Commit graph

6 commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
4e8d89f482 chore: mark CB-WP-0005 T02 done
Some checks failed
ci / check (push) Failing after 3s
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-31 17:27:30 +02:00
e25bac3af3 CB-WP-0005 T02: M-D1-MUT — 4 of 14 acceptance rows are enforced
For each acceptance row in GameKernel §5, invert the property and require
the verifying command to go red. adapted:mutation-testing, with the
denominator changed from source lines to acceptance rows.

  M-D1-MUT: 4/14 rows enforced
    PARTIAL       2   (AM-7, AM-8 — some clauses live, some inert)
    unmutatable   8   (no property to invert, reason stated per row)
    SURVIVED      0

Two corrections to our own numbers. There are 14 rows, not the twelve
ADR-0005 and CB-WP-0005 both asserted — AM-4 splits into a/b/c. And the
prediction of 9-of-12 (75%) becomes >=10 of 14; measured 4 (29%), badly
unmet. No target moved in this commit.

The second correction matters more. My first run reported two SURVIVED
rows and both were my own no-op mutations: `pub struct NullRng;` ->
`pub struct NullRng {}` is semantically identical, and renaming
max_age_days does nothing because CA-17 reads it with a default of 90.
Both would have been published as "this row asserts nothing" — a false
accusation against code that is fine. Replaced with real inversions (a
per-construction counter in the ChaCha seed; reverting AC-9's output
resolution to the first-wins bug it was fixed for), after which both go
red. T08 asks whether writing a weak mutation is the new grep. It is,
demonstrably, on the first attempt.

The finding is larger than the workplan assumed. 8 of 14 rows are
unmutatable — AM-2, AM-3, AM-4c, AM-5, AM-6, AM-9, AM-10, AM-11 have no
instrument at all. AM-6 is the sharpest: nothing in the workspace
compares any number to 100,000 events/s, the headline throughput claim.
The problem is not three unimplemented rules, it is that more than half
the acceptance table has nothing behind it.

Harness controls: a stale find-string reports HARNESS-BROKEN rather than
scoring the baseline as the mutant; a red baseline reports inconclusive
rather than red; the tree is restored in a finally and the restoration is
verified. Not in `make all` — it rebuilds the workspace once per row.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-31 17:27:23 +02:00
235412423a chore: mark CB-WP-0005 T01 done (measured: 29 responses, $7.42, opus-5)
Some checks failed
ci / check (push) Failing after 4s
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-31 16:54:25 +02:00
bb35fcb168 CB-WP-0005 T01: spec->code link over every numbered spec and every crate
AGGREGATE becomes a list of source roots and rule patterns become
per-spec, so the link runs over every numbered spec x every crate rather
than GroundRules.md x games/ground/src/lib.rs.

The prediction held on the first run:

  AM-1b kernel spec->code link: 15/18 (83%) across 10 source files
    unlinked: K10 K14 K18

Kernel rules are link-only by design, and the output says so: they are
kernel invariants with no aggregate, setup preset or command vocabulary,
so scenarios/kernel/*.yaml with covers: [K11] would be a tag in a
directory the runner cannot dispatch. Claiming scenario coverage for them
is the inflation this gate exists to prevent.

Per ADR-0005 §5 the kernel arm reports without feeding the exit code
until 2026-08-31, then binds — the date in the tool, not in prose, with
days remaining printed every run, because open-ended "gate it later" is
how AM-4's targets went unratified for four workplans. The self-test
asserts the gate returns 0 before that date and 2 after.

The zero-rules positive control is replicated on the new denominator: a
kernel regex that stops matching aborts rather than printing 0/0 as
though it were 100%.

The self-test passed while the tool was completely broken. A print(
inside say() became say(), so every real `make coverage` died with
RecursionError while --self-test reported all-ok — it only ever called
kernel_arm(quiet=True) and never executed the reporting path. The control
named the behaviour and did not assert it, which is precisely what this
workplan is about. Fixed by exercising the loud path and asserting it
prints, then verified by re-breaking say() and confirming both new checks
go red. Seventh instance of the harness-does-nothing shape, in the tool
written to find that shape.

Also caught by its own gate: a self-test label that printed "0 K-ids"
beside a passing ">5" assertion, because the detail string rebuilt the
pattern with different escaping. A label that contradicts its own check
is worse than no label.

k_rules, k_linked and k_unlinked are registered facts under facts-check.
A limit of that checker is recorded rather than patched: it is
line-based, so a tagged value that prose-wraps fails.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-31 16:54:07 +02:00
bd4423a8e4 Sync hub IDs for CB-WP-0005 and work-record index
Some checks failed
ci / check (push) Failing after 4s
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-31 14:25:54 +02:00
1bbbfc846f ADR-0005 + CB-WP-0005: count assertions, not names
Some checks failed
ci / check (push) Failing after 3s
Decides the response to CB-RES-0004 and its adversarial review.

Decision 1 — a third coverage metric, M-D1-MUT: one mutation per
acceptance row, and the suite must go red. adapted:mutation-testing, with
the denominator deliberately changed from source lines to acceptance
rows, because the failure mode here is not an untested branch but a
headline number backed by nothing. A row for which no mutation can be
written is recorded unmutatable WITH THE REASON and counts against the
metric — a row nobody can invert asserts nothing.

Decision 2 — reimplement the log framing rather than assimilate it. This
is the deliberate exception to "own the semantics, assimilate the
implementation": that rule exists so we do not reimplement HARD things.
SHA-256 and ChaCha cost 12 crates and are kept. A length prefix is not in
that category. Budget attribution corrected per the review: the durable
log is shipped runtime (AM-4a, 1.5% headroom), the bundle writer is
dev-only behind the scenarios feature (AM-4b, 9.4%). The survey wanted it
both ways without saying so.

Decision 3 — a LogStore port with a real shared conformance suite, and
the same shape retro-fitted to KernelRng. M-D4-SWAP is a bool over "the
same conformance suite" and no suite exists, so AM-11 was never earned.

Decision 4 — correct three committed verdicts in evidence/CB-EV-0001:
AM-7 split (timing met, hash-identical withdrawn), AM-10 withdrawn as
written (no cb-*-api crate; a K6 determinism lint was reported under a D4
leak row), AM-11 downgraded to unmet. AM-1b is added to the scoreboard it
was missing from while the flattering half of the same command's output
was carried.

Decision 5 — widen the name check over every numbered spec and every
crate, reporting outside the exit code until 2026-08-31, with the date in
the tool rather than in prose. Open-ended "gate it later" is how AM-4's
targets went unratified for four workplans.

Decision 6 — replay is proven by re-execution in a fresh process, with
the reviewer's four controls adopted verbatim, including the two I had
not thought of: truncate-by-one-byte and mutated-seed.

Stated worse, not only better: own source grows and AM-4c moves against
us; CI gets slower by one rebuild per acceptance row. Both accepted — the
alternative is a smaller, faster codebase whose acceptance numbers mean
nothing.

CB-WP-0005 executes it in 8 tasks across four phases. The M-D1-MUT
prediction is 9 of 12 and is beatable in both directions: 12 of 12
refutes CB-RES-0004 outright, 3 of 12 means the pass is under-scoped and
must stop and re-plan rather than proceed to Phase C.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-31 14:25:26 +02:00