[APPS] Add scoped AST walker

[sdkennedy2]

What and why?

Adds a narrow scoped ESTree walker under backend AST parsing so extractor PRs can share lexical binding and shadowing behavior without reviewing that traversal inside #346.

How?

• Add walkWithScope, Scope, and collectPatternNames.
• Track imports, variables, functions, classes, params, catch bindings, loop bindings, and destructuring patterns.
• Add focused tests for shadowing, ignored bindings, namespace binding shadowing, and nested pattern collection.

Testing

• yarn workspace @dd/tests test:unit packages/plugins/apps/src/backend/ast-parsing/walk-with-scope.test.ts --runInBand
• yarn eslint packages/plugins/apps/src/backend/ast-parsing/walk-with-scope.ts packages/plugins/apps/src/backend/ast-parsing/walk-with-scope.test.ts --quiet

[sdkennedy2]

• [APPS] Extract inline backend connection IDs #346
• [APPS] Add scoped AST walker #348 👈 (View in Graphite)
• master

This stack of pull requests is managed by Graphite. Learn more about stacking.

[sdkennedy2]

@codex review
@cursor review

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 02cd4c73e9

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

Propagate nested var bindings to the function scope

When a tracked name is declared with var inside a nested block, e.g. if (cond) { var request = local; } request(...), JavaScript hoists that binding to the enclosing function, but this block-only collection adds it only while walking the nested block. The later call in the same function is therefore visited with scope.has('request') === false, so consumers can incorrectly treat a local var binding as the imported action.

Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

Track declarations inside switch cases

For SwitchStatement/SwitchCase, the walker falls through to the generic child traversal, so declarations in a case are never added to scope. In code such as switch (x) { case 1: const request = local; request(...); }, the call is visited with scope.has('request') === false even though the case-local declaration shadows the tracked import, which can produce false extraction results for backends that branch with switch.

Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.

[sdkennedy2]

Closing this draft as superseded by #349. We decided to keep binding resolution and traversal in the inline extractor PR using eslint-scope and zimmerframe instead of introducing a separate walk-with-scope helper.