bigmerge
c6ba0677f0
cycles/ one file per Ishikawa -> scientific method -> Six Sigma loop, named
for the DEFECT not the fix, carrying the commit record as written at
the time
findings/ what the cycles produced, cross-cut: live bugs, architecture answers,
and defects in my own measurement
The organising finding is that predictions which came back FALSE produced every
significant result. Eleven of sixty-one failed, and those eleven found: that the
arity table was not drifted but 40% incomplete; that the AST traversal is
irreducible and only rules and judgments move; that guards could refuse through
the seam after all; and that routing el_bin_lookup through the gate did NOT fix
the SIGSEGV, because the fallback strlen was the hazard -- a wrong fix I would
otherwise have shipped as verified.
One cycle was run without committing predictions first and had to be discarded
as rigged. It is kept, in full, as 18-async-half-expressible.md.
60 lines
2.6 KiB
Markdown
60 lines
2.6 KiB
Markdown
# v1 — Experiments
|
||
|
||
Every change to El on `iteration-1` was produced by one loop, run repeatedly:
|
||
|
||
```
|
||
Ishikawa → scientific method → Six Sigma → repeat
|
||
```
|
||
|
||
- **Ishikawa** — name the root cause, not the symptom. *Why is this table here?*
|
||
never *why is this table ugly?*
|
||
- **Scientific method** — state a hypothesis, **commit predictions before
|
||
running**, then run it in an isolated worktree and grade every prediction
|
||
including the ones that failed.
|
||
- **Six Sigma** — eliminate the defect *class*, then add a control so it cannot
|
||
silently return.
|
||
|
||
## The organising finding
|
||
|
||
**Predictions that came back FALSE were worth more than the ones that held.**
|
||
|
||
Nineteen cycles, sixty-one predictions. The eleven that failed produced every
|
||
significant result:
|
||
|
||
| Failed prediction | What it found |
|
||
|---|---|
|
||
| "the arity table has drifted from the header" | Zero drift — but **110 functions had no entry at all**. The table was not wrong, it was 40% incomplete. |
|
||
| "codegen drops below baseline" (×4) | The **traversal is irreducible**. Walking an AST to find calls does not move no matter who decides. Only the rule and the judgment leave. |
|
||
| "guards cannot refuse through the seam" | One line, and refusal works. Six compile-time kinds were unnecessary. |
|
||
| "C forbids the struct redefinition" | C allows shadowing — and a *different* defect surfaced: an exit injection emitted with an empty target. |
|
||
| "routing el_bin_lookup through the gate fixes the SIGSEGV" | It did not. The **fallback** was the hazard: `strlen()` on an integer. I would have shipped the wrong fix and called it verified. |
|
||
|
||
A prediction that only ever confirms is a demonstration, not a test. One cycle
|
||
was run **without** committing predictions first — `async-half-expressible` —
|
||
and it produced a rigged result: `pthread_join` immediately after
|
||
`pthread_create`, with the word `DEFERRED` printed by the test itself. It had to
|
||
be discarded and re-run.
|
||
|
||
## Layout
|
||
|
||
```
|
||
cycles/ one file per loop, numbered in order, named for the DEFECT
|
||
findings/ what the cycles produced, cross-cut by kind
|
||
```
|
||
|
||
## Scoreboard
|
||
|
||
```
|
||
cycles run 19
|
||
predictions committed 61
|
||
predictions FALSE 11 ← the useful ones
|
||
silent miscompilations found 4
|
||
security-relevant defects 2
|
||
architecture questions closed 5
|
||
defects in my own measurement 4
|
||
```
|
||
|
||
Every cycle verified the same three things before landing: the compiler
|
||
self-hosts byte-identically (gen2 == gen3), the native suite passes, and the
|
||
integration harnesses pass. A cycle that could not show all three did not land.
|