Repository navigation
Record the DASH7 SNR sweep as run once and unusable, and add convention 10 - #24
Open
emrefbulut wants to merge 4 commits into
Open
emrefbulut wants to merge 4 commits into
emrefbulut wants to merge 4 commits into
Conversation
The recipe said the grid had not been run. It had: once, to completion, in a scratch working tree, with its output written where the script was told to write it and never committed. The tree was cleaned up and nothing survives -- no commit on any branch, no other worktree, no stash, no reachable object, so no table, no per-run JSON, no log, and therefore no environment stamp, seed pairs or run count to audit. The figures are not transcribed here. A number whose source file does not exist is not reproducible from this repository, which is what methodology promises in its first line. The grid is not re-run either. The plan is pre-registered, and having seen a result removes that property from whoever saw it -- a repeat by them is not the pre-registered run however exactly it repeats the command. It stays open for someone who has not read the lost table. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Section 7 collects code defects that produced plausible output. This one is a process failure, so it goes under a separate heading rather than being mixed in -- putting it in the same list would blunt both. The entry says what is verifiable from the repository: the grid was run, the output was never committed, the tree was cleaned, and nothing survives. It carries no figures from the lost table. It also says why the loss is not repairable by re-running: the plan is pre-registered, and that property does not survive the person who read the result. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
…ists Every convention in this file was learned by breaking it first. This one was broken this month: the DASH7 SNR grid ran to completion in a working directory, was read, and was never committed. The directory was cleaned and the result is unrecoverable. The rule is to write the run file and the table into artifacts/ and commit them in the step that produces them, before reading them. The convention says why the pre-registered case is the expensive one: reading a result you cannot keep closes the question to you, because a repeat is no longer the pre-registered run. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Item 1 read as never tried. It was run once; the output was never committed and is unrecoverable. The distinction matters to the next reader, because the plan is pre-registered: the item is open to someone who has not seen that result, and a repeat by whoever has is not the run the plan describes. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
This branch has not been deployed
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What changed
Four documents now say that the DASH7 SNR grid was run once and that the
result is unusable, instead of saying it has not been run. No code changes.
docs/leakage-real-snr.md— status block replacing "It has not been run"docs/methodology.md§7 — a new entry under its own headingCONTRIBUTING.md+.github/PULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE.md— convention 10ROADMAP.md— Now item 1 no longer reads as never attemptedWhy
The grid ran to completion in a scratch working tree. Its output was written
where the script was told to write it, was read, and was never committed; the
tree was cleaned up afterwards. Nothing survives — no commit on any branch, no
other worktree, no stash, no reachable object — so there is no table, no
per-run JSON and no log, and therefore no environment stamp, seed pairs or run
count to audit.
Two decisions are recorded with it:
does not exist is not reproducible from this repository, which is what
docs/methodology.mdpromises in its first line. Writing them down wouldsatisfy a reader and mislead them (conventions 3 and 9).
the stem were fixed before any run so the result could not choose its own
stopping rule. Having read a result removes that property from the reader, so
a repeat is not the run the plan describes (convention 5). The item stays
open to someone who has not read the lost table.
The §7 entry is under a separate heading because it is a process failure, not
a code defect; mixing it into that list would blunt both. It carries the lesson
the loss actually teaches: an uncommitted result is worse than a result that
was never produced, because the work is believed to have been done. That is
convention 10.
How it was verified
Each claim of absence was checked rather than assumed:
Docs-only change, and the test suite reads these files, so:
The skip is
test_the_loraiq_skip_reason_names_the_variable_to_set, whichskips because
IQFORGE_LORAIQis configured on this machine; CI runs itunconfigured. The full suite runs here in CI.
Conventions it touches
written down, and only what the repository can still show is stated
is not simply re-run
project, recorded rather than quietly dropped
true when written and had been restated since; each absence here was
re-checked against git rather than copied forward
because this is the failure that taught it
🤖 Generated with Claude Code