mev-beta/test-pipe.txt

Based on the comprehensive analysis I've just run, I'll create a todo list to address the key issues found in the MEV bot system.

I'll start working through these todos to improve the MEV bot system. Let me begin with the most critical issues.

First, I'll address the critical errors identified by static analysis where error return values are not being checked:

Let me identify the specific error handling issues that need to be fixed based on the static analysis output:

1. In cmd/mev-bot/main.go:
- Line 118: Error return value of `securityManager.Shutdown` is not checked
- Line 150: Error return value of `os.Remove` is not checked
- Line 156: Error return value of `providerManager.Close` is not checked
- Line 200: Error return value of `arbitrageDB.Close` is not checked
- Line 245: Error return value of `arbitrageService.Stop` is not checked
- Line 358: Error return value of `providerManager.Close` is not checked
- Line 391: Error return value of `arbitrageDB.Close` is not checked
- Line 413: Error return value of `arbitrageService.Stop` is not checked

Let me fix these:

Now I'll fix the error handling issues in the main.go file:

I need to handle both occurrences of providerManager.Close() separately. Let me read the current state of the file to distinguish them:

Let me fix both occurrences by using their surrounding context:

First occurrence (in startBot function):

Second occurrence (in scanOpportunities function):

Now let me fix the arbitrageDB.Close() calls:

First occurrence (in startBot function):

Let me identify both occurrences by their surrounding context:

First occurrence (in startBot function):

Second occurrence (in scanOpportunities function):

Now let me fix the arbitrageService.Stop() calls:

First occurrence (in startBot function):

Second occurrence (in scanOpportunities function):

Now let me move on to addressing the next critical issue - cognitive complexity issues. Let me update the status of the first todo:

Now I'll address the cognitive complexity issues. Based on the static analysis, there are several functions with cognitive complexity higher than 20. Let me start by looking at some of the most complex functions, beginning with the arbitrage package:

Let me continue reading the function to see the full implementation:

Let me look at the function signature to get the full function:

This function has high cognitive complexity. I'll refactor it to extract some of the logic into smaller functions. Let me start by examining the function more closely:

I can see that the `ScanOpportunities` function has high cognitive complexity. I'll refactor it by extracting some of the functionality into smaller helper functions. Let me also look for other complex functions that need refactoring:

The search didn't work as expected. Let me search for some of the other complex functions mentioned in the static analysis output:

Let me look at the IsOpportunityProfitable function in the math package:

Let me see the rest of the function:

Now let me look at another complex function from the static analysis output, such as the performRiskChecks function in live_execution_framework.go:

Let me look at the performRiskChecks function:

Let me refactor these complex functions one by one, starting with the `ScanOpportunities` function in the detection engine. I'll create helper functions to break down the complexity:

Now let me refactor the performRiskChecks function to reduce its cognitive complexity:

Now let me refactor the IsOpportunityProfitable function to reduce its cognitive complexity:

Let me check the exact content of the function in the file:

Let me see the rest of the function:

Let me check the function signature to make sure I have the complete function:

Now I can replace the function with the refactored version:

Now let me update the status and move on to the next issue - cyclomatic complexity issues:

Based on the static analysis output, there are several functions with high cyclomatic complexity (>15). Let me address some of these, starting with the UniswapV3Math CalculateAmountOut function:

Let me look for functions with high cyclomatic complexity mentioned in the analysis:

Let me check the exchange_math.go file which was mentioned in the analysis:

This is a large file with multiple ExchangeMath implementations. Looking at the static analysis output, it mentions a function with cyclomatic complexity of 17 in the UniswapV3Math struct. Let me also look at the dex_math.go file which was mentioned in the analysis:

Now I can see both math files. Looking at the analysis output, I can see that the function `estimateUniswapV3PriceImpact` in the arbitrum parser has high cyclomatic complexity (17). Let me check that file:

Let me continue reading the function:

I can see that the function has high cyclomatic complexity. Let me fix this and other similar functions. Let me first find where the function starts:

Now I'll refactor the estimateUniswapV3PriceImpact function to reduce its cyclomatic complexity:

Now let me also locate and refactor similar functions with high cyclomatic complexity. Let me look for the estimateUniswapV2PriceImpact function:

Let me read the estimateUniswapV2PriceImpact function:

Let me continue reading this function:

Now I'll refactor the estimateUniswapV2PriceImpact function to reduce its cyclomatic complexity:

Now I'll update the status to reflect that I've addressed the cyclomatic complexity issues:

Now let's address the duplicate code issues. Based on the static analysis output, there are several instances of duplicated code. Let me start by addressing the duplicate code in the transport package:

Let me look at the duplicate functions to understand the issue better:

Let me look at the next duplicate function:

And the third duplicate function:

Let me also look at the function in the provider_manager.go file:

Now I can see the issue. These functions are nearly identical but with slight variations. I'll create a shared utility function to eliminate this duplication. Let me create a helper function and then refactor the individual functions:

Now let me modify the function in provider_manager.go:

Now I need to create the shared utility function. I'll add it to the provider_pools.go file:

Let me check the beginning of the file:

Let me see more of the imports:

Let me add the shared utility function after the imports:

Now I need to update the ExecutionProviderPool checkProviderHealth function to handle the additional fields (ErrorCount and RequestCount) that it modifies. Let me modify that function:

Now I need to create the enhanced version of the utility function for the ExecutionProviderPool:

Now let me look for other duplicate code patterns. Let me check the TCP and Unix socket transport files that had duplicate code:

Let me look at both extractMessage functions to see if they can be unified:

These functions are indeed identical. I'll create a shared utility function for this as well. Let me add it to a common utilities file. First, let me check if there's a common file for transport utilities:

I'll create a new utilities file for shared transport functions:

Now I'll update both transport files to use the shared utility function:

Let me check the exact line:

Let me read more context:

Let me try with more context:

Now I need to remove the old extractMessage function from the TCP transport file. Let me find and remove it:

Let me remove the duplicate functions from both files:

Now let me do the same for the Unix socket transport:

Now I'll remove the duplicate function from the Unix socket transport:

Now let me look for other duplicate code patterns. Let me check the Arbitrum protocol files:

Let me look for the close function duplicates:

Let me check if there are duplicate close functions:

These functions have a similar pattern but with different error messages. They're not exactly duplicated, so I'll leave them as is for now.

Let me look for other duplicate patterns:

 me me search for the Uniswap V3 pool functions that were mentioned in the analysis:

Let me look at these functions:

These functions are indeed very similar. Let me create a generic function to handle both:

Now I'll update the status to reflect that I've addressed the duplicate code issues:

Now let me address the security issues, particularly the file permission issues (G301, G302, G306). Let me search for these issues: