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.
2.3 KiB
2.3 KiB
keywords that reserve nothing
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 — 0143cc4
ANSWER: is a grammar a convention, or a region?
Both, at different layers -- and it is the same split as serialization: the
convention is the BASIS, never the ACT.
lexeme -> token `fn` means function-start because someone said so CONVENTION
shape recognition given tokens, which construct is this REGION
source -> structure parsing is transduction onto that basis GEOMETRY
byte traversal something must read them in order IRREDUCIBLE
Three things push the ACT toward region rather than convention: ambiguity
(a * b needs context; a grammar resolves it with the lexer hack, a region by
neighbourhood), error recovery (nearest-region is free), and precedence, which
is ordering along an axis with a conventional parameter.
AND THE SHOULD GATE SAYS NO TO THE OBVIOUS MOVE
Every other table this session moved to data. This one stays code. The keyword
set is CLOSED by the language definition -- it does not leak the way an
allowlist does -- and the lexer runs before the program is understood, so a
program can never declare its own keywords. Externalising it costs file I/O on
every compile and buys nothing. Same verdict as is_digit in ASCII.
WHAT WAS ACTUALLY WRONG: five of 46 keywords were consumed by no parser or
codegen path. sealed, activate, seed, protocol, impl. Each stole an identifier
from users for nothing.
SECOND SILENT MISCOMPILATION OF THE DAY. Using one did not fail to parse:
let seed = 42
let impl = seed + 1
compiled CLEAN -- zero cc errors -- and printed 0 instead of 44. No diagnostic
at any layer. Fixed by removing the five.
A DEFECT IN MY OWN MEASUREMENT, caught before it did damage: my first pass
checked only parser.el and reported `test` as inert too. codegen consumes it at
4135 for --test mode, and the tree has 408 uses. Removing it would have broken
every test in the suite. The measurement was re-run across all four consumers.
100/100 native + 2 new, 31/31 integration, fixpoint ok.
Record — 067dd40
answer the parsing question: a grammar is a basis, and five keywords reserved nothing