the two sides are not taken over identical commit sets) with no explicit dependency between them. They sit in the same directory, but in this ecosystem each file is its own module — a sibling reference still needs an import — so the missing import edge is real: the coupling runs through shared behaviour, not a declared dependency. If they duplicate structure, extract the common part into one unit; otherwise the coupling is hidden and worth breaking. You can check this without leaving the row: of the 8 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `5454a5d2` add some more workarounds for a Safari < 13 bug with silent ignore of…; `405b93e7` update per the current spec draft; `f793cc3a` add "change Array by copy" stage 0 proposal — run `git show` on any of them.
Change coupling: es.regexp.to-string.js ↔ es.string.match-all.js packages/core-js/modules/es.regexp.to-string.js— `packages/core-js/modules/es.regexp.to-string.js` and `packages/core-js/modules/es.string.match-all.js` change together 55% of the time (6 of the 11 commits that touched whichever of the two files changed less often, counting a file under its earlier names as well — a repo-wide or module-wide sweep is evidence about the sweep rather than about any pair inside it and is left out of BOTH sides of this ratio, while a dependency bump, a formatter/rename sweep, or a commit whose edit to one of the two files was a tool directive such as //go:generate or whitespace only is left out of the shared count ONLY, so the two sides are not taken over identical commit sets) with no explicit dependency between them. They sit in the same directory, but in this ecosystem each file is its own module — a sibling reference still needs an import — so the missing import edge is real: the coupling runs through shared behaviour, not a declared dependency. If they duplicate structure, extract the common part into one unit; otherwise the coupling is hidden and worth breaking. You can check this without leaving the row: of the 6 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `93aee471` refactoring; `4b764e90` Refactoring; `0cdb1245` Use regexp flags via helper — run `git show` on any of them.
Change coupling: es.string.replace-all.js ↔ es.string.replace.js packages/core-js/modules/es.string.replace-all.js— `packages/core-js/modules/es.string.replace-all.js` and `packages/core-js/modules/es.string.replace.js` change together 50% of the time (7 of the 14 commits that touched whichever of the two files changed less often, counting a file under its earlier names as well — a repo-wide or module-wide sweep is evidence about the sweep rather than about any pair inside it and is left out of BOTH sides of this ratio, while a dependency bump, a formatter/rename sweep, or a commit whose edit to one of the two files was a tool directive such as //go:generate or whitespace only is left out of the shared count ONLY, so the two sides are not taken over identical commit sets) with no explicit dependency between them. They sit in the same directory, but in this ecosystem each file is its own module — a sibling reference still needs an import — so the missing import edge is real: the coupling runs through shared behaviour, not a declared dependency. If they duplicate structure, extract the common part into one unit; otherwise the coupling is hidden and worth breaking. You can check this without leaving the row: of the 7 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `93aee471` refactoring; `4b764e90` Refactoring; `f99ddfa6` Don't call well-known Symbol methods for RegExp on primitive values (… — run `git show` on any of them.
Change coupling: es.string.match-all.js ↔ es.string.replace-all.js packages/core-js/modules/es.string.match-all.js— `packages/core-js/modules/es.string.match-all.js` and `packages/core-js/modules/es.string.replace-all.js` change together 50% of the time (7 of the 14 commits that touched whichever of the two files changed less often, counting a file under its earlier names as well — a repo-wide or module-wide sweep is evidence about the sweep rather than about any pair inside it and is left out of BOTH sides of this ratio, while a dependency bump, a formatter/rename sweep, or a commit whose edit to one of the two files was a tool directive such as //go:generate or whitespace only is left out of the shared count ONLY, so the two sides are not taken over identical commit sets) with no explicit dependency between them. They sit in the same directory, but in this ecosystem each file is its own module — a sibling reference still needs an import — so the missing import edge is real: the coupling runs through shared behaviour, not a declared dependency. If they duplicate structure, extract the common part into one unit; otherwise the coupling is hidden and worth breaking. You can check this without leaving the row: of the 7 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `93aee471` refactoring; `4b764e90` Refactoring; `0cdb1245` Use regexp flags via helper — run `git show` on any of them.
Change coupling: array-buffer.js ↔ object-get-own-property-names-external.js packages/core-js/internals/array-buffer.js— `packages/core-js/internals/array-buffer.js` and `packages/core-js/internals/object-get-own-property-names-external.js` change together 50% of the time (5 of the 10 commits that touched whichever of the two files changed less often, counting a file under its earlier names as well — a repo-wide or module-wide sweep is evidence about the sweep rather than about any pair inside it and is left out of BOTH sides of this ratio, while a dependency bump, a formatter/rename sweep, or a commit whose edit to one of the two files was a tool directive such as //go:generate or whitespace only is left out of the shared count ONLY, so the two sides are not taken over identical commit sets) with no explicit dependency between them. They sit in the same directory, but in this ecosystem each file is its own module — a sibling reference still needs an import — so the missing import edge is real: the coupling runs through shared behaviour, not a declared dependency. If they duplicate structure, extract the common part into one unit; otherwise the coupling is hidden and worth breaking. You can check this without leaving the row: of the 5 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `ff68fa63` drop `array-slice-simple` since in all current cases of usage it can'…; `7f6670ff` prevent some theoretical cases of breaking / observing the internal s…; `584b0064` some cases related to `Array#slice`, `.apply` and `arguments` — run `git show` on any of them.
Duplicated block (11 lines × 2 locations) packages/core-js/internals/async-from-sync-iterator.js:48— packages/core-js/internals/async-from-sync-iterator.js:48 · packages/core-js/internals/async-from-sync-iterator.js:60 — all 2 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.
Duplicated block (11 lines × 2 locations) packages/core-js/modules/es.array.splice.js:28— packages/core-js/modules/es.array.splice.js:28 · packages/core-js/modules/es.array.to-spliced.js:24 — the 2 copies sit in sibling files in one directory, so check first whether one of them (or an existing module there) already owns this behaviour and the others should call it; otherwise extract it into one module in that directory and have each site call it.
Duplicated block (11 lines × 2 locations) packages/core-js/modules/es.iterator.zip-keyed.js:16— packages/core-js/modules/es.iterator.zip-keyed.js:16 · packages/core-js/modules/es.iterator.zip.js:15 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.
Duplicated block (11 lines × 2 locations) packages/core-js/modules/esnext.math.imulh.js:8— packages/core-js/modules/esnext.math.imulh.js:8 · packages/core-js/modules/esnext.math.umulh.js:8 — the 2 copies sit in sibling files in one directory, so check first whether one of them (or an existing module there) already owns this behaviour and the others should call it; otherwise extract it into one module in that directory and have each site call it.
R10 · Code Duplication· Duplicated block with local edits (10 matched lines × 2 locations) · ×4
Duplicated block with local edits (10 matched lines × 2 locations) packages/core-js/modules/es.map.get-or-insert-computed.js:13— packages/core-js/modules/es.map.get-or-insert-computed.js:13 · packages/core-js/modules/es.weak-map.get-or-insert-computed.js:26 — the two spans are one implementation copied and then locally edited — 56 tokens are still identical, in the same order in both files, with only local edits between them. The copies have already begun to drift, which is this row's finding: an edit made to one and not the other changes behaviour silently. Diff the two spans first to learn what genuinely differs, then extract the shared core into one module both sites use, passing the differences in as parameters — or, if one copy exists only because the other could not be imported from its context, make one of them the single source the other is generated or re-exported from. If one copy is no longer reachable, delete it rather than letting it shadow the live one.
Duplicated block with local edits (10 matched lines × 2 locations) packages/core-js/modules/es.promise.any.js:11— packages/core-js/modules/es.promise.any.js:11 · packages/core-js/modules/es.promise.race.js:8 — the two spans are one implementation copied and then locally edited — 79 tokens are still identical, in the same order in both files, with only local edits between them. The copies have already begun to drift, which is this row's finding: an edit made to one and not the other changes behaviour silently. Diff the two spans first to learn what genuinely differs, then extract the shared core into one module both sites use, passing the differences in as parameters — or, if one copy exists only because the other could not be imported from its context, make one of them the single source the other is generated or re-exported from. If one copy is no longer reachable, delete it rather than letting it shadow the live one.
Duplicated block with local edits (10 matched lines × 2 locations) packages/core-js/modules/es.uint8-array.from-base64.js:5— packages/core-js/modules/es.uint8-array.from-base64.js:5 · packages/core-js/modules/es.uint8-array.to-base64.js:17 — the two spans are one implementation copied and then locally edited — 54 tokens are still identical, in the same order in both files, with only local edits between them. The copies have already begun to drift, which is this row's finding: an edit made to one and not the other changes behaviour silently. Diff the two spans first to learn what genuinely differs, then extract the shared core into one module both sites use, passing the differences in as parameters — or, if one copy exists only because the other could not be imported from its context, make one of them the single source the other is generated or re-exported from. If one copy is no longer reachable, delete it rather than letting it shadow the live one.
Duplicated block with local edits (10 matched lines × 2 locations) packages/core-js/modules/es.uint8-array.to-base64.js:20— packages/core-js/modules/es.uint8-array.to-base64.js:20 · packages/core-js/modules/es.uint8-array.to-hex.js:8 — the two spans are one implementation copied and then locally edited — 67 tokens are still identical, in the same order in both files, with only local edits between them. The copies have already begun to drift, which is this row's finding: an edit made to one and not the other changes behaviour silently. Diff the two spans first to learn what genuinely differs, then extract the shared core into one module both sites use, passing the differences in as parameters — or, if one copy exists only because the other could not be imported from its context, make one of them the single source the other is generated or re-exported from. If one copy is no longer reachable, delete it rather than letting it shadow the live one.
exports (cyclomatic 22) packages/core-js-pure/override/internals/collection.js:22— exports has cyclomatic complexity 22 (threshold 15). Most of this is not in the body itself: 10 of the 22 points are its own statements and the rest belongs to 6 function items inside it that branch ((anonymous)::(anonymous), (anonymous), (anonymous), …). Those helpers are already separate functions, so extracting the branching again is not available. To reduce it, move them out of the body to the enclosing scope, where each is measured, reviewed and tested on its own, and reduce whichever one then reads as the largest.
exports (cyclomatic 22) packages/core-js-compat/targets-parser.js:50— exports has cyclomatic complexity 22 (threshold 15). Of this number, 18 points are the body's own statements and 4 belong to 4 function literals inside it that branch. To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
exports (cyclomatic 22) packages/core-js/internals/make-built-in.js:26— exports has cyclomatic complexity 22 (threshold 15). To reduce it, split the body: these branches sit side by side rather than nested inside one another, so extracting each one on its own would leave a function per branch. Group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function, so the body reads as a short sequence of named stages.
Duplicated block (14 lines × 2 locations) packages/core-js/modules/es.array.push.js:11— packages/core-js/modules/es.array.push.js:11 · packages/core-js/modules/es.array.unshift.js:10 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.
Duplicated block (14 lines × 2 locations) packages/core-js/modules/es.regexp.dot-all.js:8— packages/core-js/modules/es.regexp.dot-all.js:8 · packages/core-js/modules/es.regexp.sticky.js:8 — the 2 copies sit in sibling files in one directory, so check first whether one of them (or an existing module there) already owns this behaviour and the others should call it; otherwise extract it into one module in that directory and have each site call it.
Duplicated block (14 lines × 2 locations) packages/core-js/modules/esnext.map.emplace.js:13— packages/core-js/modules/esnext.map.emplace.js:13 · packages/core-js/modules/esnext.weak-map.emplace.js:13 — the 2 copies sit in sibling files in one directory, so check first whether one of them (or an existing module there) already owns this behaviour and the others should call it; otherwise extract it into one module in that directory and have each site call it.
R10 · Code Duplication· Duplicated block with local edits (13 matched lines × 2 locations) · ×3
Duplicated block with local edits (13 matched lines × 2 locations) packages/core-js/modules/es.array.with.js:15— packages/core-js/modules/es.array.with.js:15 · packages/core-js/modules/es.typed-array.with.js:17 — the two spans are one implementation copied and then locally edited — 104 tokens are still identical, in the same order in both files, with only local edits between them. The copies have already begun to drift, which is this row's finding: an edit made to one and not the other changes behaviour silently. Diff the two spans first to learn what genuinely differs, then extract the shared core into one module both sites use, passing the differences in as parameters — or, if one copy exists only because the other could not be imported from its context, make one of them the single source the other is generated or re-exported from. If one copy is no longer reachable, delete it rather than letting it shadow the live one.
Duplicated block with local edits (13 matched lines × 2 locations) packages/core-js/modules/es.regexp.constructor.js:53— packages/core-js/modules/es.regexp.constructor.js:53 · packages/core-js/modules/es.regexp.constructor.js:77 — the two spans are one implementation copied and then locally edited — 77 tokens are still identical, in the same order in both spans, with only local edits between them. The copies have already begun to drift, which is this row's finding: an edit made to one and not the other changes behaviour silently. Diff the two spans first to learn what genuinely differs, then extract the shared core into one module both sites use, passing the differences in as parameters — or, if one copy exists only because the other could not be imported from its context, make one of them the single source the other is generated or re-exported from. If one copy is no longer reachable, delete it rather than letting it shadow the live one.
Duplicated block with local edits (13 matched lines × 2 locations) packages/core-js/modules/esnext.observable.constructor.js:88— packages/core-js/modules/esnext.observable.constructor.js:88 · packages/core-js/modules/esnext.observable.constructor.js:139 — the two spans are one implementation copied and then locally edited — 56 tokens are still identical, in the same order in both spans, with only local edits between them. The copies have already begun to drift, which is this row's finding: an edit made to one and not the other changes behaviour silently. Diff the two spans first to learn what genuinely differs, then extract the shared core into one module both sites use, passing the differences in as parameters — or, if one copy exists only because the other could not be imported from its context, make one of them the single source the other is generated or re-exported from. If one copy is no longer reachable, delete it rather than letting it shadow the live one.
Duplicated block (10 lines × 2 locations) packages/core-js/modules/es.map.get-or-insert.js:6— packages/core-js/modules/es.map.get-or-insert.js:6 · packages/core-js/modules/es.weak-map.get-or-insert.js:6 — the 2 copies sit in sibling files in one directory, so check first whether one of them (or an existing module there) already owns this behaviour and the others should call it; otherwise extract it into one module in that directory and have each site call it.
Duplicated block (10 lines × 2 locations) packages/core-js/modules/web.url.can-parse.js:26— packages/core-js/modules/web.url.can-parse.js:26 · packages/core-js/modules/web.url.parse.js:13 — the 2 copies sit in sibling files in one directory, so check first whether one of them (or an existing module there) already owns this behaviour and the others should call it; otherwise extract it into one module in that directory and have each site call it.
Duplicated block (10 lines × 2 locations) packages/core-js/modules/web.url.constructor.js:1021— packages/core-js/modules/web.url.constructor.js:1021 · packages/core-js/modules/web.url.constructor.js:1041 — all 2 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.
exports (cyclomatic 36) packages/core-js-pure/override/internals/export.js:44— exports has cyclomatic complexity 36 (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.
exports (cyclomatic 36) packages/core-js/internals/collection.js:18— exports has cyclomatic complexity 36 (threshold 15). Of this number, 19 points are the body's own statements and 17 belong to 11 function items inside it that branch. To reduce it, split the body: these branches sit side by side rather than nested inside one another, so extracting each one on its own would leave a function per branch. Group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function, so the body reads as a short sequence of named stages.
exports (cyclomatic 26) packages/core-js/internals/typed-array-constructor.js:113— exports has cyclomatic complexity 26 (threshold 15). Most of this is not in the body itself: 11 of the 26 points are its own statements and the rest belongs to 9 function items inside it that branch ((anonymous), (anonymous)::(anonymous), setter, …). Those helpers are already separate functions, so extracting the branching again is not available. To reduce it, move them out of the body to the enclosing scope, where each is measured, reviewed and tested on its own, and reduce whichever one then reads as the largest.
exports (cyclomatic 26) packages/core-js/internals/string-parse.js:43— exports has cyclomatic complexity 26 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
Floating npm dependency: mkdirp — `mkdirp` is declared as `>=0.5.6 <1` in packages/core-js-builder/package.json, which names no releasable version: `>=0.5.6 <1` is an open range with no upper bound on the major. A production dependency that cannot be resolved to one immutable release makes the build non-reproducible — two installs a day apart can ship different code — and leaves nothing for a vulnerability scanner to match against.
Floating npm dependency: webpack — `webpack` is declared as `>=4.47.0 <5` in packages/core-js-builder/package.json, which names no releasable version: `>=4.47.0 <5` is an open range with no upper bound on the major. A production dependency that cannot be resolved to one immutable release makes the build non-reproducible — two installs a day apart can ship different code — and leaves nothing for a vulnerability scanner to match against.
exports (cognitive 48) packages/core-js/internals/typed-array-constructor.js:113— exports has cognitive complexity 48 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 21 (39 pts), ternaries 4 (6 pts), loops 1 (2 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 21). Most of this is not in the body itself: 12 of the 48 points are its own statements and the rest belongs to 9 function items inside it that branch ((anonymous), (anonymous)::(anonymous), setter, …). Those helpers are already separate functions, so extracting the branching again is not available. To reduce it, move them out of the body to the enclosing scope, where each is measured, reviewed and tested on its own, and reduce whichever one then reads as the largest.
exports (cognitive 48) packages/core-js-pure/override/internals/export.js:44— exports has cognitive complexity 48 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 12 (23 pts), boolean chains 15, ternaries 6 (9 pts), loops 1 (nesting depth added 14). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
exports (cognitive 32) packages/core-js/internals/export.js:25— exports has cognitive complexity 32 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (18 pts), boolean chains 6, ternaries 2 (6 pts), loops 1 (2 pts) (nesting depth added 14). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
exports (cognitive 32) packages/core-js-compat/targets-parser.js:50— exports has cognitive complexity 32 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 12 (19 pts), ternaries 5 (6 pts), boolean chains 4, loops 2 (3 pts) (nesting depth added 9). Of this number, 28 points are the body's own statements and 4 belong to 4 function literals inside it that branch. To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
exports (cognitive 31) packages/core-js/internals/string-parse.js:43— exports has cognitive complexity 31 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (25 pts), boolean chains 3, match/switch 1 (2 pts), loops 1 (nesting depth added 17). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
exports (cognitive 31) packages/core-js-pure/override/internals/collection.js:22— exports has cognitive complexity 31 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: ternaries 5 (14 pts), if/else 6 (10 pts), boolean chains 7 (nesting depth added 13). Most of this is not in the body itself: 8 of the 31 points are its own statements and the rest belongs to 6 function items inside it that branch ((anonymous)::(anonymous), (anonymous), (anonymous), …). Those helpers are already separate functions, so extracting the branching again is not available. To reduce it, move them out of the body to the enclosing scope, where each is measured, reviewed and tested on its own, and reduce whichever one then reads as the largest.
FunctionTooLong: playground.init website/src/js/playground.js:35— FunctionTooLong — init runs 183 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 83 over it, 1.83× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
FunctionTooLong: main.init website/src/js/main.js:17— FunctionTooLong — init runs 122 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 22 over it, 1.22× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
R10 · Code Duplication· Duplicated block with local edits (37 matched lines × 2 locations) · ×2
Duplicated block with local edits (37 matched lines × 2 locations) packages/core-js/modules/es.iterator.drop.js:14— packages/core-js/modules/es.iterator.drop.js:14 · packages/core-js/modules/es.iterator.take.js:14 — the two spans are one implementation copied and then locally edited — 239 tokens are still identical, in the same order in both files, with only local edits between them. The copies have already begun to drift, which is this row's finding: an edit made to one and not the other changes behaviour silently. Diff the two spans first to learn what genuinely differs, then extract the shared core into one module both sites use, passing the differences in as parameters — or, if one copy exists only because the other could not be imported from its context, make one of them the single source the other is generated or re-exported from. If one copy is no longer reachable, delete it rather than letting it shadow the live one.
Duplicated block with local edits (37 matched lines × 2 locations) packages/core-js/modules/esnext.promise.all-keyed.js:12— packages/core-js/modules/esnext.promise.all-keyed.js:12 · packages/core-js/modules/esnext.promise.all-settled-keyed.js:12 — the two spans are one implementation copied and then locally edited — 285 tokens are still identical, in the same order in both files, with only local edits between them. The copies have already begun to drift, which is this row's finding: an edit made to one and not the other changes behaviour silently. Diff the two spans first to learn what genuinely differs, then extract the shared core into one module both sites use, passing the differences in as parameters — or, if one copy exists only because the other could not be imported from its context, make one of them the single source the other is generated or re-exported from. If one copy is no longer reachable, delete it rather than letting it shadow the live one.
Duplicated block (16 lines × 2 locations) packages/core-js/modules/es.iterator.find.js:16— packages/core-js/modules/es.iterator.find.js:16 · packages/core-js/modules/es.iterator.some.js:16 — the 2 copies sit in sibling files in one directory, so check first whether one of them (or an existing module there) already owns this behaviour and the others should call it; otherwise extract it into one module in that directory and have each site call it.
Duplicated block (16 lines × 2 locations) packages/core-js/modules/esnext.map.reduce.js:12— packages/core-js/modules/esnext.map.reduce.js:12 · packages/core-js/modules/esnext.set.reduce.js:12 — the 2 copies sit in sibling files in one directory, so check first whether one of them (or an existing module there) already owns this behaviour and the others should call it; otherwise extract it into one module in that directory and have each site call it.
Duplicated block (13 lines × 2 locations) packages/core-js/modules/es.string.ends-with.js:12— packages/core-js/modules/es.string.ends-with.js:12 · packages/core-js/modules/es.string.starts-with.js:12 — the 2 copies sit in sibling files in one directory, so check first whether one of them (or an existing module there) already owns this behaviour and the others should call it; otherwise extract it into one module in that directory and have each site call it.
Duplicated block (13 lines × 2 locations) packages/core-js/modules/esnext.async-iterator.filter.js:40— packages/core-js/modules/esnext.async-iterator.filter.js:40 · packages/core-js/modules/esnext.async-iterator.reduce.js:50 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.
Duplicated block (12 lines × 3 locations) packages/core-js/internals/async-iterator-map.js:11— packages/core-js/internals/async-iterator-map.js:11 · packages/core-js/modules/esnext.async-iterator.filter.js:12 · packages/core-js/modules/esnext.async-iterator.flat-map.js:13 — the 3 copies are spread across 3 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.
Duplicated block (12 lines × 3 locations) packages/core-js/modules/es.iterator.filter.js:32— packages/core-js/modules/es.iterator.filter.js:32 · packages/core-js/modules/es.iterator.flat-map.js:53 · packages/core-js/modules/es.iterator.map.js:25 — the 3 copies are spread across 3 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.
R10 · Code Duplication· Duplicated block with local edits (9 matched lines × 2 locations) · ×2
Duplicated block with local edits (9 matched lines × 2 locations) packages/core-js/internals/array-iteration-from-last.js:5— packages/core-js/internals/array-iteration-from-last.js:5 · packages/core-js/internals/array-iteration.js:7 — the two spans are one implementation copied and then locally edited — 56 tokens are still identical, in the same order in both files, with only local edits between them. The copies have already begun to drift, which is this row's finding: an edit made to one and not the other changes behaviour silently. Diff the two spans first to learn what genuinely differs, then extract the shared core into one module both sites use, passing the differences in as parameters — or, if one copy exists only because the other could not be imported from its context, make one of them the single source the other is generated or re-exported from. If one copy is no longer reachable, delete it rather than letting it shadow the live one.
Duplicated block with local edits (9 matched lines × 2 locations) packages/core-js/internals/set-is-disjoint-from.js:12— packages/core-js/internals/set-is-disjoint-from.js:12 · packages/core-js/internals/set-is-superset-of.js:11 — the two spans are one implementation copied and then locally edited — 75 tokens are still identical, in the same order in both files, with only local edits between them. The copies have already begun to drift, which is this row's finding: an edit made to one and not the other changes behaviour silently. Diff the two spans first to learn what genuinely differs, then extract the shared core into one module both sites use, passing the differences in as parameters — or, if one copy exists only because the other could not be imported from its context, make one of them the single source the other is generated or re-exported from. If one copy is no longer reachable, delete it rather than letting it shadow the live one.
Complex function (anonymous) (cyclomatic 25, cognitive 29) tests/unit-global/web.structured-clone.js:9— (anonymous) has cyclomatic complexity 25 and cognitive complexity 29; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
Complex function (anonymous) (cyclomatic 25, cognitive 29) tests/unit-pure/web.structured-clone.js:18— (anonymous) has cyclomatic complexity 25 and cognitive complexity 29; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
AC7 · A11y enforcement· Accessibility enforcement below the top rung · ×1
Accessibility enforcement below the top rung — No accessibility enforcement found — no a11y linter (an a11y linter that can read your UI — no component framework was detected, so the JSX/Vue ESLint plugins would have nothing to lint; use an HTML-template a11y linter (html-eslint, htmlhint) or run axe/pa11y over the rendered pages) and no axe/pa11y/Lighthouse in tests or CI. Start with the linter to catch issues at author time. What was searched, so you can tell an absence from a miss: the 3 markup file(s) this pass actually assessed, the linter configuration checked in beside them, and this repository's test and CI files — matched by name against the accessibility checkers this dimension carries. An audit run outside the repository, a hosted scanner, or a check whose name is not one of those, is not seen here.
parse (cyclomatic 196) packages/core-js/modules/web.url.constructor.js:447— parse has cyclomatic complexity 196 (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.
web.structured-clone.structuredCloneInternal (cyclomatic 98) packages/core-js/modules/web.structured-clone.js:189— web.structured-clone.structuredCloneInternal has cyclomatic complexity 98 (threshold 15). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Where every arm is uniform — the same kind of value, with no behaviour of its own — a table keyed by the case is the shorter form; wherever the arms carry different data or different behaviour, keep them as cases, because collapsing those trades an explicit, reviewable set of cases for nothing.
sumPrecise (cyclomatic 52) packages/core-js/modules/es.math.sum-precise.js:38— sumPrecise has cyclomatic complexity 52 (threshold 15). Of this number, 40 points are the body's own statements and 12 belong to one function literal inside it that branches. To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
playground.init (cyclomatic 48) website/src/js/playground.js:35— playground.init has cyclomatic complexity 48 (threshold 15). Of this number, 38 points are the body's own statements and 10 belong to 5 function literals inside it that branch. To reduce it, split the body: these branches sit side by side rather than nested inside one another, so extracting each one on its own would leave a function per branch. Group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function, so the body reads as a short sequence of named stages.
iterator-define.default (cyclomatic 41) packages/core-js/internals/iterator-define.js:28— iterator-define.default has cyclomatic complexity 41 (threshold 15). Of this number, 33 points are the body's own statements and 8 belong to one function literal inside it that branches. To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
exports (cyclomatic 41) packages/core-js/internals/iterator-define.js:28— exports has cyclomatic complexity 41 (threshold 15). Of this number, 33 points are the body's own statements and 8 belong to 6 function items inside it that branch. To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
export.default (cyclomatic 36) packages/core-js-pure/override/internals/export.js:44— export.default has cyclomatic complexity 36 (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.
collection.default (cyclomatic 36) packages/core-js/internals/collection.js:18— collection.default has cyclomatic complexity 36 (threshold 15). Of this number, 19 points are the body's own statements and 17 belong to 8 function literals inside it that branch. To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
main.init (cyclomatic 32) website/src/js/main.js:17— main.init has cyclomatic complexity 32 (threshold 15). Of this number, 27 points are the body's own statements and 5 belong to 3 function literals inside it that branch. To reduce it, split the body: these branches sit side by side rather than nested inside one another, so extracting each one on its own would leave a function per branch. Group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function, so the body reads as a short sequence of named stages.
uint8-from-base64.default (cyclomatic 31) packages/core-js/internals/uint8-from-base64.js:72— uint8-from-base64.default has cyclomatic complexity 31 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
web.url.constructor.parseIPv6 (cyclomatic 31) packages/core-js/modules/web.url.constructor.js:206— web.url.constructor.parseIPv6 has cyclomatic complexity 31 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
exports (cyclomatic 31) packages/core-js/internals/uint8-from-base64.js:72— exports has cyclomatic complexity 31 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
getConstructor (cyclomatic 30) packages/core-js/internals/collection-strong.js:20— getConstructor has cyclomatic complexity 30 (threshold 15). Most of this is not in the body itself: 3 of the 30 points are its own statements and the rest belongs to 11 function items inside it that branch (delete, define, forEach, …). Those helpers are already separate functions, so extracting the branching again is not available. To reduce it, move them out of the body to the enclosing scope, where each is measured, reviewed and tested on its own, and reduce whichever one then reads as the largest.
RegExp (cyclomatic 30) packages/core-js/modules/es.regexp.constructor.js:139— RegExp 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.
exec (cyclomatic 30) packages/core-js/internals/regexp-exec.js:47— exec has cyclomatic complexity 30 (threshold 15). Of this number, 28 points are the body's own statements and 2 belong to one function literal inside it that branches. To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
url-percent-coding.decode (cyclomatic 27) packages/core-js/internals/url-percent-coding.js:72— url-percent-coding.decode has cyclomatic complexity 27 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
web.structured-clone.tryToTransfer (cyclomatic 26) packages/core-js/modules/web.structured-clone.js:430— web.structured-clone.tryToTransfer has cyclomatic complexity 26 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function so the top-level body reads as a short sequence of named decisions.
string-parse.default (cyclomatic 26) packages/core-js/internals/string-parse.js:43— string-parse.default has cyclomatic complexity 26 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
(anonymous) (cyclomatic 26) packages/core-js/modules/es.string.split.js:46— (anonymous) has cyclomatic complexity 26 (threshold 15). Most of this is not in the body itself: 2 of the 26 points are its own statements and the rest belongs to 3 function items inside it that branch ((anonymous), (anonymous), split). Those helpers are already separate functions, so extracting the branching again is not available. To reduce it, move them out of the body to the enclosing scope, where each is measured, reviewed and tested on its own, and reduce whichever one then reads as the largest.
iterate.default (cyclomatic 24) packages/core-js/internals/iterate.js:22— iterate.default has cyclomatic complexity 24 (threshold 15). Of this number, 20 points are the body's own statements and 4 belong to 2 function literals inside it that branch. To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
stringify (cyclomatic 24) packages/core-js/modules/es.json.stringify.js:181— stringify has cyclomatic complexity 24 (threshold 15). Most of this is not in the body itself: 11 of the 24 points are its own statements and the rest belongs to one function literal inside it that branches (line 192). The decisions are inside the literal, which nothing outside this body can call, review or test on its own, so splitting the enclosing body is not the move available here. To reduce it, lift the literal's work into a named function or method at the enclosing scope and have the literal call it, then reduce whichever part then reads as the largest.
exports (cyclomatic 24) packages/core-js/internals/iterate.js:22— exports has cyclomatic complexity 24 (threshold 15). Of this number, 20 points are the body's own statements and 4 belong to 2 function items inside it that branch. To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
targets-parser.default (cyclomatic 22) packages/core-js-compat/targets-parser.js:50— targets-parser.default has cyclomatic complexity 22 (threshold 15). Of this number, 18 points are the body's own statements and 4 belong to 2 function literals inside it that branch. To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
collection.default (cyclomatic 22) packages/core-js-pure/override/internals/collection.js:22— collection.default has cyclomatic complexity 22 (threshold 15). Most of this is not in the body itself: 10 of the 22 points are its own statements and the rest belongs to 3 function literals inside it that branch (lines 53, 50, 38). The decisions are inside those literals, which nothing outside this body can call, review or test on its own, so splitting the enclosing body is not the move available here. To reduce it, lift the literals' work into a named function or method at the enclosing scope and have each literal call it, then reduce whichever part then reads as the largest.
async-iterator-create-proxy.createAsyncIteratorProxyPrototype (cyclomatic 22) packages/core-js/internals/async-iterator-create-proxy.js:23— async-iterator-create-proxy.createAsyncIteratorProxyPrototype has cyclomatic complexity 22 (threshold 15). Most of this is not in the body itself: 2 of the 22 points are its own statements and the rest belongs to 7 function literals inside it that branch (lines 63, 27, 41, …). The decisions are inside those literals, which nothing outside this body can call, review or test on its own, so splitting the enclosing body is not the move available here. To reduce it, lift the literals' work into a named function or method at the enclosing scope and have each literal call it, then reduce whichever part then reads as the largest.
numeric-range-iterator.$RangeIterator (cyclomatic 21) packages/core-js/internals/numeric-range-iterator.js:20— numeric-range-iterator.$RangeIterator has cyclomatic complexity 21 (threshold 15). To reduce it, split the body: these branches sit side by side rather than nested inside one another, so extracting each one on its own would leave a function per branch. Group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function, so the body reads as a short sequence of named stages.
(anonymous) (cyclomatic 21) packages/core-js/modules/es.string.replace.js:60— (anonymous) has cyclomatic complexity 21 (threshold 15). Most of this is not in the body itself: 2 of the 21 points are its own statements and the rest belongs to 2 function items inside it that branch ((anonymous), replace). Those helpers are already separate functions, so extracting the branching again is not available. To reduce it, move them out of the body to the enclosing scope, where each is measured, reviewed and tested on its own, and reduce whichever one then reads as the largest.
NumericRangeIterator (cyclomatic 21) packages/core-js/internals/numeric-range-iterator.js:20— NumericRangeIterator has cyclomatic complexity 21 (threshold 15). To reduce it, split the body: these branches sit side by side rather than nested inside one another, so extracting each one on its own would leave a function per branch. Group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function, so the body reads as a short sequence of named stages.
array-iteration.createMethod (cyclomatic 20) packages/core-js/internals/array-iteration.js:10— array-iteration.createMethod has cyclomatic complexity 20 (threshold 15). Most of this is not in the body itself: 2 of the 20 points are its own statements and the rest belongs to one function literal inside it that branches (line 18). The decisions are inside the literal, which nothing outside this body can call, review or test on its own, so splitting the enclosing body is not the move available here. To reduce it, lift the literal's work into a named function or method at the enclosing scope and have the literal call it, then reduce whichever part then reads as the largest.
async-iterator-iteration.createMethod (cyclomatic 20) packages/core-js/internals/async-iterator-iteration.js:15— async-iterator-iteration.createMethod has cyclomatic complexity 20 (threshold 15). Most of this is not in the body itself: 1 of the 20 points is its own statement and the rest belongs to 4 function literals inside it that branch (lines 42, 56, 20, …). The decisions are inside those literals, which nothing outside this body can call, review or test on its own, so splitting the enclosing body is not the move available here. To reduce it, lift the literals' work into a named function or method at the enclosing scope and have each literal call it, then reduce whichever part then reads as the largest.
web.url.constructor.isDisallowedCodePoint (cyclomatic 20) packages/core-js/modules/web.url.constructor.js:97— web.url.constructor.isDisallowedCodePoint has cyclomatic complexity 20 (threshold 15). To reduce it, name the conditions: bind each compound test to a well-named local or a small predicate function, so the body reads as a sequence of named decisions rather than a chain of operators.
isIgnoredCodePoint (cyclomatic 20) packages/core-js/modules/web.url.constructor.js:86— isIgnoredCodePoint has cyclomatic complexity 20 (threshold 15). To reduce it, name the conditions: bind each compound test to a well-named local or a small predicate function, so the body reads as a sequence of named decisions rather than a chain of operators.
wrap-error-constructor-with-cause.default (cyclomatic 19) packages/core-js/internals/wrap-error-constructor-with-cause.js:16— wrap-error-constructor-with-cause.default has cyclomatic complexity 19 (threshold 15). Of this number, 13 points are the body's own statements and 6 belong to one function literal inside it that branches. To reduce it, split the body: these branches sit side by side rather than nested inside one another, so extracting each one on its own would leave a function per branch. Group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function, so the body reads as a short sequence of named stages.
web.url.constructor.parseIPv4 (cyclomatic 19) packages/core-js/modules/web.url.constructor.js:166— web.url.constructor.parseIPv4 has cyclomatic complexity 19 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top. This is NOT this file's highest cyclomatic complexity: web.url.constructor.isIgnoredCodePoint (cyclomatic 20) is higher and carries no row of its own — it was excluded as a flat dispatcher (a long switch/match over independent cases: many branches, almost no nesting), which this dimension does not treat as a refactor obligation. It is named here so the ranking you see in this file is not mistaken for the whole of it; the excluded method is counted neither in this dimension's figures nor in its score.
exports (cyclomatic 19) packages/core-js/internals/wrap-error-constructor-with-cause.js:16— exports has cyclomatic complexity 19 (threshold 15). Of this number, 13 points are the body's own statements and 6 belong to one function literal inside it that branches. To reduce it, split the body: these branches sit side by side rather than nested inside one another, so extracting each one on its own would leave a function per branch. Group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function, so the body reads as a short sequence of named stages.
array-buffer-view-core.exportTypedArrayStaticMethod (cyclomatic 18) packages/core-js/internals/array-buffer-view-core.js:107— array-buffer-view-core.exportTypedArrayStaticMethod has cyclomatic complexity 18 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
es.regexp.constructor.handleNCG (cyclomatic 18) packages/core-js/modules/es.regexp.constructor.js:77— es.regexp.constructor.handleNCG has cyclomatic complexity 18 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
esnext.string.dedent.dedentStringsArray (cyclomatic 18) packages/core-js/modules/esnext.string.dedent.js:57— esnext.string.dedent.dedentStringsArray has cyclomatic complexity 18 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
exports (cyclomatic 18) packages/core-js-builder/index.js:27— exports has cyclomatic complexity 18 (threshold 15). Of this number, 17 points are the body's own statements and 1 belongs to 3 function items inside it that branch. To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity· zip (cyclomatic 18) · ×1
zip (cyclomatic 18) packages/core-js/modules/es.iterator.zip.js:22— zip has cyclomatic complexity 18 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
export.default (cyclomatic 17) packages/core-js/internals/export.js:25— export.default has cyclomatic complexity 17 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
string-punycode-to-ascii.encode (cyclomatic 17) packages/core-js/internals/string-punycode-to-ascii.js:89— string-punycode-to-ascii.encode has cyclomatic complexity 17 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
exports (cyclomatic 17) packages/core-js/internals/export.js:25— exports has cyclomatic complexity 17 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
fromString (cyclomatic 17) packages/core-js/modules/esnext.number.from-string.js:40— fromString has cyclomatic complexity 17 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
iterator-create-proxy.createIteratorProxyPrototype (cyclomatic 16) packages/core-js/internals/iterator-create-proxy.js:22— iterator-create-proxy.createIteratorProxyPrototype has cyclomatic complexity 16 (threshold 15). Most of this is not in the body itself: 2 of the 16 points are its own statements and the rest belongs to 2 function literals inside it that branch (lines 43, 26). The decisions are inside those literals, which nothing outside this body can call, review or test on its own, so splitting the enclosing body is not the move available here. To reduce it, lift the literals' work into a named function or method at the enclosing scope and have each literal call it, then reduce whichever part then reads as the largest.
es.number.constructor.toNumber (cyclomatic 16) packages/core-js/modules/es.number.constructor.js:38— es.number.constructor.toNumber has cyclomatic complexity 16 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
(anonymous) (cyclomatic 16) packages/core-js/modules/es.array.sort.js:32— (anonymous) has cyclomatic complexity 16 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function so the top-level body reads as a short sequence of named decisions.
parse (cognitive 364) packages/core-js/modules/web.url.constructor.js:447— parse has cognitive complexity 364 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 102 (271 pts), boolean chains 60, ternaries 4 (17 pts), loops 3 (10 pts), match/switch 2 (6 pts) (nesting depth added 193). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: this score is depth rather than breadth — most of its points come from checks stacked inside one another, so the work sits several levels in. Invert each enclosing check into an early exit (a return, or the language's equivalent) so the happy path stays at one level, and where a level cannot be exited early, lift the block it encloses into its own named function.
structuredCloneInternal (cognitive 86) packages/core-js/modules/web.structured-clone.js:189— structuredCloneInternal has cognitive complexity 86 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 18 (32 pts), error handling 9 (28 pts), ternaries 4 (14 pts), match/switch 4 (7 pts), loops 2 (5 pts) (nesting depth added 49). 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.
uint8-from-base64.default (cognitive 82) packages/core-js/internals/uint8-from-base64.js:72— uint8-from-base64.default has cognitive complexity 82 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 22 (73 pts), boolean chains 5, loops 1 (2 pts), ternaries 2 (nesting depth added 52). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: this score is depth rather than breadth — most of its points come from checks stacked inside one another, so the work sits several levels in. Invert each enclosing check into an early exit (a return, or the language's equivalent) so the happy path stays at one level, and where a level cannot be exited early, lift the block it encloses into its own named function.
url-percent-coding.decode (cognitive 82) packages/core-js/internals/url-percent-coding.js:72— url-percent-coding.decode has cognitive complexity 82 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 16 (64 pts), loops 3 (10 pts), boolean chains 8 (nesting depth added 55). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: this score is depth rather than breadth — most of its points come from checks stacked inside one another, so the work sits several levels in. Invert each enclosing check into an early exit (a return, or the language's equivalent) so the happy path stays at one level, and where a level cannot be exited early, lift the block it encloses into its own named function.
exports (cognitive 82) packages/core-js/internals/uint8-from-base64.js:72— exports has cognitive complexity 82 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 22 (73 pts), boolean chains 5, loops 1 (2 pts), ternaries 2 (nesting depth added 52). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: this score is depth rather than breadth — most of its points come from checks stacked inside one another, so the work sits several levels in. Invert each enclosing check into an early exit (a return, or the language's equivalent) so the happy path stays at one level, and where a level cannot be exited early, lift the block it encloses into its own named function.
sumPrecise (cognitive 77) packages/core-js/modules/es.math.sum-precise.js:38— sumPrecise has cognitive complexity 77 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 20 (38 pts), ternaries 7 (22 pts), boolean chains 12, loops 3 (4 pts), match/switch 1 (nesting depth added 34). Of this number, 60 points are the body's own statements and 17 belong to one function literal inside it that branches. To reduce it, flatten the nesting: this score is depth rather than breadth — most of its points come from checks stacked inside one another, so the work sits several levels in. Invert each enclosing check into an early exit (a return, or the language's equivalent) so the happy path stays at one level, and where a level cannot be exited early, lift the block it encloses into its own named function.
web.url.constructor.parseIPv6 (cognitive 74) packages/core-js/modules/web.url.constructor.js:206— web.url.constructor.parseIPv6 has cognitive complexity 74 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 23 (58 pts), loops 5 (12 pts), boolean chains 4 (nesting depth added 42). 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.
collection.default (cognitive 68) packages/core-js/internals/collection.js:18— collection.default has cognitive complexity 68 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: ternaries 13 (45 pts), boolean chains 12, if/else 7 (11 pts) (nesting depth added 36). Of this number, 21 points are the body's own statements and 47 belong to 8 function literals inside it that branch. To reduce it, flatten the nesting: this score is depth rather than breadth — most of its points come from checks stacked inside one another, so the work sits several levels in. Invert each enclosing check into an early exit (a return, or the language's equivalent) so the happy path stays at one level, and where a level cannot be exited early, lift the block it encloses into its own named function.
exports (cognitive 51) packages/core-js/internals/iterator-define.js:28— exports has cognitive complexity 51 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 16 (29 pts), boolean chains 15, loops 1 (3 pts), ternaries 2 (3 pts), match/switch 1 (nesting depth added 16). Of this number, 46 points are the body's own statements and 5 belong to 6 function items inside it that branch. To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
iterator-define.default (cognitive 49) packages/core-js/internals/iterator-define.js:28— iterator-define.default has cognitive complexity 49 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 16 (29 pts), boolean chains 15, loops 1 (3 pts), match/switch 1, ternaries 1 (nesting depth added 15). Of this number, 44 points are the body's own statements and 5 belong to one function literal inside it that branches. To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
iterator-zip.IteratorProxy (cognitive 47) packages/core-js/internals/iterator-zip.js:15— iterator-zip.IteratorProxy has cognitive complexity 47 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 10 (31 pts), error handling 2 (9 pts), loops 2 (6 pts), ternaries 1 (nesting depth added 32). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: this score is depth rather than breadth — most of its points come from checks stacked inside one another, so the work sits several levels in. Invert each enclosing check into an early exit (a return, or the language's equivalent) so the happy path stays at one level, and where a level cannot be exited early, lift the block it encloses into its own named function.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity· zip (cognitive 47) · ×1
zip (cognitive 47) packages/core-js/modules/es.iterator.zip.js:22— zip has cognitive complexity 47 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (20 pts), error handling 5 (17 pts), loops 3 (7 pts), ternaries 2, boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 27). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
(anonymous) (cognitive 47) packages/core-js/internals/iterator-zip.js:15— (anonymous) has cognitive complexity 47 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 10 (31 pts), error handling 2 (9 pts), loops 2 (6 pts), ternaries 1 (nesting depth added 32). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: this score is depth rather than breadth — most of its points come from checks stacked inside one another, so the work sits several levels in. Invert each enclosing check into an early exit (a return, or the language's equivalent) so the happy path stays at one level, and where a level cannot be exited early, lift the block it encloses into its own named function.
playground.init (cognitive 46) website/src/js/playground.js:35— playground.init has cognitive complexity 46 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 29 (30 pts), boolean chains 12, error handling 2, ternaries 2 (nesting depth added 1). Of this number, 36 points are the body's own statements and 10 belong to 5 function literals inside it that branch. To reduce it, split the body: this score is breadth rather than depth — many checks laid out side by side rather than nested inside one another, so inverting conditions into early returns has nothing left to flatten. Group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function, so the body reads as a short sequence of named stages.
getConstructor (cognitive 46) packages/core-js/internals/collection-strong.js:20— getConstructor has cognitive complexity 46 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 22 (33 pts), ternaries 5 (6 pts), loops 4 (5 pts), boolean chains 2 (nesting depth added 13). Most of this is not in the body itself: 2 of the 46 points are its own statements and the rest belongs to 11 function items inside it that branch (delete, define, forEach, …). Those helpers are already separate functions, so extracting the branching again is not available. To reduce it, move them out of the body to the enclosing scope, where each is measured, reviewed and tested on its own, and reduce whichever one then reads as the largest.
export.default (cognitive 42) packages/core-js-pure/override/internals/export.js:44— export.default has cognitive complexity 42 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 12 (23 pts), boolean chains 14, ternaries 3 (4 pts), loops 1 (nesting depth added 12). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
async-iterator-iteration.createMethod (cognitive 42) packages/core-js/internals/async-iterator-iteration.js:15— async-iterator-iteration.createMethod has cognitive complexity 42 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 13 (19 pts), ternaries 3 (11 pts), error handling 5 (9 pts), boolean chains 3 (nesting depth added 18). Most of this is not in the body itself: 0 of the 42 points are its own statements and the rest belongs to 4 function literals inside it that branch (lines 42, 56, 20, …). The decisions are inside those literals, which nothing outside this body can call, review or test on its own, so splitting the enclosing body is not the move available here. To reduce it, lift the literals' work into a named function or method at the enclosing scope and have each literal call it, then reduce whichever part then reads as the largest.
string-punycode-to-ascii.encode (cognitive 42) packages/core-js/internals/string-punycode-to-ascii.js:89— string-punycode-to-ascii.encode has cognitive complexity 42 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (19 pts), ternaries 2 (11 pts), loops 5 (10 pts), boolean chains 2 (nesting depth added 26). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
exports (cognitive 42) packages/core-js/internals/collection.js:18— exports has cognitive complexity 42 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: ternaries 14 (15 pts), if/else 8 (14 pts), boolean chains 11, loops 1 (2 pts) (nesting depth added 8). Of this number, 22 points are the body's own statements and 20 belong to 11 function items inside it that branch. To reduce it, split the body: most of this score is breadth rather than depth — checks laid out side by side rather than stacked — so group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function. Some of it IS depth: where a check sits inside another whose only job is to reach it, merge the two into one condition.
(anonymous) (cognitive 41) packages/core-js/modules/es.string.split.js:46— (anonymous) has cognitive complexity 41 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 11 (19 pts), ternaries 10 (15 pts), loops 2 (4 pts), boolean chains 3 (nesting depth added 15). Most of this is not in the body itself: 1 of the 41 points is its own statement and the rest belongs to 3 function items inside it that branch ((anonymous), (anonymous), split). Those helpers are already separate functions, so extracting the branching again is not available. To reduce it, move them out of the body to the enclosing scope, where each is measured, reviewed and tested on its own, and reduce whichever one then reads as the largest.
parseIPv4 (cognitive 37) packages/core-js/modules/web.url.constructor.js:166— parseIPv4 has cognitive complexity 37 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 10 (18 pts), ternaries 4 (14 pts), loops 3, boolean chains 2 (nesting depth added 18). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
exports (cognitive 36) packages/core-js/internals/iterate.js:22— exports has cognitive complexity 36 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 11 (19 pts), boolean chains 7, loops 2 (4 pts), ternaries 3 (4 pts), error handling 1 (2 pts) (nesting depth added 12). Of this number, 31 points are the body's own statements and 5 belong to 2 function items inside it that branch. To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
iterate.default (cognitive 35) packages/core-js/internals/iterate.js:22— iterate.default has cognitive complexity 35 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 11 (19 pts), boolean chains 7, loops 2 (4 pts), ternaries 2 (3 pts), error handling 1 (2 pts) (nesting depth added 12). Of this number, 30 points are the body's own statements and 5 belong to 2 function literals inside it that branch. To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
array-buffer-view-core.exportTypedArrayStaticMethod (cognitive 34) packages/core-js/internals/array-buffer-view-core.js:107— array-buffer-view-core.exportTypedArrayStaticMethod has cognitive complexity 34 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (13 pts), error handling 2 (8 pts), boolean chains 6, loops 2 (4 pts), ternaries 1 (3 pts) (nesting depth added 16). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
tryToTransfer (cognitive 34) packages/core-js/modules/web.structured-clone.js:430— tryToTransfer has cognitive complexity 34 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 8 (18 pts), error handling 2 (8 pts), match/switch 1 (3 pts), ternaries 1 (3 pts), boolean chains 1, loops 1 (nesting depth added 20). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
exec (cognitive 34) packages/core-js/internals/regexp-exec.js:47— exec has cognitive complexity 34 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 14 (20 pts), boolean chains 9, ternaries 2 (3 pts), loops 1 (2 pts) (nesting depth added 8). Of this number, 29 points are the body's own statements and 5 belong to one function literal inside it that branches. To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
targets-parser.default (cognitive 33) packages/core-js-compat/targets-parser.js:50— targets-parser.default has cognitive complexity 33 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 12 (19 pts), ternaries 5 (7 pts), boolean chains 4, loops 2 (3 pts) (nesting depth added 10). Of this number, 28 points are the body's own statements and 5 belong to 2 function literals inside it that branch. To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
stringify (cognitive 33) packages/core-js/modules/es.json.stringify.js:181— stringify has cognitive complexity 33 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 18 (26 pts), boolean chains 4, ternaries 2, loops 1 (nesting depth added 8). Most of this is not in the body itself: 15 of the 33 points are its own statements and the rest belongs to one function literal inside it that branches (line 192). The decisions are inside the literal, which nothing outside this body can call, review or test on its own, so splitting the enclosing body is not the move available here. To reduce it, lift the literal's work into a named function or method at the enclosing scope and have the literal call it, then reduce whichever part then reads as the largest.
RegExp (cognitive 33) packages/core-js/modules/es.regexp.constructor.js:139— RegExp has cognitive complexity 33 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 13 (19 pts), boolean chains 8, ternaries 4 (5 pts), error handling 1 (nesting depth added 7). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
collection.default (cognitive 32) packages/core-js-pure/override/internals/collection.js:22— collection.default has cognitive complexity 32 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: ternaries 5 (15 pts), boolean chains 9, if/else 5 (8 pts) (nesting depth added 13). Most of this is not in the body itself: 9 of the 32 points are its own statements and the rest belongs to 3 function literals inside it that branch (lines 53, 50, 38). The decisions are inside those literals, which nothing outside this body can call, review or test on its own, so splitting the enclosing body is not the move available here. To reduce it, lift the literals' work into a named function or method at the enclosing scope and have each literal call it, then reduce whichever part then reads as the largest.
array-iteration.createMethod (cognitive 32) packages/core-js/internals/array-iteration.js:10— array-iteration.createMethod has cognitive complexity 32 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 5 (11 pts), match/switch 2 (10 pts), ternaries 4 (6 pts), boolean chains 4, loops 1 (nesting depth added 16). Most of this is not in the body itself: 1 of the 32 points is its own statement and the rest belongs to one function literal inside it that branches (line 18). The decisions are inside the literal, which nothing outside this body can call, review or test on its own, so splitting the enclosing body is not the move available here. To reduce it, lift the literal's work into a named function or method at the enclosing scope and have the literal call it, then reduce whichever part then reads as the largest.
string-parse.default (cognitive 31) packages/core-js/internals/string-parse.js:43— string-parse.default has cognitive complexity 31 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (25 pts), boolean chains 3, match/switch 1 (2 pts), loops 1 (nesting depth added 17). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
main.init (cognitive 30) website/src/js/main.js:17— main.init has cognitive complexity 30 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 11 (14 pts), boolean chains 12, loops 3, ternaries 1 (nesting depth added 3). Of this number, 29 points are the body's own statements and 1 belongs to 3 function literals inside it that branch. To reduce it, split the body: most of this score is breadth rather than depth — checks laid out side by side rather than stacked — so group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function. Some of it IS depth: where a check sits inside another whose only job is to reach it, merge the two into one condition.
(anonymous) (cognitive 30) packages/core-js/modules/es.string.replace.js:60— (anonymous) has cognitive complexity 30 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 11 (19 pts), boolean chains 4, loops 3 (4 pts), ternaries 3 (nesting depth added 9). Most of this is not in the body itself: 1 of the 30 points is its own statement and the rest belongs to 2 function items inside it that branch ((anonymous), replace). Those helpers are already separate functions, so extracting the branching again is not available. To reduce it, move them out of the body to the enclosing scope, where each is measured, reviewed and tested on its own, and reduce whichever one then reads as the largest.
async-iterator-create-proxy.createAsyncIteratorProxyPrototype (cognitive 29) packages/core-js/internals/async-iterator-create-proxy.js:23— async-iterator-create-proxy.createAsyncIteratorProxyPrototype has cognitive complexity 29 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 14 (19 pts), ternaries 4 (5 pts), error handling 1 (3 pts), boolean chains 2 (nesting depth added 8). Most of this is not in the body itself: 1 of the 29 points is its own statement and the rest belongs to 7 function literals inside it that branch (lines 63, 27, 41, …). The decisions are inside those literals, which nothing outside this body can call, review or test on its own, so splitting the enclosing body is not the move available here. To reduce it, lift the literals' work into a named function or method at the enclosing scope and have each literal call it, then reduce whichever part then reads as the largest.
es.regexp.constructor.handleNCG (cognitive 29) packages/core-js/modules/es.regexp.constructor.js:77— es.regexp.constructor.handleNCG has cognitive complexity 29 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (19 pts), loops 3 (4 pts), boolean chains 3, match/switch 1 (3 pts) (nesting depth added 13). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
esnext.string.dedent.dedentStringsArray (cognitive 29) packages/core-js/modules/esnext.string.dedent.js:57— esnext.string.dedent.dedentStringsArray has cognitive complexity 29 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 8 (17 pts), loops 5 (7 pts), boolean chains 4, ternaries 1 (nesting depth added 11). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
exports (cognitive 28) packages/core-js-builder/index.js:27— exports has cognitive complexity 28 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 12 (14 pts), ternaries 3 (8 pts), boolean chains 3, loops 1 (3 pts) (nesting depth added 9). Of this number, 25 points are the body's own statements and 3 belong to 3 function items inside it that branch. To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity· from (cognitive 28) · ×1
from (cognitive 28) packages/core-js/internals/array-from.js:20— from has cognitive complexity 28 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: ternaries 6 (13 pts), error handling 2 (6 pts), loops 2 (4 pts), if/else 3, boolean chains 2 (nesting depth added 13). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
export.default (cognitive 26) packages/core-js/internals/export.js:25— export.default has cognitive complexity 26 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (18 pts), boolean chains 6, loops 1 (2 pts) (nesting depth added 10). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
es.json.parse.internalize (cognitive 26) packages/core-js/modules/es.json.parse.js:51— es.json.parse.internalize has cognitive complexity 26 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: ternaries 5 (14 pts), loops 2 (6 pts), if/else 3 (4 pts), boolean chains 2 (nesting depth added 14). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
es.promise.constructor.callReaction (cognitive 25) packages/core-js/modules/es.promise.constructor.js:59— es.promise.constructor.callReaction has cognitive complexity 25 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 12 (22 pts), boolean chains 1, error handling 1, ternaries 1 (nesting depth added 10). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
serializeHost (cognitive 25) packages/core-js/modules/web.url.constructor.js:305— serializeHost has cognitive complexity 25 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (16 pts), loops 2 (4 pts), ternaries 1 (4 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 14). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
exports (cognitive 24) packages/core-js/internals/make-built-in.js:26— exports has cognitive complexity 24 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 11 (13 pts), boolean chains 8, ternaries 1 (2 pts), error handling 1 (nesting depth added 3). To reduce it, split the body: most of this score is breadth rather than depth — checks laid out side by side rather than stacked — so group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function. Some of it IS depth: where a check sits inside another whose only job is to reach it, merge the two into one condition, and where an else follows a branch that already returns, drop the trailing else and let the rest of the body continue at one level.
zipKeyed (cognitive 24) packages/core-js/modules/es.iterator.zip-keyed.js:22— zipKeyed has cognitive complexity 24 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 5 (8 pts), loops 4 (8 pts), error handling 2 (5 pts), ternaries 2, boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 10). Of this number, 23 points are the body's own statements and 1 belongs to one function literal inside it that branches. To reduce it, 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.
array-buffer-view-core.exportTypedArrayMethod (cognitive 23) packages/core-js/internals/array-buffer-view-core.js:88— array-buffer-view-core.exportTypedArrayMethod has cognitive complexity 23 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: error handling 2 (9 pts), if/else 4 (6 pts), boolean chains 4, loops 1 (2 pts), ternaries 1 (2 pts) (nesting depth added 11). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
splice (cognitive 23) packages/core-js/modules/es.array.splice.js:23— splice has cognitive complexity 23 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 10 (15 pts), loops 5 (8 pts) (nesting depth added 8). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
fromString (cognitive 23) packages/core-js/modules/esnext.number.from-string.js:40— fromString has cognitive complexity 23 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 10 (13 pts), ternaries 2 (4 pts), boolean chains 3, loops 1 (3 pts) (nesting depth added 7). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
wrap-error-constructor-with-cause.default (cognitive 22) packages/core-js/internals/wrap-error-constructor-with-cause.js:16— wrap-error-constructor-with-cause.default has cognitive complexity 22 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 12 (14 pts), boolean chains 3, ternaries 3, error handling 1 (2 pts) (nesting depth added 3). Of this number, 16 points are the body's own statements and 6 belong to one function literal inside it that branches. To reduce it, split the body: most of this score is breadth rather than depth — checks laid out side by side rather than stacked — so group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function. Some of it IS depth: where a check sits inside another whose only job is to reach it, merge the two into one condition, and where an else follows a branch that already returns, drop the trailing else and let the rest of the body continue at one level.
es.number.constructor.toNumber (cognitive 22) packages/core-js/modules/es.number.constructor.js:38— es.number.constructor.toNumber has cognitive complexity 22 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 6 (12 pts), boolean chains 4, loops 1 (3 pts), match/switch 1 (3 pts) (nesting depth added 10). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
cloneBuffer (cognitive 22) packages/core-js/modules/web.structured-clone.js:140— cloneBuffer has cognitive complexity 22 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 8 (11 pts), boolean chains 3, loops 1 (3 pts), ternaries 1 (3 pts), error handling 1 (2 pts) (nesting depth added 8). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
toFixed (cognitive 22) packages/core-js/modules/es.number.to-fixed.js:77— toFixed has cognitive complexity 22 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (10 pts), loops 2 (6 pts), ternaries 2 (4 pts), boolean chains 2 (nesting depth added 7). To reduce it, split the body: most of this score is breadth rather than depth — checks laid out side by side rather than stacked — so group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function. Some of it IS depth: where a check sits inside another whose only job is to reach it, merge the two into one condition, and where an else follows a branch that already returns, drop the trailing else and let the rest of the body continue at one level.
pack (cognitive 22) packages/core-js/internals/ieee754.js:10— pack has cognitive complexity 22 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (13 pts), ternaries 3 (4 pts), boolean chains 3, loops 2 (nesting depth added 5). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
exports (cognitive 21) packages/core-js/internals/wrap-error-constructor-with-cause.js:16— exports has cognitive complexity 21 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 12 (14 pts), boolean chains 3, ternaries 3, error handling 1 (nesting depth added 2). Of this number, 15 points are the body's own statements and 6 belong to one function literal inside it that branches. To reduce it, split the body: most of this score is breadth rather than depth — checks laid out side by side rather than stacked — so group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function. Some of it IS depth: where a check sits inside another whose only job is to reach it, merge the two into one condition, and where an else follows a branch that already returns, drop the trailing else and let the rest of the body continue at one level.
web.dom-collections.iterator.handlePrototype (cognitive 20) packages/core-js/modules/web.dom-collections.iterator.js:13— web.dom-collections.iterator.handlePrototype has cognitive complexity 20 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 4 (9 pts), error handling 2 (8 pts), loops 1 (3 pts) (nesting depth added 13). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
esnext.async-iterator.flat-map.AsyncIteratorProxy (cognitive 20) packages/core-js/modules/esnext.async-iterator.flat-map.js:13— esnext.async-iterator.flat-map.AsyncIteratorProxy has cognitive complexity 20 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: error handling 6 (10 pts), if/else 8 (10 pts) (nesting depth added 6). Most of this is not in the body itself: 0 of the 20 points are its own statements and the rest belongs to 5 function literals inside it that branch (lines 30, 56, 60, …). The decisions are inside those literals, which nothing outside this body can call, review or test on its own, so splitting the enclosing body is not the move available here. To reduce it, lift the literals' work into a named function or method at the enclosing scope and have each literal call it, then reduce whichever part then reads as the largest.
iterator-create-proxy.createIteratorProxyPrototype (cognitive 20) packages/core-js/internals/iterator-create-proxy.js:22— iterator-create-proxy.createIteratorProxyPrototype has cognitive complexity 20 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (11 pts), error handling 3 (5 pts), ternaries 3 (4 pts) (nesting depth added 5). Most of this is not in the body itself: 1 of the 20 points is its own statement and the rest belongs to 2 function literals inside it that branch (lines 43, 26). The decisions are inside those literals, which nothing outside this body can call, review or test on its own, so splitting the enclosing body is not the move available here. To reduce it, lift the literals' work into a named function or method at the enclosing scope and have each literal call it, then reduce whichever part then reads as the largest.
es.reflect.set.$set (cognitive 20) packages/core-js/modules/es.reflect.set.js:16— es.reflect.set.$set has cognitive complexity 20 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (15 pts), error handling 1 (3 pts), boolean chains 2 (nesting depth added 8). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
check-dependencies.checkPackage (cognitive 20) scripts/check-dependencies/check-dependencies.mjs:9— check-dependencies.checkPackage has cognitive complexity 20 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (9 pts), loops 3 (8 pts), boolean chains 3 (nesting depth added 7). Of this number, 18 points are the body's own statements and 2 belong to one function literal inside it that branches. To reduce it, split the body: most of this score is breadth rather than depth — checks laid out side by side rather than stacked — so group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function. Some of it IS depth: where a check sits inside another whose only job is to reach it, merge the two into one condition.
parseHost (cognitive 20) packages/core-js/modules/web.url.constructor.js:858— parseHost has cognitive complexity 20 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 10 (17 pts), loops 1 (2 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 8). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
toExponential (cognitive 20) packages/core-js/modules/es.number.to-exponential.js:54— toExponential has cognitive complexity 20 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 14 (17 pts), ternaries 1 (2 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 4). To reduce it, split the body: most of this score is breadth rather than depth — checks laid out side by side rather than stacked — so group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function. Some of it IS depth: where a check sits inside another whose only job is to reach it, merge the two into one condition, and where an else follows a branch that already returns, drop the trailing else and let the rest of the body continue at one level.
(anonymous) (cognitive 20) packages/core-js/modules/esnext.async-iterator.flat-map.js:13— (anonymous) has cognitive complexity 20 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: error handling 6 (10 pts), if/else 8 (10 pts) (nesting depth added 6). Most of this is not in the body itself: 0 of the 20 points are its own statements and the rest belongs to 8 function items inside it that branch ((anonymous)::outerLoop::(anonymous), (anonymous)::innerLoop, (anonymous)::innerLoop::(anonymous), …). Those helpers are already separate functions, so extracting the branching again is not available. To reduce it, move them out of the body to the enclosing scope, where each is measured, reviewed and tested on its own, and reduce whichever one then reads as the largest.
array-includes.createMethod (cognitive 19) packages/core-js/internals/array-includes.js:7— array-includes.createMethod has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 5 (9 pts), boolean chains 6, loops 2 (4 pts) (nesting depth added 6). Most of this is not in the body itself: 0 of the 19 points are its own statements and the rest belongs to one function literal inside it that branches (line 8). The decisions are inside the literal, which nothing outside this body can call, review or test on its own, so splitting the enclosing body is not the move available here. To reduce it, lift the literal's work into a named function or method at the enclosing scope and have the literal call it, then reduce whichever part then reads as the largest.
es.typed-array.sort.getSortCompare (cognitive 19) packages/core-js/modules/es.typed-array.sort.js:51— es.typed-array.sort.getSortCompare has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: ternaries 6 (13 pts), if/else 4, boolean chains 2 (nesting depth added 7). Most of this is not in the body itself: 0 of the 19 points are its own statements and the rest belongs to one function literal inside it that branches (line 52). The decisions are inside the literal, which nothing outside this body can call, review or test on its own, so splitting the enclosing body is not the move available here. To reduce it, lift the literal's work into a named function or method at the enclosing scope and have the literal call it, then reduce whichever part then reads as the largest.
NumericRangeIterator (cognitive 19) packages/core-js/internals/numeric-range-iterator.js:20— NumericRangeIterator has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 11, boolean chains 6, ternaries 1 (2 pts) (nesting depth added 1). To reduce it, split the body: this score is breadth rather than depth — many checks laid out side by side rather than nested inside one another, so inverting conditions into early returns has nothing left to flatten. Group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function, so the body reads as a short sequence of named stages.
array-reduce.createMethod (cognitive 18) packages/core-js/internals/array-reduce.js:12— array-reduce.createMethod has cognitive complexity 18 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 5 (10 pts), ternaries 3 (4 pts), loops 2 (3 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 7). Most of this is not in the body itself: 0 of the 18 points are its own statements and the rest belongs to one function literal inside it that branches (line 13). The decisions are inside the literal, which nothing outside this body can call, review or test on its own, so splitting the enclosing body is not the move available here. To reduce it, lift the literal's work into a named function or method at the enclosing scope and have the literal call it, then reduce whichever part then reads as the largest.
parse-json-string.default (cognitive 18) packages/core-js/internals/parse-json-string.js:27— parse-json-string.default has cognitive complexity 18 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (17 pts), loops 1 (nesting depth added 8). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
isDisallowedCodePoint (cognitive 18) packages/core-js/modules/web.url.constructor.js:97— isDisallowedCodePoint has cognitive complexity 18 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: boolean chains 18. To reduce it, name the conditions: bind each compound test to a well-named local or a small predicate function, so the body reads as a sequence of named decisions rather than a chain of operators.
replaceAll (cognitive 18) packages/core-js/modules/es.string.replace-all.js:26— replaceAll has cognitive complexity 18 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (12 pts), ternaries 2 (4 pts), boolean chains 1, loops 1 (nesting depth added 7). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
allSettledKeyed (cognitive 18) packages/core-js/modules/esnext.promise.all-settled-keyed.js:18— allSettledKeyed has cognitive complexity 18 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 4 (9 pts), loops 2 (4 pts), ternaries 1 (3 pts), boolean chains 2 (nesting depth added 9). Most of this is not in the body itself: 1 of the 18 points is its own statement and the rest belongs to 4 function items inside it that branch ((anonymous)::(anonymous)::createElementResolver::(anonymous), (anonymous), (anonymous)::(anonymous), …). Those helpers are already separate functions, so extracting the branching again is not available. To reduce it, move them out of the body to the enclosing scope, where each is measured, reviewed and tested on its own, and reduce whichever one then reads as the largest.
array-buffer-transfer.default (cognitive 17) packages/core-js/internals/array-buffer-transfer.js:24— array-buffer-transfer.default has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: boolean chains 6, if/else 5 (6 pts), ternaries 2 (3 pts), loops 1 (2 pts) (nesting depth added 3). To reduce it, split the body: most of this score is breadth rather than depth — checks laid out side by side rather than stacked — so group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function. Some of it IS depth: where a check sits inside another whose only job is to reach it, merge the two into one condition, and where an else follows a branch that already returns, drop the trailing else and let the rest of the body continue at one level.
get-substitution.default (cognitive 17) packages/core-js/internals/get-substitution.js:15— get-substitution.default has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 5 (11 pts), ternaries 2 (5 pts), match/switch 1 (nesting depth added 9). Most of this is not in the body itself: 1 of the 17 points is its own statement and the rest belongs to one function literal inside it that branches (line 23). The decisions are inside the literal, which nothing outside this body can call, review or test on its own, so splitting the enclosing body is not the move available here. To reduce it, lift the literal's work into a named function or method at the enclosing scope and have the literal call it, then reduce whichever part then reads as the largest.
numeric-range-iterator.$RangeIterator (cognitive 17) packages/core-js/internals/numeric-range-iterator.js:20— numeric-range-iterator.$RangeIterator has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 11, boolean chains 6. To reduce it, split the body: this score is breadth rather than depth — many checks laid out side by side rather than nested inside one another, so inverting conditions into early returns has nothing left to flatten. Group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function, so the body reads as a short sequence of named stages.
defineProperty (cognitive 17) packages/core-js/modules/es.symbol.constructor.js:93— defineProperty has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 6 (11 pts), boolean chains 3, ternaries 1 (3 pts) (nesting depth added 7). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
(anonymous) (cognitive 17) packages/core-js/internals/array-buffer-transfer.js:24— (anonymous) has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: boolean chains 6, if/else 5 (6 pts), ternaries 2 (3 pts), loops 1 (2 pts) (nesting depth added 3). To reduce it, split the body: most of this score is breadth rather than depth — checks laid out side by side rather than stacked — so group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function. Some of it IS depth: where a check sits inside another whose only job is to reach it, merge the two into one condition, and where an else follows a branch that already returns, drop the trailing else and let the rest of the body continue at one level.
slice (cognitive 17) packages/core-js/modules/es.array.slice.js:25— slice has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 6 (11 pts), boolean chains 3, ternaries 2, loops 1 (nesting depth added 5). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
define-built-in.default (cognitive 16) packages/core-js/internals/define-built-in.js:7— define-built-in.default has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 10 (13 pts), error handling 1 (2 pts), ternaries 1 (nesting depth added 4). To reduce it, split the body: most of this score is breadth rather than depth — checks laid out side by side rather than stacked — so group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function. Some of it IS depth: where a check sits inside another whose only job is to reach it, merge the two into one condition, and where an else follows a branch that already returns, drop the trailing else and let the rest of the body continue at one level.
getConstructor (cognitive 16) packages/core-js/internals/collection-weak.js:59— getConstructor has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 10 (12 pts), boolean chains 3, ternaries 1 (nesting depth added 2). Most of this is not in the body itself: 1 of the 16 points is its own statement and the rest belongs to 7 function items inside it that branch (get, delete, has, …). Those helpers are already separate functions, so extracting the branching again is not available. To reduce it, move them out of the body to the enclosing scope, where each is measured, reviewed and tested on its own, and reduce whichever one then reads as the largest.
reduce (cognitive 16) packages/core-js/modules/esnext.async-iterator.reduce.js:17— reduce has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 6 (9 pts), error handling 3 (4 pts), ternaries 2 (3 pts) (nesting depth added 5). Most of this is not in the body itself: 1 of the 16 points is its own statement and the rest belongs to 5 function items inside it that branch ((anonymous)::loop::(anonymous), (anonymous)::loop, (anonymous), …). Those helpers are already separate functions, so extracting the branching again is not available. To reduce it, move them out of the body to the enclosing scope, where each is measured, reviewed and tested on its own, and reduce whichever one then reads as the largest.
allKeyed (cognitive 16) packages/core-js/modules/esnext.promise.all-keyed.js:18— allKeyed has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 4 (9 pts), loops 2 (5 pts), boolean chains 2 (nesting depth added 8). Most of this is not in the body itself: 1 of the 16 points is its own statement and the rest belongs to 3 function literals inside it that branch (lines 38, 23, 30). The decisions are inside those literals, which nothing outside this body can call, review or test on its own, so splitting the enclosing body is not the move available here. To reduce it, lift the literals' work into a named function or method at the enclosing scope and have each literal call it, then reduce whichever part then reads as the largest.
FileTooLong: modules/web.url.constructor.js packages/core-js/modules/web.url.constructor.js— FileTooLong — 879 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded; the length bar is tripled for a single-responsibility module of 4 or fewer top-level units). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 379 over it, 1.76× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.
Change-coupling hub: es.string.match.js → es.string.replace.js, es.string.search.js, es.string.split.js packages/core-js/modules/es.string.match.js— `packages/core-js/modules/es.string.match.js` changes together with 3 other files — `packages/core-js/modules/es.string.replace.js`, `packages/core-js/modules/es.string.search.js`, `packages/core-js/modules/es.string.split.js` — none of which declares a dependency on it: one file is the hub of 3 separate couplings, not 3 unrelated pairs. Read the hub first: if the others each duplicate a part of what it does, the shared concern belongs in ONE unit and extracting it clears every edge at once; if the hub is a registry, dispatcher or barrel that must name each of them, the coupling is structural and the question is whether that list can be discovered instead of enumerated. Fixing the hub is one change; breaking the couplings one pair at a time is 3.
Duplication concentrated across 5 sibling directories (27 clone groups) packages/core-js/internals/async-iterator-map.js:26— 27 duplicated blocks under packages/core-js/ have copies in at least two of the sibling directories actual, es, full, internals, modules — 10 of them are reported below, and 17 are counted here but not reported individually: those copies match on shape but no longer clear R10's bar for an individually reported row — either they kept neither their own names nor their values, or what was copied is too small to stand on its own (it reports near-exact duplication only, and only of substantial extent). What this row states is the concentration, which the detector measured over all 27 and which does not depend on how exactly each block's copies still match. That concentration is one structural fact, not 27 local ones: the siblings replicate behaviour none of them owns, which is the shape of a missing shared module — a common library every sibling imports — rather than 27 separate extractions. Check first whether the siblings are deliberately standalone deliverables (scaffold templates, demo apps that must stay copy-pasteable); where they are, the duplication is the design and the per-block rows are the ones to act on.
R10 · Code Duplication· Duplicated block with local edits (78 matched lines × 2 locations) · ×1
Duplicated block with local edits (78 matched lines × 2 locations) packages/core-js/modules/es.async-disposable-stack.constructor.js:17— packages/core-js/modules/es.async-disposable-stack.constructor.js:17 · packages/core-js/modules/es.disposable-stack.constructor.js:15 — the two spans are one implementation copied and then locally edited — 496 tokens are still identical, in the same order in both files, with only local edits between them. The copies have already begun to drift, which is this row's finding: an edit made to one and not the other changes behaviour silently. Diff the two spans first to learn what genuinely differs, then extract the shared core into one module both sites use, passing the differences in as parameters — or, if one copy exists only because the other could not be imported from its context, make one of them the single source the other is generated or re-exported from. If one copy is no longer reachable, delete it rather than letting it shadow the live one.
Duplicated block (24 lines × 2 locations) packages/core-js/modules/esnext.async-iterator.filter.js:12— packages/core-js/modules/esnext.async-iterator.filter.js:12 · packages/core-js/modules/esnext.async-iterator.flat-map.js:13 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.
R10 · Code Duplication· Duplicated block with local edits (22 matched lines × 2 locations) · ×1
Duplicated block with local edits (22 matched lines × 2 locations) packages/core-js/modules/es.iterator.filter.js:14— packages/core-js/modules/es.iterator.filter.js:14 · packages/core-js/modules/es.iterator.map.js:14 — the two spans are one implementation copied and then locally edited — 154 tokens are still identical, in the same order in both files, with only local edits between them. The copies have already begun to drift, which is this row's finding: an edit made to one and not the other changes behaviour silently. Diff the two spans first to learn what genuinely differs, then extract the shared core into one module both sites use, passing the differences in as parameters — or, if one copy exists only because the other could not be imported from its context, make one of them the single source the other is generated or re-exported from. If one copy is no longer reachable, delete it rather than letting it shadow the live one.
Duplicated block (21 lines × 2 locations) packages/core-js/internals/async-iterator-map.js:26— packages/core-js/internals/async-iterator-map.js:26 · packages/core-js/modules/esnext.async-iterator.filter.js:28 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 directories, so the shared home is a decision rather than an obvious spot: check first whether one of them already owns this behaviour, and otherwise put the extracted module somewhere all of the sites already reach rather than making one of them depend on another.
R10 · Code Duplication· Duplicated block with local edits (19 matched lines × 2 locations) · ×1
Duplicated block with local edits (19 matched lines × 2 locations) packages/core-js/internals/async-iterator-iteration.js:24— packages/core-js/internals/async-iterator-iteration.js:24 · packages/core-js/modules/esnext.async-iterator.reduce.js:9 — the two spans are one implementation copied and then locally edited — 126 tokens are still identical, in the same order in both files, with only local edits between them. The copies have already begun to drift, which is this row's finding: an edit made to one and not the other changes behaviour silently. Diff the two spans first to learn what genuinely differs, then extract the shared core into one module both sites use, passing the differences in as parameters — or, if one copy exists only because the other could not be imported from its context, make one of them the single source the other is generated or re-exported from. If one copy is no longer reachable, delete it rather than letting it shadow the live one.
Duplicated block (19 lines × 2 locations) packages/core-js/modules/es.promise.all-settled.js:12— packages/core-js/modules/es.promise.all-settled.js:12 · packages/core-js/modules/es.promise.all.js:12 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.
Duplicated block (16 lines × 4 locations) packages/core-js/modules/es.iterator.every.js:16— packages/core-js/modules/es.iterator.every.js:16 · packages/core-js/modules/es.iterator.find.js:16 · packages/core-js/modules/es.iterator.for-each.js:16 · packages/core-js/modules/es.iterator.some.js:16 — the 4 copies sit in sibling files in one directory, so check first whether one of them (or an existing module there) already owns this behaviour and the others should call it; otherwise extract it into one module in that directory and have each site call it. There is one copy in each of 4 separate files rather than several in one place, so check first whether these are sibling modules that each declare their own version of one shape — one per entity, per provider, per language. Where they are, no single extracted module collapses them: each module still has to be written, and what recurs is the TEMPLATE. The moves that do collapse a template are to generate these modules from the set they enumerate, or to replace the repeated construction with one factory each site calls with its own values — and where the set is the point, each module pinning one distinct thing, the repetition IS the enumeration and there is nothing to delete.
R10 · Code Duplication· Duplicated block with local edits (16 matched lines × 2 locations) · ×1
Duplicated block with local edits (16 matched lines × 2 locations) packages/core-js/modules/web.atob.js:16— packages/core-js/modules/web.atob.js:16 · packages/core-js/modules/web.btoa.js:12 — the two spans are one implementation copied and then locally edited — 88 tokens are still identical, in the same order in both files, with only local edits between them. The copies have already begun to drift, which is this row's finding: an edit made to one and not the other changes behaviour silently. Diff the two spans first to learn what genuinely differs, then extract the shared core into one module both sites use, passing the differences in as parameters — or, if one copy exists only because the other could not be imported from its context, make one of them the single source the other is generated or re-exported from. If one copy is no longer reachable, delete it rather than letting it shadow the live one.
R10 · Code Duplication· Duplicated block with local edits (14 matched lines × 2 locations) · ×1
Duplicated block with local edits (14 matched lines × 2 locations) packages/core-js/internals/string-cooked.js:7— packages/core-js/internals/string-cooked.js:7 · packages/core-js/modules/es.string.raw.js:7 — the two spans are one implementation copied and then locally edited — 94 tokens are still identical, in the same order in both files, with only local edits between them. The copies have already begun to drift, which is this row's finding: an edit made to one and not the other changes behaviour silently. Diff the two spans first to learn what genuinely differs, then extract the shared core into one module both sites use, passing the differences in as parameters — or, if one copy exists only because the other could not be imported from its context, make one of them the single source the other is generated or re-exported from. If one copy is no longer reachable, delete it rather than letting it shadow the live one.
Duplicated block (12 lines × 2 locations) packages/core-js/modules/esnext.async-iterator.drop.js:36— packages/core-js/modules/esnext.async-iterator.drop.js:36 · packages/core-js/modules/esnext.async-iterator.take.js:35 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.
Duplicated block (10 lines × 4 locations) packages/core-js/stable/instance/entries.js:8— packages/core-js/stable/instance/entries.js:8 · packages/core-js/stable/instance/for-each.js:8 · packages/core-js/stable/instance/keys.js:8 · packages/core-js/stable/instance/values.js:8 — the 4 copies sit in sibling files in one directory, so check first whether one of them (or an existing module there) already owns this behaviour and the others should call it; otherwise extract it into one module in that directory and have each site call it. There is one copy in each of 4 separate files rather than several in one place, so check first whether these are sibling modules that each declare their own version of one shape — one per entity, per provider, per language. Where they are, no single extracted module collapses them: each module still has to be written, and what recurs is the TEMPLATE. The moves that do collapse a template are to generate these modules from the set they enumerate, or to replace the repeated construction with one factory each site calls with its own values — and where the set is the point, each module pinning one distinct thing, the repetition IS the enumeration and there is nothing to delete.
Duplicated block (9 lines × 2 locations) packages/core-js/modules/es.array.find-index.js:6— packages/core-js/modules/es.array.find-index.js:6 · packages/core-js/modules/es.array.find.js:6 — the 2 copies sit in sibling files in one directory, so check first whether one of them (or an existing module there) already owns this behaviour and the others should call it; otherwise extract it into one module in that directory and have each site call it.
Complex function parse (cyclomatic 196, cognitive 364) packages/core-js/modules/web.url.constructor.js:447— parse has cyclomatic complexity 196 and cognitive complexity 364; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
Complex function structuredCloneInternal (cyclomatic 98, cognitive 86) packages/core-js/modules/web.structured-clone.js:189— structuredCloneInternal has cyclomatic complexity 98 and cognitive complexity 86; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive sits below cyclomatic here, so much of the count is breadth — arms side by side rather than stacked — and splitting per arm would leave a function per arm; group the work between the checks into named steps instead. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
Complex function sumPrecise (cyclomatic 40, cognitive 60) packages/core-js/modules/es.math.sum-precise.js:38— sumPrecise has cyclomatic complexity 40 and cognitive complexity 60; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
Complex function exports (cyclomatic 36, cognitive 48) packages/core-js-pure/override/internals/export.js:44— exports has cyclomatic complexity 36 and cognitive complexity 48; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
R2 · Cyclomatic Complexity· Complex function run (cyclomatic 36, cognitive 39) · ×1
Complex function run (cyclomatic 36, cognitive 39) tests/unit-global/es.string.split.js:9— run has cyclomatic complexity 36 and cognitive complexity 39; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
Complex function exports (cyclomatic 33, cognitive 46) packages/core-js/internals/iterator-define.js:28— exports has cyclomatic complexity 33 and cognitive complexity 46; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
Complex function exports (cyclomatic 31, cognitive 82) packages/core-js/internals/uint8-from-base64.js:72— exports has cyclomatic complexity 31 and cognitive complexity 82; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
Complex function parseIPv6 (cyclomatic 31, cognitive 74) packages/core-js/modules/web.url.constructor.js:206— parseIPv6 has cyclomatic complexity 31 and cognitive complexity 74; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
Complex function RegExp (cyclomatic 30, cognitive 33) packages/core-js/modules/es.regexp.constructor.js:139— RegExp has cyclomatic complexity 30 and cognitive complexity 33; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
Complex function exec (cyclomatic 28, cognitive 29) packages/core-js/internals/regexp-exec.js:47— exec has cyclomatic complexity 28 and cognitive complexity 29; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
Complex function decode (cyclomatic 27, cognitive 82) packages/core-js/internals/url-percent-coding.js:72— decode has cyclomatic complexity 27 and cognitive complexity 82; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
Complex function tryToTransfer (cyclomatic 26, cognitive 34) packages/core-js/modules/web.structured-clone.js:430— tryToTransfer has cyclomatic complexity 26 and cognitive complexity 34; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
Complex function exports (cyclomatic 26, cognitive 31) packages/core-js/internals/string-parse.js:43— exports has cyclomatic complexity 26 and cognitive complexity 31; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
Complex function exports (cyclomatic 22, cognitive 24) packages/core-js/internals/make-built-in.js:26— exports has cyclomatic complexity 22 and cognitive complexity 24; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
Complex function (anonymous) (cyclomatic 21, cognitive 36) packages/core-js/modules/es.string.split.js:66— (anonymous) has cyclomatic complexity 21 and cognitive complexity 36; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
Complex function NumericRangeIterator (cyclomatic 21, cognitive 19) packages/core-js/internals/numeric-range-iterator.js:20— NumericRangeIterator has cyclomatic complexity 21 and cognitive complexity 19; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive sits below cyclomatic here, so much of the count is breadth — arms side by side rather than stacked — and splitting per arm would leave a function per arm; group the work between the checks into named steps instead. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
Complex function exports (cyclomatic 20, cognitive 31) packages/core-js/internals/iterate.js:22— exports has cyclomatic complexity 20 and cognitive complexity 31; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
Complex function isDisallowedCodePoint (cyclomatic 20, cognitive 18) packages/core-js/modules/web.url.constructor.js:97— isDisallowedCodePoint has cyclomatic complexity 20 and cognitive complexity 18; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive sits below cyclomatic here, so much of the count is breadth — arms side by side rather than stacked — and splitting per arm would leave a function per arm; group the work between the checks into named steps instead. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
No typecheck script — test ✓ · lint ✓ · typecheck ✗ — read from this repository's package.json scripts and corroborated against its CI workflows. A script counts when its name or command matches the step: `test` for the suite, `lint` or `prettier` for linting, `typecheck`/`type-check`/`tsc` for type checking. ✗ therefore means no script or CI step under those names was found, NOT that the step is absent from your pipeline — a task invoked by a runner this check does not read, or named something else entirely, is not seen and is worth confirming before acting on a cross. A ✓ means the wiring is DECLARED — a script or CI step under those names exists. It is not a statement that the step passes, or that it runs at all: nothing here installs a dependency or executes a suite.
Unused dependency 'actions-up' — Declared in scripts/check-actions/package.json but never imported anywhere in that package or its workspace members — no static import reaches it. Usually that is dead weight and attack surface, but two shapes are indistinguishable from source and are NOT dead: an optional or native peer that another dependency loads dynamically at runtime, and a package a build, docs or test step installs and invokes separately. Confirm which of the three this is before removing it.
Unused dependency 'updates' — Declared in scripts/check-dependencies/package.json but never imported anywhere in that package or its workspace members — no static import reaches it. Usually that is dead weight and attack surface, but two shapes are indistinguishable from source and are NOT dead: an optional or native peer that another dependency loads dynamically at runtime, and a package a build, docs or test step installs and invokes separately. Confirm which of the three this is before removing it.
Unused dependency 'moon-unit' — Declared in tests/observables/package.json but never imported anywhere in that package or its workspace members — no static import reaches it. Usually that is dead weight and attack surface, but two shapes are indistinguishable from source and are NOT dead: an optional or native peer that another dependency loads dynamically at runtime, and a package a build, docs or test step installs and invokes separately. Confirm which of the three this is before removing it.
Silent fallback default in catch packages/core-js/internals/try-to-string.js:7— `default` swallows every exception into `return 'Object'` — a data error becomes a silent behavior change with no trail. Log the failure or let it raise. If that constant is the correct answer rather than a stand-in for a value that could not be read, say so in a comment on the handler or in the docstring, and the row stops firing.
Silent fallback default in catch packages/core-js/internals/set-method-accept-set-like.js:55— `default` swallows every exception into `return false` — a data error becomes a silent behavior change with no trail. Log the failure or let it raise. If that constant is the correct answer rather than a stand-in for a value that could not be read, say so in a comment on the handler or in the docstring, and the row stops firing.
Silent fallback default in catch packages/core-js/modules/es.reflect.set.js:32— `$set` swallows every exception into `return false` — a data error becomes a silent behavior change with no trail. Log the failure or let it raise. If that constant is the correct answer rather than a stand-in for a value that could not be read, say so in a comment on the handler or in the docstring, and the row stops firing.
Silent fallback default in catch tests/compat/tests.js:279— `createSetMethodTest` swallows every exception into `return false` — a data error becomes a silent behavior change with no trail. Log the failure or let it raise. If that constant is the correct answer rather than a stand-in for a value that could not be read, say so in a comment on the handler or in the docstring, and the row stops firing.
Silent fallback default in catch tests/compat/tests.js:351— `iteratorHelperThrowsErrorOnInvalidIterator` swallows every exception into `return true` — a data error becomes a silent behavior change with no trail. Log the failure or let it raise. If that constant is the correct answer rather than a stand-in for a value that could not be read, say so in a comment on the handler or in the docstring, and the row stops firing.
Duplicated predicate packages/core-js/internals/object-is-extensible.js:15— `ARRAY_BUFFER_NON_EXTENSIBLE && classof(it) === 'ArrayBuffer'` appears character-identically in 3 files — packages/core-js/internals/object-is-extensible.js, packages/core-js/modules/es.object.is-frozen.js, packages/core-js/modules/es.object.is-sealed.js. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.
Duplicated predicate packages/core-js/actual/instance/with.js:9— `it === ArrayPrototype || (isPrototypeOf(ArrayPrototype, it) && own === ArrayPrototype['with'])` appears character-identically in 2 files — packages/core-js/actual/instance/with.js, packages/core-js/es/instance/with.js. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.
Duplicated predicate packages/core-js/es/instance/at.js:12— `typeof it == 'string' || it === StringPrototype || (isPrototypeOf(StringPrototype, it) && own === StringPrototype.at)` appears character-identically in 2 files — packages/core-js/es/instance/at.js, packages/core-js/full/instance/at.js. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.
Split packages/core-js — A huge bundler/dependency project whose namespaces are all modules of the core JS API (internals, stable, es/instance, etc.) and whose types sit overwhelmingly in one cohesive namespace. Suggested:
No ADRs — No Architecture Decision Records found — no conventional ADR directory, no numbered `NNNN-title` documents in any markup this check reads, and nothing ADR-shaped by content. Design rationale recorded elsewhere (a design-notes tree, a mailing list, pull-request discussion) is not visible to this check and is not re-findable per decision, so a future maintainer cannot ask why one choice was made and get an answer.
M2 · Architecture documentation· No architecture diagram/doc · ×1
No architecture diagram/doc — No C4/Structurizr/PlantUML/Mermaid/Graphviz/D2 diagram, no drawn diagram named for the architecture, no file named `architecture` or `design` in any markup this check reads, and nothing in the README, docs or contributor guides that announces the shape — no `## Architecture` heading, no "architecture overview"/"high-level design" phrasing, no "the architecture is …" introduction, no guided code tour. A shape laid out in prose that never names itself as the architecture is not visible to this check, and neither is one kept outside the repository, so this row reports the absence of a re-findable shape document — not evidence that nobody wrote the shape down.
No SAST — No static application security testing detected. For this repository's stack, add CodeQL's javascript-typescript pack, `semgrep --config=p/javascript`, or eslint-plugin-security as a CI step. What was searched, so you can tell an absence from a miss: the 11259 CI workflow file(s) in this repository, and the scanner and linter configuration checked in beside them. A scan that runs outside CI, one configured in your forge's web UI rather than in a committed file, or a tool whose name is none of those this check carries, is not seen — if that is your case the row is wrong, and saying so is more useful than adding a second scanner.
Hand-rolled JSON/XML parsing via regex website/build.mjs:187— A regex whose pattern encodes JSON/XML syntax is parsing a structured format by hand — malformed or differently-typed content (e.g. `"amount": "5"` as a string) silently mis-parses instead of failing validation. This JavaScript/TypeScript code already uses a real parser in the same package; use it here too.
Outdated (npm): mkdirp — mkdirp is pinned at 0.5.6; registry.npmjs.org publishes 3.0.1 as the latest release. Upgrading is a judgement call — read that package's changelog for what changed between the two — but a direct production dependency several releases behind is where security and compatibility debt accumulates silently.
Outdated (npm): vite — vite is pinned at 8.3.1; registry.npmjs.org publishes 8.3.2 as the latest release. Upgrading is a judgement call — read that package's changelog for what changed between the two — but a direct production dependency several releases behind is where security and compatibility debt accumulates silently.
Outdated (npm): webpack — webpack is pinned at 4.47.0; registry.npmjs.org publishes 5.111.1 as the latest release. Upgrading is a judgement call — read that package's changelog for what changed between the two — but a direct production dependency several releases behind is where security and compatibility debt accumulates silently.
Skipped (documented): (unnamed test) tests/compat/common-runner.js:11— Skipped with a documented reason — a deferral, not lazy debt: declared with no body — a pending test the runner lists but never runs
Skipped (documented): (unnamed test) tests/compat/browsers-runner.js:52— Skipped with a documented reason — a deferral, not lazy debt: declared with no body — a pending test the runner lists but never runs
Appendix B — Reproduction & audit trail
Every external tool invocation behind a deep-scan dimension — the tool, its captured version, the exact command, how many findings it yielded, and a link to the retained raw output. To reproduce any finding: check out the same commit and run the command shown (repo-relative — never an absolute scratch path). The complete raw scanner output is retained verbatim under artifacts/raw/ (indexed in artifacts/raw/index.json); per-invocation exit codes and wall-clock durations are in sidecar.json — kept out of this table so the rendered report stays byte-identical across runs of the same commit.
trivy: not applicable — No Infrastructure-as-Code or container manifests found (Dockerfile, Docker Compose, Terraform, Kubernetes/Helm, CloudFormation, ARM, Bicep, Ansible); nothing to scan.
semgrep: not applicable — No personal data was found crossing a boundary the PII/GDPR ruleset checks — nothing written to a log or console sink, placed in a URL or query string, or persisted to browser storage. That is a clean result for the LEAK surface only: this ruleset detects personal data escaping, it does not inventory the personal data a repository holds, so it is not evidence that this repository has no personal-data surface. The personal-data map (Appendix C) and the C1-C5 compliance cards are what speak to that.
runtime-hardening: not applicable — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; network egress policy is a cluster-native control that may live at the platform/firewall layer, so there is nothing to assess here.
runtime-hardening: not applicable — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; seccomp/AppArmor/SELinux confinement is a workload-level control, so there is nothing to assess here.
runtime-hardening: not applicable — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; runtime threat-detection and admission-control policy are cluster-level controls, so there is nothing to assess here.
Run 01a0f86a-bce8-796a-a36b-e75d3e18f93e · every finding is also locatable in findings.md, and the complete scoring record (with exit codes + durations) in sidecar.json.
Issues: 68 · Warnings: 247 · Recommendations: 18 · Info: 5 — Appendix A · all findings · full markdown report.
Generated by Watchdog — deterministic code-health analysis. 01-10-2026 @ 17:02 UTC.
Downloadable artifacts
Machine-readable and reproducible from this commit + frozen rubric — drop them straight into a contract appendix, a CRA dossier, or a downstream SCA / VEX tool.