feat(py2udf): analyze control scopes

[carloea2]

What changes were proposed in this PR?

Add lexical-scope indexing and structured control-flow traversal for complete Python statements. The analysis derives deterministic control routes for branching, loops, exceptions, context managers, and nested lexical scopes while keeping rendering concerns outside the analysis layer.

This draft is stacked on #8323. Review this PR's control/scope commit after the preceding drafts; its branch will be rebased as the stack lands.

Any related issues, documentation, discussions?

Related to #8319, #8322, #8323, and discussion #8160.

How was this PR tested?

python -m pytest py2udf/src/test/python/python_to_workflow/mosaic/test_controlwalk.py -q
python -m ruff check py2udf/src/main/python/python_to_workflow/mosaic/analysis py2udf/src/test/python/python_to_workflow/mosaic/test_controlwalk.py
python -m ruff format --check py2udf/src/main/python/python_to_workflow/mosaic/analysis py2udf/src/test/python/python_to_workflow/mosaic/test_controlwalk.py

Result: 2 tests passed; Ruff checks passed.

The parameterized cases cover nested branching, loops, exceptions, context managers, abrupt completion, and lexical-scope boundaries.

Was this PR authored or co-authored using generative AI tooling?

Generated-by: OpenAI Codex (GPT-5)

[github-actions]

Automated Reviewer Suggestions

Based on the git blame history of the changed files, we recommend the following reviewers:

• Contributors with relevant context: @zyratlo, @aglinxinyuan
  You can notify them by mentioning @zyratlo, @aglinxinyuan in a comment.

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 94.07%. Comparing base (fc7cfcd) to head (880bfc3).

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff            @@
##               main    #8324   +/-   ##
=========================================
  Coverage     94.07%   94.07%           
  Complexity     4814     4814           
=========================================
  Files          1196     1196           
  Lines         48713    48713           
  Branches       5866     5866           
=========================================
  Hits          45825    45825           
  Misses         1436     1436           
  Partials       1452     1452           

Flag	Coverage Δ		*Carryforward flag
access-control-service	81.00% <ø> (ø)
agent-service	99.32% <ø> (ø)
amber	90.12% <ø> (ø)		Carriedforward from fc7cfcd
computing-unit-managing-service	73.67% <ø> (ø)
config-service	87.00% <ø> (ø)
file-service	87.91% <ø> (ø)
frontend	96.80% <ø> (ø)
notebook-migration-service	79.31% <ø> (ø)
pyamber	98.18% <ø> (ø)
workflow-compiling-service	77.19% <ø> (ø)

*This pull request uses carry forward flags. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Harness.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

[github-actions]

⚠️ Benchmark changes need a look

🟢 0 better · 🔴 9 worse · ⚪ 6 noise (<±5%) · 0 without baseline

Compared against main fc7cfcd benchmarked on this same runner, so the delta is largely free of cross-runner hardware noise. The "7d avg" column still reflects the gh-pages dashboard. Treat <±5% as noise unless repeated.

Dashboard · Run

	config	throughput	MB/s	latency	max Δ latest / 7d
🔴	bs=10 sw=10 sl=64	370	0.226	25,950/39,564/39,564 us	🔴 +16.4% / 🔴 +148.8%
🔴	bs=100 sw=10 sl=64	796	0.486	127,423/144,069/144,069 us	🔴 +8.0% / 🔴 +30.2%
🔴	bs=1000 sw=10 sl=64	909	0.555	1,096,993/1,182,492/1,182,492 us	🔴 +5.8% / 🔴 +12.2%

Baseline details

Latest main fc7cfcd from same runner

config	metric	PR	latest main	7d avg	Δ latest	Δ 7d
bs=10 sw=10 sl=64	throughput	370 tuples/sec	383 tuples/sec	750.65 tuples/sec	-3.4%	-50.7%
bs=10 sw=10 sl=64	MB/s	0.226 MB/s	0.234 MB/s	0.458 MB/s	-3.4%	-50.7%
bs=10 sw=10 sl=64	p50	25,950 us	27,212 us	13,049 us	-4.6%	+98.9%
bs=10 sw=10 sl=64	p95	39,564 us	34,004 us	15,902 us	+16.4%	+148.8%
bs=10 sw=10 sl=64	p99	39,564 us	34,004 us	19,184 us	+16.4%	+106.2%
bs=100 sw=10 sl=64	throughput	796 tuples/sec	844 tuples/sec	960.3 tuples/sec	-5.7%	-17.1%
bs=100 sw=10 sl=64	MB/s	0.486 MB/s	0.515 MB/s	0.586 MB/s	-5.6%	-17.1%
bs=100 sw=10 sl=64	p50	127,423 us	117,977 us	104,199 us	+8.0%	+22.3%
bs=100 sw=10 sl=64	p95	144,069 us	136,693 us	110,645 us	+5.4%	+30.2%
bs=100 sw=10 sl=64	p99	144,069 us	136,693 us	120,888 us	+5.4%	+19.2%
bs=1000 sw=10 sl=64	throughput	909 tuples/sec	927 tuples/sec	993.27 tuples/sec	-1.9%	-8.5%
bs=1000 sw=10 sl=64	MB/s	0.555 MB/s	0.566 MB/s	0.606 MB/s	-1.9%	-8.5%
bs=1000 sw=10 sl=64	p50	1,096,993 us	1,078,784 us	1,012,191 us	+1.7%	+8.4%
bs=1000 sw=10 sl=64	p95	1,182,492 us	1,117,641 us	1,054,057 us	+5.8%	+12.2%
bs=1000 sw=10 sl=64	p99	1,182,492 us	1,117,641 us	1,081,313 us	+5.8%	+9.4%

Raw CSV

config_idx,batch_size,schema_width,string_len,num_batches,total_ms,total_tuples,total_bytes,tuples_per_sec,mb_per_sec,lat_p50_us,lat_p95_us,lat_p99_us
0,10,10,64,20,541.01,200,128000,370,0.226,25949.58,39564.20,39564.20
1,100,10,64,20,2512.41,2000,1280000,796,0.486,127423.05,144069.11,144069.11
2,1000,10,64,20,22006.42,20000,12800000,909,0.555,1096993.48,1182491.60,1182491.60