dd5d0fabf9a5d804e6064bf25070ff0676a3a452
4
Commits
| Author | SHA1 | Message | Date | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
 XingfenD
|
9061c39ef3 |
docs(spec): close the P15-A branch review's A1 and A3 advisories
A1 - the four-gate line said `internal/api ~11.0s 含真库集成`. It does not include the real-database integration tests: without TEST_DATABASE_URL they skip silently, and the 11s is the mock path. The wording mattered because it hid the fact that every run in this batch - implementer, task reviewer, fix-forward and controller alike - skipped them, including the two concurrency/TOCTOU guards that §1.6 names as the behavioural evidence for phase six. Replaced with the measured picture: 4 skips in internal/api, 26 `--- SKIP` lines repo-wide, and the full list of the 11 Test functions gated on that variable (cmd 2, api 4, repository 2, service 3). Also recorded the branch review's DB-parity run - base fe810dd 194 PASS/0 FAIL versus HEAD b15c2a8 199 PASS/0 FAIL, +5 being exactly this batch's new guards, state multisets identical - which is the first runtime proof of zero behaviour change on the postgres path; everything before it was static. The pre-merge checklist now has to include a DB-enabled comparison or the next batch skips them again. A3 - fix-evidence/rv-t3-v2-filtered.py prints 6 ORDER VIOLATIONS while the fix report's prose says both trees have 0. The prose is right and the script is the artefact: it assigns repeated text lines to destinations with a greedy pop(0), so identically-named lines land in the wrong bucket. The branch review redid the check with an unambiguous-unique-text method and got pre=0, post=0. Annotated the archived script in place (it lives in the gitignored evidence area, kept for auditability) so nobody cites its violation count as evidence again, and pointed at the review's §12 reproduction method. Post-write checks: 20/20 assertions, 12 table blocks with 0 column anomalies, 8 code fences paired, 28 headings with no duplicates, and the annotated script still passes py_compile. |
||
|
XingfenD
|
37a0a8ddd1 |
docs(spec): close the P15-A branch review's N1-N4 staleness in the A spec
The full-branch review of chore/p15a-approve-phases returned APPROVE with notes: the merged branch code itself has zero defects, but four places in this spec disagreed with the code it describes. All four came from the controller writing executable details from memory during the first re-pin. N1 - applyApprovalInTx parameter order, three places (D-C row, the §3.1 skeleton call site, the §3.2 phase-six signature). The spec said `plan approvePlan, submissionID`; the code has always been `submissionID string, plan approvePlan`. The implementer's order is legal and better: a scalar identifier before an aggregate matches Go convention. N2 - §3.2 migration ranges the first re-pin claimed to have fixed but had not: 48-85 -> 48-86 (86 is the closing brace of the coverUpload block) and 87-100 -> 88-101 (87 is a blank line, 88 is `switch sub.Kind`). N3 - the §1.2 difference-table header: phase four 87-100 -> 88-101, phase six 136-186 -> 136-199 (186 is a mid-branch line inside MetadataChange; 199 is the closing brace of the switch). N4 - §T1.4 said the CG2 needle's only hit is `:196`, which is the pre-F9 line number from dda3fe8; HEAD measures `:201`. The (b) blind-spot note said "126-200 = 77 lines"; 126-200 is 75 lines - 77 belongs to the §1.1 range 125-201 and was carried over by mistake. Every corrected value was re-derived from the base tree fe810dd and HEAD b15c2a8 line by line rather than copied from the review, and the two derivations agree. A RE-PIN note at §3.2 phase six records the true values and the lesson, which §8 discipline 11 now states as a rule: executable details in a spec (regexes, signatures, literals, line ranges) must be grepped out of the code entity and pasted, never hand-written. Post-write checks: 20/20 assertions, table column counts unchanged (12 blocks, 0 anomalies), 8 code fences paired, 28 headings with no duplicates. Closes N1-N4 of crearte-server/.superpowers/sdd-p15a/final-review-report.md. N5 (the verification artifact's fake rigor) is closed separately in the gitignored evidence area: verify-fix-v8.py now runs 106 real checks with zero bare prints, and the v2 output it cites is archived on disk. |
||
|
XingfenD
|
02188eb3e0 |
docs: re-pin both P15 specs after task-level review adjudication
Twenty-four pinned corrections across the two specs and their plans, every one traced to a measured finding. Both task-level reviewers overturned claims I had written into the specs, and I reproduced each against the base tree before accepting it (git show, never the working tree, which already carries the fix). P15-A spec gains two sections. T1.4 records the reviewer's candidate guard for phase-independence: the spec called "do not merge phases four and six" the most important constraint in the batch, yet its only stated mitigation was the byte-level comparison, which is one-shot evidence — after the report is filed, nothing reddens when someone merges them. The reviewer built CG1/CG2/CG3 and verified them both ways: green on the legal tree, red on four distinct merge and degeneration forms, all assertion-red rather than compile-red, while the three shipped guards stayed green throughout. T4 records the adjudication of nine findings, including two that undercut the guard the batch itself added: a half-finished dir parameter that redirects which files are counted but not which are read, so a scan pointed elsewhere can satisfy its own precondition while the 169-line function it exists to catch stays invisible; and a span scanner keyed to line-initial func, which means a 125-line package-level closure passes all four gates and all three guards. Also pinned: the gofmt gate in the four-gate recipe. gofmt -l lists unformatted files and still exits zero, so the recipe everyone ran reported gofmt_exit=0 as evidence of formatting cleanliness. Implementer and I shared that recipe, which is why the same blind spot was computed twice and caught by neither. Phase intervals are corrected to the real base-tree line numbers. The prior text told the implementer to move lines 212-213 into a helper; 213 is the slog.Info the same spec requires to stay in the caller, so following it would have swapped what moves with what stays. Phases six and seven also overlapped, each claiming the transaction error mapping. The skeleton now passes a pointer where its own note eighteen lines later demanded a pointer receiver, and the transaction helper's signature carries submissionID, which removes the batch's dependence on a cross-repository equality argument for the only acceptance criterion it has. P15-B spec corrects the artifact criterion I had backwards. I wrote that deleting a token should change the var(--color-*) count; that count measures usage, the token had zero usage across seven utility suffixes, and it stayed at 75. Had it moved, that would have meant something referenced the token, contradicting the dead-token premise. Definition-side and usage-side are separate measures and the spec now says so. Leg five is re-pinned as critical. It was the sole enforcement point for the non-reactive injection decision, and it only pinned literal form: two type-legal variants that establish the dependency elsewhere in the computed body pass all ten legs with vue-tsc clean, and the reviewer proved by effectScope evaluation counting that both really do make the iframe src flip on a theme change, reloading a running game. The narrowing was introduced by the implementer's own fix, to avoid a trap comment that spells out the forbidden literal; but comment masking already neutralizes that comment, so the narrowing was unnecessary and the second line of defense created the gap. Same shape as the P14 final review finding a hole in the first round's fix. Also pinned: the rejected deviation five, with the corrected root cause (all four freeze attempts used page.route, which does not intercept service worker registration, worker-issued requests, or navigations synthesized by respondWith; context.route holds the loading screen past 25 seconds); the missing dark-system-times-light-hash grid that one mutation slipped past all ten source legs and all five e2e legs simultaneously; the fourth tautology class the spec's three warnings omitted, where emptying a loop's driving collection makes it vacuously true; legs seven and eight, which respectively substring-searched a hex that occurs three times in the file and matched only double-quoted style attributes; the copyable code block's comment, which now avoids the three literals that would false-redden a correct implementation, with the annotation moved outside the block; and three new discipline entries covering untested method scope, measurement units, and retaining one-off verification scripts. Every correction was checked by a script asserting both directions — the pinned text present and the superseded text gone — plus table column integrity, fence pairing, and code-block cleanliness. Three earlier attempts at this re-pin failed on my own errors and were fixed before commit; the working tree was never left in a half-edited state. |
||
|
XingfenD
|
82f0a6d360 |
docs: add P15-A and P15-B specs and plans, register both in ROADMAP
Two batches, one per repo, so they can run in parallel under the one-writer-per-repo rule: P15-A refactors crearte-server's Approve function, P15-B fixes a dark-mode gap in crearte's game loading screen plus two guard items. P15-A splits a 169-line function whose seven phases are mapped here with real line numbers — the base-tree mapping logged during P14 is void, since that batch moved the function into moderation.go. The spec's central constraint is that phases four and six look alike but must not be merged: four is an optimistic pre-check that runs unlocked before any object copy, six is a pessimistic re-check under a row lock after the copies have happened. They differ in four concrete ways (kind coverage, the NewVersion runtime and bundle checks, whether entities are created, and the error wrapping), so the apparent duplication is deliberate TOCTOU defence rather than removable redundancy. A measurement also overturned the survey's claim about helper shape: both an unexported method and a package-level function leave all seven P14 assertions green, because IsExported filtering and NumMethod's exported-only view put neither in scope. The choice is therefore about needing receiver fields, not about the guard. P15-B fixes a gap P13 left: its token work covered only the src/index.html entry and missed the second Vite entry, bootstrap, so the game loading screen hardcodes light values and dark-theme users see a white flash on every virtual game launch. The fix rides the hash channel bootstrap already parses rather than inventing a postMessage protocol, which would be async and so repaint light first — the very flash being removed. The spec records the trap that makes this easy to get wrong: GameHost builds targets in a computed, so injecting the reactive theme ref would make a theme switch recompute the iframe src and reload a game in progress; the non-reactive snapshot is required, and a guard leg plus a mutation exist solely to hold that line. It also records two pre-existing contrast violations found on the way, where inline style attributes override conforming stylesheet values with lower-contrast ones, and why noHardcodedColor cannot be extended to cover this file: it only collects .vue and blanks out style blocks, so widening its roots would scan nothing while looking like coverage. Every line number and quoted signature in both specs was checked against source before commit; two claims the survey had asserted from reasoning were measured instead, and one of them was wrong. |