[skip ci] doc: update generated wiki pages (wiki/Control Flow Graph.md)

Author: actions-user

wiki/Control Flow Graph.md

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-_This document was generated from '[src/documentation/wiki-cfg.ts](https://github.com/flowr-analysis/flowr/tree/main//src/documentation/wiki-cfg.ts)' on 2026-01-14, 16:35:27 UTC presenting an overview of flowR's control flow graph (v2.8.6, using R v4.5.0). Please do not edit this file/wiki page directly._
+_This document was generated from '[src/documentation/wiki-cfg.ts](https://github.com/flowr-analysis/flowr/tree/main//src/documentation/wiki-cfg.ts)' on 2026-01-15, 19:46:03 UTC presenting an overview of flowR's control flow graph (v2.8.6, using R v4.5.0). Please do not edit this file/wiki page directly._
 
 _flowR_ produces three main perspectives of the program: 1) a [normalized version of the AST](https://github.com/flowr-analysis/flowr/wiki/Normalized-AST)
 and 2) a [dataflow graph](https://github.com/flowr-analysis/flowr/wiki/Dataflow%20Graph), and 3) a control flow graph (CFG).
@@ -81,7 +81,7 @@ flowchart RL
 ```
 
 
-_(The analysis required _2.2 ms_ (including the dataflow analysis,  normalization,  and parsing with the [r-shell](https://github.com/flowr-analysis/flowr/wiki/Engines) engine) within the generation environment.
+_(The analysis required _2.7 ms_ (including the dataflow analysis,  normalization,  and parsing with the [r-shell](https://github.com/flowr-analysis/flowr/wiki/Engines) engine) within the generation environment.
 We used the following simplification: `unique-cf-sets` .
 	)_
 
@@ -140,7 +140,7 @@ flowchart RL
 
 <summary style="color:gray">R Code of the CFG</summary>
 
-The analysis required _1.4 ms_ (including the dataflow analysis,  normalization,  and parsing with the [r-shell](https://github.com/flowr-analysis/flowr/wiki/Engines) engine) within the generation environment.
+The analysis required _1.5 ms_ (including the dataflow analysis,  normalization,  and parsing with the [r-shell](https://github.com/flowr-analysis/flowr/wiki/Engines) engine) within the generation environment.
 We used the following simplification: `unique-cf-sets` .
 
 
@@ -372,7 +372,7 @@ flowchart RL
 
 <summary style="color:gray">R Code of the CFG</summary>
 
-The analysis required _2.0 ms_ (including the dataflow analysis,  normalization,  and parsing with the [r-shell](https://github.com/flowr-analysis/flowr/wiki/Engines) engine) within the generation environment.
+The analysis required _1.7 ms_ (including the dataflow analysis,  normalization,  and parsing with the [r-shell](https://github.com/flowr-analysis/flowr/wiki/Engines) engine) within the generation environment.
 We used the following simplification: `unique-cf-sets` .
 
 
@@ -389,7 +389,7 @@ f()
 
 <h2 id="cfg-structure">Structure of the Control Flow Graph</h2>
 
-You can produce your very own control flow graph with <a href="https://github.com/flowr-analysis/flowr/tree/main//src/control-flow/extract-cfg.ts#L91"><code><span title="Given a normalized AST, this approximates the control flow graph of the program. This view is different from the computation of the dataflow graph and may differ, especially because it focuses on intra-procedural analysis.">extractCfg</span></code></a>.
+You can produce your very own control flow graph with <a href="https://github.com/flowr-analysis/flowr/tree/main//src/control-flow/extract-cfg.ts#L90"><code><span title="Given a normalized AST, this approximates the control flow graph of the program. This view is different from the computation of the dataflow graph and may differ, especially because it focuses on intra-procedural analysis.">extractCfg</span></code></a>.
 The <a href="https://github.com/flowr-analysis/flowr/tree/main//src/control-flow/control-flow-graph.ts#L211"><code><span title="This class represents the control flow graph of an R program. The control flow may be hierarchical when confronted with function definitions (see CfgSimpleVertex and rootVertexIds() ). There are two very simple visitors to traverse a CFG: - visitCfgInOrder visits the graph in the order of the vertices - visitCfgInReverseOrder visits the graph in reverse order If you want to prohibit modification, ...">ControlFlowGraph</span></code></a> class describes everything required to model the control flow graph, with its edge types described by
  <a href="https://github.com/flowr-analysis/flowr/tree/main//src/control-flow/control-flow-graph.ts#L129"><code>CfgEdge</code></a> and its vertices by <a href="https://github.com/flowr-analysis/flowr/tree/main//src/control-flow/control-flow-graph.ts#L86"><code><span title="A vertex in the ControlFlowGraph .">CfgSimpleVertex</span></code></a>.
 However, you should be aware of the <a href="https://github.com/flowr-analysis/flowr/tree/main//src/control-flow/control-flow-graph.ts#L466"><code><span title="Summarizes the control information of a program">ControlFlowInformation</span></code></a> interface which adds some additional information the CFG
@@ -430,7 +430,7 @@ However, you should be aware of the <a href="https://github.com/flowr-analysis/f
 To check whether the CFG has the expected shape, you can use the test function <a href="https://github.com/flowr-analysis/flowr/tree/main//test/functionality/_helper/controlflow/assert-control-flow-graph.ts#L35"><code><span title="Assert that the given code produces the expected CFG">assertCfg</span></code></a> which supports testing for
  sub-graphs as well (it provides diffing capabilities similar to <a href="https://github.com/flowr-analysis/flowr/tree/main//test/functionality/_helper/shell.ts#L394"><code><span title="Your best friend whenever you want to test whether the dataflow graph produced by flowR is as expected. You may want to have a look at the DataflowTestConfiguration to see what you can configure. Especially the resolveIdsAsCriterion and the expectIsSubgraph are interesting as they allow you for rather flexible matching of the expected graph. Pleas note, that if you pass context: 'call-graph' in th...">assertDataflow</span></code></a>).
 As the CFG may become unhandy for larger programs, there are simplifications available with <a href="https://github.com/flowr-analysis/flowr/tree/main//src/control-flow/cfg-simplification.ts#L39"><code><span title="Simplify the control flow information by applying the given passes. This may reduce the vertex count, in- and outgoing edges, entry and exit points, etc.">simplifyControlFlowInformation</span></code></a>
-(these can be passed on to the <a href="https://github.com/flowr-analysis/flowr/tree/main//src/control-flow/extract-cfg.ts#L91"><code><span title="Given a normalized AST, this approximates the control flow graph of the program. This view is different from the computation of the dataflow graph and may differ, especially because it focuses on intra-procedural analysis.">extractCfg</span></code></a> function as well).
+(these can be passed on to the <a href="https://github.com/flowr-analysis/flowr/tree/main//src/control-flow/extract-cfg.ts#L90"><code><span title="Given a normalized AST, this approximates the control flow graph of the program. This view is different from the computation of the dataflow graph and may differ, especially because it focuses on intra-procedural analysis.">extractCfg</span></code></a> function as well).
 
 <h3 id="cfg-structure-vertices">CFG Vertices</h3>
 
@@ -601,7 +601,7 @@ flowchart RL
 ```
 
 
-_(The analysis required _1.6 ms_ (including the dataflow analysis,  normalization,  and parsing with the [r-shell](https://github.com/flowr-analysis/flowr/wiki/Engines) engine) within the generation environment.
+_(The analysis required _1.3 ms_ (including the dataflow analysis,  normalization,  and parsing with the [r-shell](https://github.com/flowr-analysis/flowr/wiki/Engines) engine) within the generation environment.
 We used the following simplification: `unique-cf-sets` .
 	)_
 
@@ -681,7 +681,7 @@ flowchart RL
 
 <summary style="color:gray">R Code of the CFG</summary>
 
-The analysis required _3.0 ms_ (including the dataflow analysis,  normalization,  and parsing with the [r-shell](https://github.com/flowr-analysis/flowr/wiki/Engines) engine) within the generation environment.
+The analysis required _1.3 ms_ (including the dataflow analysis,  normalization,  and parsing with the [r-shell](https://github.com/flowr-analysis/flowr/wiki/Engines) engine) within the generation environment.
 We used the following simplification: `unique-cf-sets` .
 
 
@@ -735,7 +735,7 @@ flowchart RL
 
 <summary style="color:gray">R Code of the CFG</summary>
 
-The analysis required _1.7 ms_ (including the dataflow analysis,  normalization,  and parsing with the [r-shell](https://github.com/flowr-analysis/flowr/wiki/Engines) engine) within the generation environment.
+The analysis required _1.6 ms_ (including the dataflow analysis,  normalization,  and parsing with the [r-shell](https://github.com/flowr-analysis/flowr/wiki/Engines) engine) within the generation environment.
 We used the following simplification: `unique-cf-sets` .
 
 
@@ -792,7 +792,7 @@ flowchart RL
 
 <summary style="color:gray">R Code of the CFG</summary>
 
-The analysis required _1.9 ms_ (including the dataflow analysis,  normalization,  and parsing with the [r-shell](https://github.com/flowr-analysis/flowr/wiki/Engines) engine) within the generation environment.
+The analysis required _1.8 ms_ (including the dataflow analysis,  normalization,  and parsing with the [r-shell](https://github.com/flowr-analysis/flowr/wiki/Engines) engine) within the generation environment.
 We used the following simplification: `unique-cf-sets` .
 
 
@@ -932,7 +932,7 @@ flowchart RL
 
 <summary style="color:gray">R Code of the CFG</summary>
 
-The analysis required _1.6 ms_ (including the dataflow analysis,  normalization,  and parsing with the [r-shell](https://github.com/flowr-analysis/flowr/wiki/Engines) engine) within the generation environment.
+The analysis required _1.7 ms_ (including the dataflow analysis,  normalization,  and parsing with the [r-shell](https://github.com/flowr-analysis/flowr/wiki/Engines) engine) within the generation environment.
 We used the following simplification: `unique-cf-sets` .
 
 
@@ -951,7 +951,7 @@ for(i in 1:10) b
 
 <h4 id="cfg-call-links">Extra: Call Links</h4>
 
-If you generate the CFG with the <a href="https://github.com/flowr-analysis/flowr/tree/main//src/control-flow/extract-cfg.ts#L91"><code><span title="Given a normalized AST, this approximates the control flow graph of the program. This view is different from the computation of the dataflow graph and may differ, especially because it focuses on intra-procedural analysis.">extractCfg</span></code></a> function you can (and, if you want to gain inter-procedural information, should)
+If you generate the CFG with the <a href="https://github.com/flowr-analysis/flowr/tree/main//src/control-flow/extract-cfg.ts#L90"><code><span title="Given a normalized AST, this approximates the control flow graph of the program. This view is different from the computation of the dataflow graph and may differ, especially because it focuses on intra-procedural analysis.">extractCfg</span></code></a> function you can (and, if you want to gain inter-procedural information, should)
 pass a matching [dataflow graph](https://github.com/flowr-analysis/flowr/wiki/Dataflow%20Graph) to it to incorporate the dataflow perspective into the CFG.
 
 The difference becomes obvious when we look at the code `f <- function() b; f()` first without the dataflow graph:
@@ -1002,7 +1002,7 @@ flowchart RL
 
 <summary style="color:gray">R Code of the CFG</summary>
 
-The analysis required _1.6 ms_ (including the  normalization and parsing with the [r-shell](https://github.com/flowr-analysis/flowr/wiki/Engines) engine) within the generation environment.
+The analysis required _1.4 ms_ (including the  normalization and parsing with the [r-shell](https://github.com/flowr-analysis/flowr/wiki/Engines) engine) within the generation environment.
 We used the following simplification: `unique-cf-sets` .
 
 
@@ -1124,7 +1124,7 @@ flowchart RL
 
 <summary style="color:gray">R Code of the CFG</summary>
 
-The analysis required _1.4 ms_ (including the dataflow analysis,  normalization,  and parsing with the [r-shell](https://github.com/flowr-analysis/flowr/wiki/Engines) engine) within the generation environment.
+The analysis required _1.7 ms_ (including the dataflow analysis,  normalization,  and parsing with the [r-shell](https://github.com/flowr-analysis/flowr/wiki/Engines) engine) within the generation environment.
 We used the following simplification: `unique-cf-sets` .
 
 
@@ -1166,7 +1166,7 @@ print`"]
 
 <summary style="color:gray">R Code of the Dataflow Graph</summary>
 
-The analysis required _1.3 ms_ (including parse and normalize, using the [r-shell](https://github.com/flowr-analysis/flowr/wiki/Engines) engine) within the generation environment. 
+The analysis required _1.4 ms_ (including parse and normalize, using the [r-shell](https://github.com/flowr-analysis/flowr/wiki/Engines) engine) within the generation environment. 
 We encountered unknown side effects (with ids: 3 (linked)) during the analysis.
 
 
@@ -1205,7 +1205,7 @@ x #60;#45; 2 #42; 3 #43; 1`"]]
 
 <summary style="color:gray">R Code of the CFG</summary>
 
-The analysis required _3.2 ms_ (including the dataflow analysis,  normalization,  and parsing with the [r-shell](https://github.com/flowr-analysis/flowr/wiki/Engines) engine) within the generation environment.
+The analysis required _1.9 ms_ (including the dataflow analysis,  normalization,  and parsing with the [r-shell](https://github.com/flowr-analysis/flowr/wiki/Engines) engine) within the generation environment.
 We used the following simplifications: `unique-cf-sets`, `to-basic-blocks`  and render a simplified/compacted version.
 
 
@@ -1261,7 +1261,7 @@ flowchart RL
 ```
 
 
-_(The analysis required _1.7 ms_ (including the dataflow analysis,  normalization,  and parsing with the [r-shell](https://github.com/flowr-analysis/flowr/wiki/Engines) engine) within the generation environment.
+_(The analysis required _1.8 ms_ (including the dataflow analysis,  normalization,  and parsing with the [r-shell](https://github.com/flowr-analysis/flowr/wiki/Engines) engine) within the generation environment.
 We used the following simplification: `unique-cf-sets` .
 	)_
 
@@ -1313,7 +1313,7 @@ flowchart RL
 ```
 
 
-_(The analysis required _1.6 ms_ (including the dataflow analysis,  normalization,  and parsing with the [r-shell](https://github.com/flowr-analysis/flowr/wiki/Engines) engine) within the generation environment.
+_(The analysis required _2.0 ms_ (including the dataflow analysis,  normalization,  and parsing with the [r-shell](https://github.com/flowr-analysis/flowr/wiki/Engines) engine) within the generation environment.
 We used the following simplifications: `unique-cf-sets`, `to-basic-blocks` .
 	)_
 
@@ -1393,7 +1393,7 @@ f(42)`"]]
 ```
 
 
-_(The analysis required _10.4 ms_ (including the dataflow analysis,  normalization,  and parsing with the [r-shell](https://github.com/flowr-analysis/flowr/wiki/Engines) engine) within the generation environment.
+_(The analysis required _10.5 ms_ (including the dataflow analysis,  normalization,  and parsing with the [r-shell](https://github.com/flowr-analysis/flowr/wiki/Engines) engine) within the generation environment.
 We used the following simplifications: `unique-cf-sets`, `to-basic-blocks`  and render a simplified/compacted version.
 	)_
 
@@ -1652,7 +1652,7 @@ flowchart RL
 ```
 
 
-_(The analysis required _6.7 ms_ (including the dataflow analysis,  normalization,  and parsing with the [r-shell](https://github.com/flowr-analysis/flowr/wiki/Engines) engine) within the generation environment.
+_(The analysis required _5.7 ms_ (including the dataflow analysis,  normalization,  and parsing with the [r-shell](https://github.com/flowr-analysis/flowr/wiki/Engines) engine) within the generation environment.
 We used the following simplification: `unique-cf-sets` .
 	)_