Prefer utility reuse

When changing or adding code prefer existing helpers, language-idiomatic constructs, and small well-maintained libraries to keep code DRY, readable, and consistent.

Why: Reusing helpers reduces duplication and bugs; using idiomatic patterns (entries, map, pipe) removes boilerplate and conditional checks; consistent literal formats improve readability; standard libraries avoid ad-hoc implementations for common tasks (e.g., color scales).

How to apply (checklist):

• Before adding logic, search for an existing helper or utility and reuse it. Example: replace manual find with an existing helper const node = findNodeByElementFqn(context.xynodes, elementFqn)
• Favor idiomatic JS/TS constructs over manual loops and guards. Example: prefer entries or functional pipelines to for...in plus manual checks for (const [id, styles] of entries(parsedGlobalRules.styles)) { /* … */ } // or globalRules.styles = pipe( entries(parsedGlobalRules.styles), map(([id, style]) => ({ id, style })), indexBy(prop(‘id’)) )
• Use consistent literal styles for readability: prefer triple-quoted multi-line strings for embedded markdown or long text blocks (match project conventions): notes: “”” # Title
  • bullet “””
• Prefer well-maintained small libraries for common tasks rather than bespoke constants. Example: use @mantine/colors-generator (or an agreed color system like Radix/Open Colors) to produce consistent color scales rather than hand-picking values.

Guidance for code reviews:

• Ask whether new logic duplicates existing helpers; suggest reuse or extraction.
• Recommend idiomatic replacements for loops/conditionals when they simplify code and clarify intent.
• Enforce the project’s chosen conventions for string literals and external libraries; prefer standard, vetted solutions for common domains (colors, formatting, parsing).

References: discussions 0, 1, 2, 3.