import-next/no-cycle Reported 0 Cycles on Next.js. We Found Why — and Fixed It.

May 29, 2026 · 6:04 PM UTC ·6 min read · 0 reactions · 0 comments · 31 views

TL;DR · WeSearch summary

The article discusses the identification and resolution of bugs in the import-next/no-cycle tool used for analyzing cycles in Next.js. Two significant bugs were found: one related to a depth limit that caused cycles to be missed, and another involving cache contamination that led to inconsistent benchmark results. The fixes have improved the tool's accuracy in detecting cycles in complex codebases.

Key facts

▪The import-next/no-cycle tool initially reported zero cycles in Next.js due to a depth limit of 10 that missed deeper cycles.
▪After auditing the tool, two bugs were identified and fixed, including changing the depth limit to effectively unlimited.
▪Cache contamination caused inconsistent cycle counts across multiple runs, which was also resolved by resetting analysis-state caches.

About this source

DEV.to (Top) files mainly under programming. We currently carry 4,924 of its stories.

All DEV.to (Top) coverage →

Original article

DEV.to (Top)

Read full at DEV.to (Top) →

Story provenance

Source · retrieval · rights · ranking — open for full record

inspect →

Attribution is not the same as permission. This drawer separates discovery metadata, excerpts, WeSearch-generated summaries, reuse status, and whether the publisher receives the visit. Nothing here claims a legal grant the publisher has not made.

Record

Original publisher	DEV.to (Top)
Canonical URL	https://dev.to/ofri-peretz/import-nextno-cycle-reported-0-cycles-on-nextjs-we-found-why-and-fixed-it-ln2
Publication time	Fri, 29 May 2026 18:04:24 +0000
Retrieval time	2026-05-29T18:20:02.626Z
Last seen	2026-05-29T18:20:02.626Z
Headline source	Publisher (no WeSearch rewrite)
Excerpt source	publisher body
Excerpt method	First ~120 words (~800 chars) of extracted publisher body, fair-use limited.
Summary	WeSearch · cerebras-chat (WeSearch summarizer)
Summary source text	contentText
Citation coverage	Summary is a WeSearch-generated derivative; primary citation is the original publisher URL.
Cluster	ZWK_Bqk8lUnj
Cluster logic	Grouped by semantic title/content similarity across sources within a rolling window. Same-publisher template collisions are excluded from coverage comparison.
Ranking reason	Story pages are not engagement-ranked. Hub feeds use recency, with optional source-diversified chronological ordering (cap consecutive stories per source). No personalized ranking.
Publisher visit	Yes — open original
Substitutes article?	No — link-out required for full text

Rights status (four layers)

Publisher-declared

No publisher-confirmed rights record for this source yet.

Machine-readable

No source-specific machine-readable restriction detected beyond the public feed.

WeSearch interpretation

WeSearch declared handling (basis: Derived from the published RSS/Atom feed). This is WeSearch policy, not a legal grant on the publisher's behalf.

Unknown

Retrieval and training permissions are not asserted unless the publisher confirms them.

WeSearch handling by dimension

Indexing	May the item be indexed (stored, ranked, made findable)?	Allowed
Snippet	May a short excerpt of the publisher's text be shown?	Allowed
AI summary	May WeSearch generate its own short summary of the article?	Limited
Retrieval / RAG	May the content be exposed for third-party retrieval-augmented generation?	Not asserted
Model training	May the content be used to train AI models?	Not asserted
Commercial reuse	May the content be reused commercially?	Not permitted

Basis: Derived from the published RSS/Atom feed. Contact: [email protected]. Reviewed: 2026-07-24.

Open original publisher → Source rights JSON → Machine-readable provenance → Rights framework → WESEARCH-STORY-PROVENANCE-V1

Opening excerpt (first ~120 words) tap to expand

try { if(localStorage) { let currentUser = localStorage.getItem('current_user'); if (currentUser) { currentUser = JSON.parse(currentUser); if (currentUser.id === 3669992) { document.getElementById('article-show-container').classList.add('current-user-is-article-author'); } } } } catch (e) { console.error(e); } Ofri Peretz Posted on May 29 • Originally published at ofriperetz.dev import-next/no-cycle Reported 0 Cycles on Next.js. We Found Why — and Fixed It. #javascript #eslint #node #webdev Inside our linter benchmarks (4 Part Series) 1 I Found 3 Real Bugs in Popular ESLint Plugins. Unit Tests Didn't Catch Them. 2 no-cycle finds 0 cycles in next.js (and other lies caches tell you) 3 import-next/no-cycle Reported 0 Cycles on Next.js. We Found Why — and Fixed It.

…

Excerpt limited to ~120 words for fair-use compliance. The full article is at DEV.to (Top).

Anonymous · no account needed

Discussion

0 comments