chore: fix JavaScript lint errors (issue #10556)

[parthodas23]

---

type: pre_commit_static_analysis_report
description: Results of running static analysis checks when committing changes. report:

• task: lint_filenames status: passed
• task: lint_editorconfig status: passed
• task: lint_markdown status: na
• task: lint_package_json status: na
• task: lint_repl_help status: na
• task: lint_javascript_src status: na
• task: lint_javascript_cli status: na
• task: lint_javascript_examples status: passed
• task: lint_javascript_tests status: passed
• task: lint_javascript_benchmarks status: na
• task: lint_python status: na
• task: lint_r status: na
• task: lint_c_src status: na
• task: lint_c_examples status: na
• task: lint_c_benchmarks status: na
• task: lint_c_tests_fixtures status: na
• task: lint_shell status: na
• task: lint_typescript_declarations status: passed
• task: lint_typescript_tests status: na
• task: lint_license_headers status: passed ---

Resolves #{{TODO: add issue number}}.

Description

What is the purpose of this pull request?

This pull request:

• Utility Async: In lib/node_modules/@stdlib/utils/async/for-each-right/examples/index.js, replaced string concatenation in the Error constructor with @stdlib/string/format to comply with the stdlib/no-error-string-concat rule.
• Math Strided: In lib/node_modules/@stdlib/math/strided/special/ahavercos-by/test/test.ndarray.js, replaced new Array() constructors with array literals and explicit .length assignments to comply with the stdlib/no-new-array rule while maintaining sparse array testing logic.

Related Issues

Does this pull request have any related issues?

This pull request has the following related issues:

• Fix JavaScript lint errors #10556

Questions

Any questions for reviewers of this pull request?

No.

Other

Any other information relevant to this pull request? This may include screenshots, references, and/or implementation notes.

No.

Checklist

Please ensure the following tasks are completed before submitting this pull request.

• Read, understood, and followed the contributing guidelines.

AI Assistance

When authoring the changes proposed in this PR, did you use any kind of AI assistance?

• Yes
• No

If you answered "yes" above, how did you use AI assistance?

• Code generation (e.g., when writing an implementation or fixing a bug)
• Test/benchmark generation
• Documentation (including examples)
• Research and understanding

Disclosure

If you answered "yes" to using AI assistance, please provide a short disclosure indicating how you used AI assistance. This helps reviewers determine how much scrutiny to apply when reviewing your contribution. Example disclosures: "This PR was written primarily by Claude Code." or "I consulted ChatGPT to understand the codebase, but the proposed changes were fully authored manually by myself.".

{{TODO: add disclosure if applicable}}

---

@stdlib-js/reviewers

[stdlib-bot]

Coverage Report

Package	Statements	Branches	Functions	Lines
math/strided/special/ahavercos-by	$\color{green}197/197$ $\color{green}+100.00%$	$\color{green}5/5$ $\color{green}+100.00%$	$\color{green}2/2$ $\color{green}+100.00%$	$\color{green}197/197$ $\color{green}+100.00%$
utils/async/for-each-right	$\color{green}530/530$ $\color{green}+100.00%$	$\color{green}59/59$ $\color{green}+100.00%$	$\color{green}8/8$ $\color{green}+100.00%$	$\color{green}530/530$ $\color{green}+100.00%$

The above coverage report was generated for the changes in this PR.

[kgryte]

LGTM