[duplicate-code] Duplicate Code Analysis Report - Commit 6820a53

[github-actions]

🔍 Duplicate Code Analysis Report

Analysis of commit 6820a53

Summary

This analysis identified 2 high-severity and 1 medium-severity code duplication patterns across the logger and server packages. While some refactoring has been done (notably the global_helpers.go using generics), significant structural duplication remains that impacts maintainability.

Detected Patterns

This analysis found 3 significant duplication patterns requiring attention:

1. Logger Initialization Boilerplate - Severity: High - See sub-issue [duplicate-code] Duplicate Code Pattern: Logger Initialization Boilerplate #436
2. Dual Logging Calls in Server - Severity: High - See sub-issue #aw_7g8h9i0j1k2l
3. Logger Close() Method Duplication - Severity: Medium - See sub-issue #aw_3m4n5o6p7q8r

Overall Impact

• Total Duplicated Lines: ~80 lines of substantive duplication
• Affected Files: 4 files (3 in logger package, 1 in server package)
• Maintainability Risk: High - Changes to logging patterns require updates in multiple locations
• Refactoring Priority: High for patterns 1 & 2, Medium for pattern 3

Key Concerns

1. Inconsistent Error Handling: The three logger Init functions handle errors differently (fallback to stdout, immediate return, silent fallback), making behavior unpredictable
2. Maintenance Burden: Adding a new logger type requires copying ~25 lines of boilerplate code
3. Code Bloat: Dual logging statements (debug logger + file logger) create noise and increase the risk of inconsistencies

Positive Notes

• Good refactoring already done: common.go provides shared initLogFile() and closeLogFile()
• Excellent use of generics in global_helpers.go to eliminate init/close duplication
• The codebase shows awareness of DRY principles

Next Steps

1. Review individual pattern sub-issues for detailed analysis ([duplicate-code] Duplicate Code Pattern: Logger Initialization Boilerplate #436, #aw_7g8h9i0j1k2l, #aw_3m4n5o6p7q8r)
2. Prioritize Pattern 1 (logger initialization) and Pattern 2 (dual logging) for immediate refactoring
3. Consider Pattern 3 as a follow-up improvement after addressing high-priority items
4. Create implementation plan using functional options or template method patterns

Analysis Metadata

• Analyzed Files: 50 Go files (excluding tests, workflows, and agent configs)
• Detection Method: Static code analysis with pattern matching
• Commit: 6820a53 (Merge pull request [log] Add debug logging to DIFC evaluator #430 from githubnext/go-logger-difc-evaluator-384940df4c53bd9d)
• Analysis Date: 2026-01-23
• Triggered By: @pelikhan

---

Note: This analysis used traditional pattern matching due to Serena semantic analysis tools being unavailable in the CI environment. Results focus on structural and textual duplication.