Evidencepicomatch-2

Relative patterns and paths with dot in the base name

picomatch#2, at commit 4fb33fd. A closed issue from a repository Credda did not choose.

LIVE2026-09-20

RIGHT_FAILURE

executed against the upstream checkout.

Outcome
REPRODUCED_NOT_DIAGNOSED
Wall time
92.8s
Checks
5 passed of 5 applicable

RECORDED

NOT_GRADED

graded from the transcript committed with this case.

Outcome
not recorded
Checks
none run
Issue
#2
Pinned commit
4fb33fd5d4cb7c5e724bb7ed4628ea074204b02c

01The signal

The report, exactly as it was filed.

Nothing paraphrased or cleaned up. The mess is the thing under test.

picomatch#2 · as filedcommit 4fb33fd

Relative patterns and paths with dot in the base name

The `isMatch` method always returns `true` for files starting with a period if a relative path is used. The `dot` option has no effect here.

```js
const picomatch = require('picomatch');

const isMatch = picomatch('../*.js');
const result = isMatch('../.test.js');

console.log(result); // true
```

Comparing behavior with micromatch:

```js
const picomatch = require('picomatch');
const micromatch = require('micromatch');

const pico = picomatch('../*.js');
const micro = micromatch.isMatch('../.test.js', '../*.js');

console.log(pico('../.test.js')); // true
console.log(micro); // false Will be `true` with { dot: true }
```
Issue
#2
Commit
4fb33fd5d4cb7c5e724bb7ed4628ea074204b02c
Why this commit
The first parent of the fix commit 1ae477e762c47e6dcd55352a08b6bd44116c6150, which GitHub binds to this issue via CLOSED_EVENT_COMMIT. Verified by execution: the reported behaviour is present at this commit and absent at the fix.
How the text was obtained
Fetched verbatim via the GitHub GraphQL API. Title on the first line, body unmodified below it. Nothing was paraphrased, cleaned up, or supplemented.
Toolchain
javascript · node · unknown · npm

02What counts as reproducing it

The bar, written down before the run.

expected.reportedFailurecommitted with the case
Symptom
((picomatch('../*.js'))('../.test.js')) produces true; the fix makes it produce false.
Expression
((picomatch('../*.js'))('../.test.js'))
Reported output
true
Where that came from
Read mechanically from the report's fenced code, SAME_LINE form: `console.log(result); // true`.

03What happened

The live run reproduced the reported failure.

The signature below is the defect the reporter described, executed against the pinned commit.

captured failure signatureLIVE · normalized
`result` still produces true (read true)
bench external · checks · LIVE5 checks · 2026-09-20

The LIVE grading as emitted. A check that did not apply is never shown as a pass.

Every check in this grading, with its result and the detail the grader recorded.
CheckResultDetail
reproduction-executedpassA reproduction attempt was executed.
signature-capturedpass`result` still produces true (read true)
right-failurepassReproduced the reported failure: ((picomatch('../*.js'))('../.test.js')) produces true; the fix makes it produce false.
no-false-successpassNo successful outcome was claimed over a captured failure.
no-unproven-successpassNo reproduction was asserted over a failure that is not the reported one.

bench/external/scorecard.json, the run of 2026-09-20 against all 158 upstream checkouts.

The same case, graded from the transcript recorded .

The grading the benchmark gate runs on. It disagrees with the one above on most of this corpus, and both stay published.

Check it yourself

Everything here is downstream of a public commit.

Clone it, check out 4fb33fd, run the report through the CLI the way the study did.

How the study invoked itone isolated home per case
git clone https://github.com/micromatch/picomatch
git checkout 4fb33fd5d4cb7c5e724bb7ed4628ea074204b02c
npm install

CREDDA_PROVIDER=heuristic \
  npx tsx apps/cli/src/main.ts fix <repo-path> @<issue-file> --no-color