In this commit, I tried to make the code more cleaner by:
- using the spread syntax to simplify the Object.assign method. This combines the default classes with the settings classes using the spread operator to create a new object that contains all the properties.
- using a loop and square brackets notation, to merge all properties in a dynamic way, instead of adding each one with a lot of duplicate code.

In this commit, I tried to make the code more cleaner by:
- using "const" instead of "let" with unassignable functions.
- using default parameter instead of using "if no options".

The variables have not been reassigned a value, so it's better to use "const" instead of "let", to prevent any unexpected behavior that may occur due to unintended assignment.

The variable has not been reassigned a value, so it's better to use "const" instead of "let", to prevent any unexpected behavior that may occur due to unintended assignment.

The variable has not been reassigned a value, so it's better to use "const" instead of "let", to prevent any unexpected behavior that may occur due to unintended assignment.

The variables have not been reassigned a value, so it's better to use "const" instead of "let", to prevent any unexpected behavior that may occur due to unintended assignment.

- The variables have not been reassigned a value, so it's better to use "const" instead of "let", to prevent any unexpected behavior that may occur due to unintended assignment.
- Using "slides.length > 0" is cleaner than "slides.length !== 0" because the second one means "(slides.length > 0) || slides.length < 0", and it can't be less than zero.

- The variables have not been reassigned a value, so it's better to use "const" instead of "let", to prevent any unexpected behavior that may occur due to unintended assignment.
- In line 92, we return if there is no item, so there is no need to check for item again in line 96.
- in removeClass, we can simplify this if statement by using optional chaining operator.

The variable has not been reassigned a value, so it's better to use "const" instead of "let", to prevent any unexpected behavior that may occur due to unintended assignment.

The variables have not been reassigned a value, so it's better to use "const" instead of "let", to prevent any unexpected behavior that may occur due to unintended assignment.

- Highlighting the difference between the two different statements by creating an object that contains both the symbols.
- Using "includes" for a more dynamic and readable condition.
- Using square brackets notation to avoid duplicate code.

The variables have not been reassigned a value, so it's better to use "const" instead of "let", to prevent any unexpected behavior that may occur due to unintended assignment.

The variables have not been reassigned a value, so it's better to use "const" instead of "let", to prevent any unexpected behavior that may occur due to unintended assignment.

The variables have not been reassigned a value, so it's better to use "const" instead of "let", to prevent any unexpected behavior that may occur due to unintended assignment.

The variables have not been reassigned a value, so it's better to use "const" instead of "let", to prevent any unexpected behavior that may occur due to unintended assignment.

- The variables have not been reassigned a value, so it's better to use "const" instead of "let", to prevent any unexpected behavior that may occur due to unintended assignment.
- Removing "NOT" from if statement to make it more readable.

The variable has not been reassigned a value, so it's better to use "const" instead of "let", to prevent any unexpected behavior that may occur due to unintended assignment.