The async/future measurements were produced by a C stub in /tmp, and that
artifact was destroyed when the session worktrees were removed. The log then
asserted results with nothing behind them -- a claim inside an evidence record,
which is exactly what turns a chain of custody into a pile.
Rerun, not reconstructed. Rebuilding the missing file would have been a
fabrication with a fresh timestamp; rerunning produces new evidence with its own.
lang/tests/integration/fixtures/future.c the future, as a tagged heap object
lang/tests/integration/async_future.sh the harness, 6/6
ok unbound: synchronous, correct result
ok unbound: el_await on a non-future passes through, no crash
ok bound: does not crash
ok bound: the awaited result is correct
ok bound: the caller continues BEFORE the body finishes
ok bound: wrap returns in <10ms while the body takes 50ms
LABELLED AS A REPLICATION. The outcomes were already known when this harness was
written, so its expectations are NOT predictions committed in advance. Its
evidentiary value is that a third party can reproduce it, not that it was called
ahead of time. Recording it as anything stronger would corrupt the record it is
meant to repair.
The fixture also carries the P5 defect and its fix in a comment: the first
el_await dereferenced ->magic off an unvalidated slot and SIGSEGV'd on the
unbound path, sixty seconds after the same defect was diagnosed elsewhere in the
runtime.
bigmerge