docs: re-measure #218/#220/#222/#223/#224 delta, verify #225/#228 on real repos

[PhysShell]

Что и зачем

Оформляет вчерашний own-check замер #230/#231 в постоянную заметку (с исправленной нумерацией — ротация это issue #218, не #219), плюс перегоняет own-check на fresh main (с #232/#233) по MaterialDesignInXamlToolkit и ClosedXML и сверяет фактическую дельту с предсказанной в PR-описаниях #232/#233. MaterialDesign совпало один-в-один. ClosedXML — нет: только 2 из 5 предсказанных точек в Slice.cs реально ушли (остальные 3 — explicit-interface IDisposable.Dispose(), не распознаётся HasEmptyDisposeBody), и попутно неожиданно ушли 263 несвязанных XLWorkbook-локали по всему ClosedXML.Examples — XLWorkbook.Dispose() пуст только в исходнике (Janitor.Fody вплетает реальную очистку на этапе компиляции в IL), чего source-level проверка не видит. Это задокументировано как вход для следующей итерации; код анализатора в этом PR не менялся.

Тип изменения

• docs — документация

Как проверено

• python tests/run_tests.py
• ruff check . и mypy
• селфтесты затронутых скриптов (не применимо — только новый docs-файл)

Плюс сама методика измерения: OwnSharp.Extractor собран на fresh main (сначала 3ca4bde, затем b1ee961 после #232/#233), прогнан scripts/own-check.sh --format sarif --severity warning против тех же кэшированных клонов на тех же зафиксированных коммитах, что и в оригинальном sweep (docs/notes/oracle-sweep-2026-07-10.md); результаты продиффаны против сохранённых own.txt-baseline'ов. Полная методика и все таблицы — в самой заметке.

Связанные issue

Refs #201, #218, #220, #222, #223, #224, #225, #228. Связанные issue — нет закрываемых.

Чеклист

• изменение покрыто тестом/селфтестом (или объяснено, почему нет) — сам docs-файл и есть отчёт о верификации, метод воспроизводим по описанной в заметке методике
• README/docs обновлены при необходимости
• коммиты в conventional-commit стиле (feat:, fix:, docs: …)

---

Generated by Claude Code

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Documentation
  • Added a detailed precision re-measurement report for SARIF analyzer findings across multiple open-source repositories.
  • Documented before-and-after results, resolved and outstanding findings, expected deltas, and identified measurement gaps.
  • Recorded proposed follow-up improvements for detecting empty disposal implementations and handling build-time code transformations.

[coderabbitai]

Warning

Review limit reached

@PhysShell, you've reached your PR review limit, so we couldn't start this review.

Next review available in: 57 minutes

Enable usage-based reviews in Billing to review now. Otherwise, wait until the next included review is available.
You're only billed for reviews past your plan's rate limits ($0.25/file).

How can I continue?

After more reviews become available, a review can be triggered using the @coderabbitai review command as a PR comment. Alternatively, push new commits to this PR.

To avoid repeated limits, reduce automatic review volume by pausing incremental auto-reviews earlier, using label-based review opt-in, excluding WIP or generated PR titles, or requesting reviews manually when the PR is ready. If your team needs uninterrupted high-volume reviews, an organization admin can enable usage-based reviews.

How do review limits work?

CodeRabbit enforces per-developer PR review limits for each organization. Most developers receive the normal plan review availability.

For paid Pro and Pro+ PR reviews, CodeRabbit uses adaptive limits for sustained high-volume activity. When a developer's recent PR review activity reaches the 95th percentile or higher among CodeRabbit users, additional reviews become available more gradually as earlier reviews age out of the rolling window.

Please refer docs for additional details.

Review details

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Path: .coderabbit.yaml

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro Plus

Run ID: d2318928-aeb0-4da1-97a2-75b4eadc4977

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 8b15f0b and c681960.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)

• docs/notes/precision-remeasure-2026-07-11.md

📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

The PR adds a documentation note describing two SARIF precision re-measurements, their finding deltas and mappings, a ClosedXML mismatch analysis involving explicit-interface disposal and IL weaving, and proposed analyzer follow-ups.

Changes

Precision re-measure

Layer / File(s)	Summary
Measurement methodology and Part 1 results docs/notes/precision-remeasure-2026-07-11.md	Documents the SARIF measurement method, Part 1 results, removed findings, remaining findings, and predicted subsequent deltas.
Part 2 mismatch analysis and follow-ups docs/notes/precision-remeasure-2026-07-11.md	Reports actual versus expected Part 2 results, explains ClosedXML coverage and IL-weaving mismatches, and lists proposed analyzer changes.

Estimated code review effort: 1 (Trivial) | ~5 minutes

Possibly related issues

• Soundness regression from #225: empty-Dispose exemption trusts source emptiness, but IL weaving (Janitor.Fody) adds real cleanup — 263 silent exemptions in ClosedXML (+ explicit-interface Dispose coverage gap) #238: Documents the same precision re-measure findings, including the explicit-interface coverage gap and IL-weaving soundness regression.

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 4

✅ Passed checks (4 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Title check	✅ Passed	The title clearly reflects the docs-only re-measurement note and the main scope of rerunning and comparing own-check deltas.
Description check	✅ Passed	The description follows the template with filled purpose, type, verification, related issues, and checklist items.
Linked Issues check	✅ Passed	Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.
Out of Scope Changes check	✅ Passed	Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.

✨ Finishing Touches

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create PR with unit tests
• Commit unit tests in branch claude/precision-remeasure-note

---

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands.}

[github-actions]

@coderabbitai review

[PhysShell]

@coderabbitai review

---

Generated by Claude Code

[coderabbitai]

@PhysShell: Sure, I'll review the changes now.

✅ Action performed

Review finished.

Note: CodeRabbit is an incremental review system and does not re-review already reviewed commits. This command is applicable only when automatic reviews are paused.

[PhysShell]

@coderabbitai review

---

Generated by Claude Code

[coderabbitai]

@PhysShell: Sure, I'll review the changes now.

✅ Action performed

Review finished.

Note: CodeRabbit is an incremental review system and does not re-review already reviewed commits. This command is applicable only when automatic reviews are paused.

[coderabbitai]

Actionable comments posted: 1

🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents

Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the
rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate.

Inline comments:
In `@docs/notes/precision-remeasure-2026-07-11.md`:
- Around line 3-5: Escape the issue references at the wrapped-line starts in the
document, specifically the lines beginning with “#201)” and “#230/#231”, by
prefixing each hash with a backslash or reflowing the continuation text onto the
preceding line. Apply the same correction to the additional affected range.

🪄 Autofix (Beta)

Fix all unresolved CodeRabbit comments on this PR:

• Push a commit to this branch (recommended)
• Create a new PR with the fixes

---

ℹ️ Review info

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Path: .coderabbit.yaml

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro Plus

Run ID: 1900cf23-4e90-40ce-86a9-364cd10c86bd

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between b1ee961 and 8b15f0b.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)

• docs/notes/precision-remeasure-2026-07-11.md