We benchmark import-next/no-cycle against eslint-plugin-import/no-cycle and oxlint's native Rust port on next.js (131K stars, 14,556 source files). The two ESLint plugins agreed: 0 cycles found. oxlint disagreed: 17 cycles found.
We trusted the consensus. Then we tested our own rule on a 33-file subset of the same repo (packages/next/src/client/components/router-reducer/**). It found 5+ cycles immediately.
Same rule. Same config. Same files. Different scope. Different answers.
The bug was 60 lines deep in the cache layer — and it explains why the wider scope returned silence.
The setup that hides the bug
Every cycle-detection algorithm has the same shape:
- For each file F in the lint scope
- Run a depth-bounded DFS over its import graph
- If DFS returns to F → found a cycle
- Else → F is acyclic, remember that for next time
Step 4 is where caching pays off. With N files and average graph depth D, naive cycle detection is O(N²·D). With a "known acyclic" cache, repeat visits are O(1). On real codebases the cache hit rate is 70%+ — without it the rule gets too slow to run in CI.
The shape of the cache:
interface FileSystemCache {
// ...
nonCyclicFiles: Set<string>; // files known not to be in any cycle
}
And the use site:
function dfs(file: string, depth: number, visited: Set<string>) {
if (file === sourceFile) {
allCycles.push([...pathStack, file]);
return;
}
if (depth >= maxDepth) return; // <-- early return on depth limit
if (visited.has(file)) return;
if (cache.nonCyclicFiles.has(file)) return;
// ... recurse into imports
}
dfs(targetFile, 1, new Set());
if (allCycles.length === 0) {
cache.nonCyclicFiles.add(targetFile); // <-- cache the result
}
Spot the bug? It's between those two // <-- lines.
Why the cache poisons itself
When the DFS hits depth >= maxDepth, it returns as if it had completed exploration without finding a cycle. The caller can't tell the difference between "I explored everything and found nothing" and "I gave up at depth 10."
So a file whose only cycle is at depth 12 (where 12 > maxDepth=10) gets:
- DFS truncated at depth 10
allCycles.length === 0-
cache.nonCyclicFiles.add(targetFile)— incorrectly marked as known-acyclic
Now any future DFS that traverses through that file short-circuits because of if (cache.nonCyclicFiles.has(file)) return;. The poisoning cascades: every file in the same SCC subtree gets marked acyclic by association.
In a small lint scope, you don't see the cascade — there aren't enough files for one bad cache entry to mask the others. In a 14K-file scope, one early miss-then-cache wipes out the whole cluster.
The narrow-vs-wide scope smoking gun
Here's the test that proved it. Same rule, same config, same --no-cache flag (so ESLint doesn't cache between runs — but our in-process cache is still active for the duration of the run):
# Wide scope: 2,363 files, includes everything in packages/
$ eslint --config flagship.config.mjs 'packages/**/*.{ts,tsx,js}'
# 0 import-next/no-cycle findings
# Narrow scope: 33 files, just the router-reducer directory
$ eslint --config flagship.config.mjs 'packages/next/src/client/components/router-reducer/**/*.ts'
# 5+ import-next/no-cycle findings
The narrow run finds cycles. The wide run, run from a fresh process with a fresh cache, also produces a fresh cache — but ESLint linits files in some order, and as it processes the 2,363 files, it builds up the nonCyclicFiles cache. By the time the lint pass reaches files that do belong to cycles, those cycles have been falsely marked acyclic via cascade.
oxlint, being a different process with its own implementation, doesn't share our cache. It uses oxlint's own ModuleGraphVisitorBuilder and finds 17 cycles.
The fix
Track whether the DFS was truncated, and don't cache truncated runs:
let depthLimitHit = false;
function dfs(file: string, depth: number, visited: Set<string>) {
if (file === sourceFile) {
allCycles.push([...pathStack, file]);
return;
}
if (depth >= maxDepth) {
depthLimitHit = true; // <-- record the truncation
return;
}
// ... rest unchanged
}
dfs(targetFile, 1, new Set());
// Only cache as acyclic when DFS COMPLETED and found nothing.
// A depth-truncated DFS isn't proof of acyclicity.
if (allCycles.length === 0 && !depthLimitHit) {
cache.nonCyclicFiles.add(targetFile);
}
Five lines. Re-running on next.js: 0 → 245 unique files in cycles, 914 unique (file, line) pairs. The wide-scope correctness now matches the narrow-scope correctness.
What eslint-plugin-import does instead
When you've found a real bug, it's worth checking how peers in the same landscape modeled the problem. The long-standing eslint-plugin-import/no-cycle rule uses a fundamentally different approach:
// from eslint-plugin-import/src/rules/no-cycle.js:73
const scc = options.disableScc
? {}
: StronglyConnectedComponentsBuilder.get(myPath, context);
// ...
// If we're in different SCCs, we can't have a circular dependency
const hasDependencyCycle =
options.disableScc || scc[myPath] === scc[imported.path];
if (!hasDependencyCycle) return;
They build a strongly-connected-components graph once per lint run, then per-file the cycle check is O(1) — "are these two files in the same SCC?". The SCC graph itself is computed in O(V+E) using Tarjan's algorithm.
This sidesteps the depth-limit problem entirely. SCCs are an exact answer to "what are the cycle clusters?" — there's no truncation, no approximation, no cache to poison. They cache the SCC result module-wide and clear it on Program:exit.
oxlint goes further: it builds an explicit module graph during parsing, then the cycle visitor runs against that graph directly. No need for SCC because the graph is already structured.
Both approaches share a property our DFS-with-cache approach lacks: the algorithm is exact, not approximate. The cache trades some compute for correctness — exactly what we accidentally did the wrong way.
What I'd do differently next time
Three takeaways from the diagnosis:
Caches should never lie. A cache entry should only encode information you've proven, not information you've failed to disprove. Our nonCyclicFiles cache encoded "DFS found no cycle" as "no cycle exists." Those aren't the same statement.
Test the algorithm at the same scope you'll deploy at. Our unit tests passed because the test fixtures are small and depth-bounded. The bug only surfaces at 2K+ files where the cache fills up enough for cascades to start. We need a stress test that mirrors production.
An exact algorithm sidesteps a class of bugs that caches can introduce. SCC-based cycle detection (eslint-plugin-import) and module-graph walking (oxlint) avoid the depth-limit interaction by construction. We hold our DFS approach for a reason — incremental analysis benefits from per-file caching — but the depth-limit + cache interaction is exactly the kind of bug the SCC approach can't have. Worth re-evaluating whether incrementality is worth that trade.
The fix is in packages/eslint-devkit/src/resolver/dependency-analysis.ts. The bench that exposed it is benchmarks/suites/ilb-flagship.
This is one of three rule bugs caught by the same bench sweep. The companion writeups: What ground truth caught that unit tests missed (the smoke-gate piece) and When entropy isn't enough (807 false credential findings on vercel/ai).
📊 About the author
I'm Ofri Peretz, building the Interlace ESLint ecosystem — a JavaScript static-analysis catalog that runs under ESLint and Oxlint with CI-enforced parity.
