admin/LithosAnanake
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Actions Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

FABRIC.md §16.3: correct the DictEntry wire count against the struct

Browse Source 
Review item REVIEW-B2, settled by reading include/vm.h:335-351.

The subsection's table and prose disagreed: the table listed the code field as
present, the prose named it as one of two missing wires, and neither accounted
for payload.

Actual mapping against §3's eight wires: identity, heat, TTL and pin are present
in correct form; link is a pointer rather than an index; the code field is a raw
function pointer rather than an enumerated tag; mass and payload are absent.
Four correct, two wrong-form, two absent -- not "six of eight."

The wrong-form pair matters more than the count. §13 names pointer-free index
links as the single biggest difference between a tractable proof effort and a
research project, and §18.3 requires the function pointer to become a closed
tag. Those are exactly the two.

The claim that the dictionary "is" a Stadium entry is therefore overstated and
has been weakened to what the struct supports: the dictionary already has the
concepts, and two of the eight wires need to change form. That still carries §1.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
This commit is contained in:
Robert Allan James
2026-08-03 10:58:21 -04:00
co-authored by Claude Opus 5
parent fd820fc9eb
commit e44dc7830c
1 changed files with 24 additions and 14 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files
FABRIC.md
+24 -14
View File
@@ -528,22 +528,32 @@ riscv64 timing numbers before and after that fix are not comparable.
### 16.3 The dictionary is already a Stadium
§1 claims the dictionary is the reference implementation. It is stronger than that.
`DictEntry` today carries six of the eight wires in §3 — the two it lacks are `mass`, which
§19.2 added later, and a behaviour tag, since its code field is a raw function pointer
rather than an enumerated tag (§18.3):
§1 claims the dictionary is the reference implementation. It is stronger than that — but not
as strong as an earlier draft of this subsection claimed. Read against `DictEntry`
(`include/vm.h:335-351`):
| §3 wire | Already in `DictEntry` |
|---|---|
| identity | name / `word_id` |
| heat | `physics.*` (Loop #1) |
| TTL | `acl_ttl` |
| pin | `acl_pinned`, plus `WORD_PINNED` / `WORD_FROZEN` |
| link | dictionary chaining |
| code field | literally a function pointer |
| §3 wire | In `DictEntry` | Form |
|---|---|---|
| identity | `word_id` + `name[]` | correct |
| heat | `execution_heat` + `physics` | correct |
| TTL | `acl_ttl` | correct |
| pin | `acl_pinned`, plus `WORD_PINNED` / `WORD_FROZEN` | correct |
| link | `struct DictEntry *link` | **a pointer, not an index** |
| code field | `word_func_t func` | **a raw function pointer, not an enumerated tag** |
| mass | — | absent |
| payload | — (definition body lives outside the entry) | absent |
The dictionary is not *analogous* to a Stadium entry. It is one, already built and already
tested. Everything else is what gets generalized toward it.
**Four wires present in correct form, two present in the wrong form, two absent.** An
earlier draft said "six of eight" and named the missing two as mass and a behaviour tag,
which double-counted the code field and omitted payload.
The wrong-form pair is the interesting part. `link` being a pointer is precisely what §13
identifies as *"the single biggest difference between a tractable proof effort and a research
project,"* and the raw function pointer is what §18.3 requires to become a closed tag.
So the honest claim is weaker than "the dictionary *is* a Stadium entry" and still strong
enough to carry §1: **the dictionary already has the concepts, and two of the eight need to
change form.** Everything else is what gets generalised toward it.
**But run §9's admission test on it before moving it in.** Its reap event is the weak
wire. Blocks migrate, messages deliver, VMs die by cooling — a dictionary word does not