Parity with _extract_python_rationale: Python files get rationale nodes
from docstrings and '# NOTE:'-style comments, but JS/TS comments were
discarded entirely. This adds a post-pass to extract_js that:
1. extracts rationale comments ('// NOTE:', '// WHY:', block-comment
'* NOTE:' variants) as rationale nodes with rationale_for edges,
matching the Python behavior;
2. first-classes architecture-decision references (ADR-NNNN, RFC NNNN)
found in comments as doc_ref nodes with 'cites' edges from the file.
The doc_ref pass is the natural join point between code and design docs
in mixed corpora: teams conventionally cite ADR ids in file headers, but
today those citations produce no edges, so code<->ADR connections never
form even when the discipline exists. Spellings are normalized
(ADR-11 / ADR 0011 -> ADR-0011) so references to the same document
collapse to one node, and string literals are excluded (comment-shaped
lines only).
Tested on a real mixed corpus (Flutter/Supabase monorepo): router.ts
alone yields 10 ADR citations that previously produced zero edges.
Alembic/Flask-Migrate revisions, Django migrations, and protobuf/OpenAPI
generated files produce hundreds of degree-1 rationale nodes labeled as
'possible documentation gaps'. Their module docstrings are revision
annotations or boilerplate, not architectural rationale.
- Add _is_autogenerated_python() in extract.py detecting Alembic, Django
migrations, and generic DO-NOT-EDIT markers; skip module docstring only
- Function/class docstrings inside those files still extracted as normal
- report.py: exclude file_type=rationale nodes from isolated-node gaps
section — rationale nodes are degree-1 by construction; flagging them
as missing edges was always wrong
- 5 new tests covering Alembic, Django, protobuf, false-positive guard,
and function-docstring passthrough
Nilton Moura