BFM-decomp/cookbook/C0107.md

§96 — The same rewrite, one shape down: reconcile_tu matched statements to lines by TEXT, so every COMMENTED declaration was silently skipped (Phase 29 SESSION-22, func_80176218 banked)

§95 fixed what the rewrite emitted (every declarator of the statement, not just the conflicting one). It did not fix how the statement was located, and that was the second half of the same bug.

cdecl.split_statements returns comment-stripped text with spans:

Stmt('extern u8  D_80078E78;' @ 4171:4193)      # the line reads
                                                #   extern u8  D_80078E78;   /* cur base ($s5) */

The rewrite re-found each planned statement by stmt.text.strip() == line.strip(). For any declaration carrying a trailing comment that test is false, so:

• the declaration was left unconformed, while
• the use-cast pass (a separate loop, keyed off the same plan) still fired,

producing a draft whose uses are cast for the TU's storage against a declaration that still has the draft's — i.e. a guaranteed conflicting types, reported by cc1 at the very declaration the tool had just claimed to fix, with the tool exiting 0 and printing reconciled: N symbols.

Fix: rewrite by SPAN. split_statements preserves start/end precisely because drafts get rewritten — its own docstring says so. The primitive was there; the code re-found the text instead.

And assert it landed (R32). The old code even had a dropped_check counter — incremented in two places and never compared, which is the R32 "a loud failure nobody counts is exactly as invisible as a silent one" shape in miniature. Now: declarators-in vs declarators-out, plus a per-symbol check that each planned tu.declaration() is actually present in the output, each emitting a !! note (so --strict exits non-zero).

Measured: func_80176218 went 3 → 4 data symbols reconciled and then banked whole-binary (327 ins, ×138 = 45,126 templated instructions), after two gate cycles that had each reported a different "next conflict".

The law, sharpened from §95: locating a syntactic unit and rewriting it are the same obligation. If you have spans, use them — re-finding a unit by its own text silently reintroduces every lexical difference (comments, whitespace, line breaks) as a miss. And when a transform can partially apply (decl not rewritten / uses rewritten), the partial state is worse than no-op, because it manufactures an error at a location the tool believes it already handled.

Corollary for the ladder: reconcile_tu owns DATA declarations only (it skips kind == 'func' by construction). Function-decl conflicts in the same draft are cast_call_sites' axis (§20), and the two compose cleanly in either order — they touch disjoint symbol classes. func_80176218 needed both: 4 data symbols conformed, then 2 callees (func_80177AD4 void (int, unsigned int), func_80178298 (u32*, u8*, short, short)) decl-conformed + call-site-cast to the draft's intended widths.