Until now, the code that analyses metadata and emits a prepost map belonged to impl.defn. So e.g. the impl.fn ns consumed the impl.defn ns, which is misleading because speced/defn and speced/fn are orthogonal: neither is more important than the other.
Created nedap.speced.def.impl.analysis accordingly. Zero creative changes: just moved code around.
QA plan
None.
Author checklist
[x] I have QAed the functionality
[x] The PR has a reasonably reviewable size and a meaningful commit history
[x] I have run the branch formatter and observed no new/significative warnings
[x] The build passes
[x] I have self-reviewed the PR prior to assignment
Additionally, I have code-reviewed iteratively the PR considering the following aspects in isolation:
[ ] Correctness
[ ] Robustness (red paths, failure handling etc)
[ ] Modular design
[ ] Test coverage
[ ] Spec coverage
[ ] Documentation
[ ] Security
[ ] Performance
[ ] Breaking API changes
[ ] Cross-compatibility (Clojure/ClojureScript)
Reviewer checklist
[ ] I have checked out this branch and reviewed it locally, running it
[ ] I have QAed the functionality
[ ] I have reviewed the PR
Additionally, I have code-reviewed iteratively the PR considering the following aspects in isolation:
Brief
Until now, the code that analyses metadata and emits a prepost map belonged to
impl.defn
. So e.g. theimpl.fn
ns consumed theimpl.defn
ns, which is misleading becausespeced/defn
andspeced/fn
are orthogonal: neither is more important than the other.Created
nedap.speced.def.impl.analysis
accordingly. Zero creative changes: just moved code around.QA plan
None.
Author checklist
Reviewer checklist