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.
13 lines
2.1 KiB
Markdown
13 lines
2.1 KiB
Markdown
# Architecture questions closed
|
|
|
|
All five were open in `geometry-vs-code.md`. Each was closed by measurement, not
|
|
by argument.
|
|
|
|
| Question | Answer |
|
|
|---|---|
|
|
| **Concurrency** — hardware threads are code, but is *ordering* geometric? | **Ordering is geometric.** Causality is a partial order (Lamport 1978); a total order is an arbitrary extension that "cannot be depended on to imply a causal relationship." Languages force a total order at authoring time, so every lock, barrier and fence is apparatus for recovering the partial order that was destroyed. CALM: a program has a coordination-free implementation **iff monotone**. What breaks monotonicity is destructive update. **Coordination is the price of forgetting.** |
|
|
| **Error handling** — does `grounded: false` cover *failed*? | **No.** Standing is a *signed* component: `>0` supported, `=0` unknown, `<0` contradicted. Not-known and known-false are opposite directions on one axis; a boolean cannot tell them apart. `inhibitory` as an int32 flag is that sign wearing a boolean. |
|
|
| **Parsing** — is a grammar a convention, or a region? | **A grammar is a basis; parsing is transduction onto it.** Lexeme→token is convention, shape recognition is a region, byte traversal is irreducible. **But the SHOULD gate refused the obvious move:** the keyword table stays code, because the set is closed by the language definition and the lexer runs before the program is understood. Same verdict as `is_digit` in ASCII. |
|
|
| **Numeric literals** — is `3` a position or a convention? | **The numeral is convention; the number is a position — and a bare `3` is a magnitude with no axis.** It is not a position until something gives it a direction, which is why `3.days` needs a calendar. Demonstrated: `t + 3` refused, `t + 1.hour` accepted. |
|
|
| **The module system** — if the partition is a neighbourhood, does linking survive? | **Premature.** The partition is a filesystem path and there is no namespacing at all. `import` is textual inlining; with a `.elh` header, symbols resolve at C link time. Two modules defining `helper` emit two C functions into one translation unit. Linking barely survives the *path* partition. |
|