chore: rename proofXyz -> xyzProof

[crodriguezvega]

Description

I will rely on @DimitrisJim's grep superpowers to pinpoint which ones I am still missing!

closes: #4053
closes: #3726

Commit Message / Changelog Entry

type: commit message

see the guidelines for commit messages. (view raw markdown for examples)

---

Before we can merge this PR, please make sure that all the following items have been
checked off. If any of the checklist items are not applicable, please leave them but
write a little note why.

• Targeted PR against the correct branch (see CONTRIBUTING.md).
• Linked to Github issue with discussion and accepted design OR link to spec that describes this work.
• Code follows the module structure standards and Go style guide.
• Wrote unit and integration tests.
• Updated relevant documentation (docs/) or specification (x/<module>/spec/).
• Added relevant godoc comments.
• Provide a commit message to be used for the changelog entry in the PR description for review.
• Re-reviewed Files changed in the Github PR explorer.
• Review Codecov Report in the comment section below once CI passes.

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

Attention: 2 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Comparison is base (dd5b172) 81.18% compared to head (028d5a6) 81.22%.
Report is 6 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #5599      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   81.18%   81.22%   +0.04%     
==========================================
  Files         197      197              
  Lines       15247    15258      +11     
==========================================
+ Hits        12378    12394      +16     
+ Misses       2404     2399       -5     
  Partials      465      465              

Files	Coverage Δ
modules/core/02-client/keeper/client.go	94.30% <100.00%> (ø)
modules/core/02-client/types/keys.go	75.00% <ø> (ø)
modules/core/02-client/types/msgs.go	85.22% <100.00%> (ø)
modules/core/02-client/types/params.go	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
modules/core/03-connection/keeper/handshake.go	88.58% <100.00%> (ø)
modules/core/03-connection/keeper/verify.go	78.79% <100.00%> (ø)
modules/core/03-connection/types/msgs.go	96.02% <100.00%> (ø)
modules/core/04-channel/keeper/handshake.go	89.64% <100.00%> (ø)
modules/core/04-channel/keeper/timeout.go	95.39% <100.00%> (ø)
modules/core/04-channel/keeper/upgrade.go	92.22% <100.00%> (ø)
... and 3 more

... and 2 files with indirect coverage changes

[DimitrisJim]

Seeing a couple of spots (only checked for function args in grep output, testing code and protobuf pb's excluded):

• module/core/exported/client.go's VerifyUpgradeAndUpdateState has a two more occurences proofUpgradeClient and proofUpgradeConsState (similarly so in the impl's of the interface in wasm and tendermint)
• modules/core/02-client/keeper/client.go's UpdateClient has proofUpgradeClient and proofUpgradeConsState; function to create a new msg for it also contains same names.
• modules/core/04-channel/types/msgs.go's NewMsgTimeoutOnClose has proofUnreceived
• modules/core/04-channel/types/expected_keepers.go's VerifyChannelUpgradeError has proofErrorReceipt (though in the rest of the interface we use a plain proof 🤷)

saw a bunch of em in testing code, maybe that can be left for other PR since they do appear to be plenty of em (also in pb gen'ed code but that would be API breaking).

[crodriguezvega]

Yay, thanks, @DimitrisJim!

• modules/core/04-channel/types/expected_keepers.go's VerifyChannelUpgradeError has proofErrorReceipt (though in the rest of the interface we use a plain proof 🤷)

Yeah, I noticed that as well. I could change those names to be more specific as well, if people prefer.

saw a bunch of em in testing code, maybe that can be left for other PR since they do appear to be plenty of em (also in pb gen'ed code but that would be API breaking).

Indeed, I left all the proto and pb.go files untouched.

[DimitrisJim]

yea, seeing connection's verify funcs generally follow a different pattern (proof and height instead of xyzProof and proofHeigh). Sound fine to clean up here but would also be willing to open additional issue and leave it to external contributors.

[damiannolan]

modules/core/04-channel/types/expected_keepers.go's VerifyChannelUpgradeError has proofErrorReceipt (though in the rest of the interface we use a plain proof

Agree, would be nice if they all just used proof in there 👍🏻

[DimitrisJim]

LGTM, can do a rename in tests afterwards if people want.

[damiannolan]

My vote would be for dropping the counterparty prefix for proof vars. Otherwise LGTM! Thank you @crodriguezvega and @DimitrisJim 🙏🏻