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.
1.6 KiB
1.6 KiB
a construct cannot refuse
One Ishikawa → scientific method → Six Sigma loop. The record below is the
commit message as written at the time, before the outcome was known to anyone
reading this file.
Record — 60737b0
let a construct refuse, not only observe
@authenticate (6 uses), @authorize (3), @rate_limit (3) and @validate (2)
parsed, attached, and compiled to nothing. Fourteen applications that read as
protection and emitted no instruction — a function decorated @authenticate
compiled byte-identically to an undecorated one.
The missing capability was not authentication. It was that a construct could
observe a boundary but never refuse one. injects_at_entry discards the target's
result; there was no form in which a construct could say no.
@decorator("guards_at_entry", "my_auth")
fn authenticate() {}
@authenticate
@authorize
fn handler() -> String { ... }
emits, at entry:
{ el_val_t __g = my_auth(EL_STR("handler"), EL_STR("authenticate")); if (__g) return __g; }
{ el_val_t __g = my_roles(EL_STR("handler"), EL_STR("authorize")); if (__g) return __g; }
Guards precede injections because a refused call must not report a crossing,
and every guard runs where the topmost injecting construct wins — refusal is
not a role, so it does not follow the role convention.
The compiler still knows nothing about auth. The program points the construct
at its own function, which is where that decision belongs.
Verified: existing @manager/@accessor output byte-identical, compiler
self-hosts byte-identically, guards stack in declaration order and emit before
the beat. 94/94 native compiler tests pass.