From 0d1e0ae8b751daf58edb28f961ed90f654c39dc6 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: sylph-decoder Date: Sun, 30 Aug 2026 17:38:42 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] re: my own CLI shipped an unmeasured recommendation -- "Prefer --settle" withdrawn sylpheed-port reported hedging a predicate in DECISIONS.md while stating the unhedged version in their tool's header, and named it as the same delivery gap they had fixed once elsewhere and not generalised. Checked this side for the same shape and found it. `sylpheed-cli screen render --at` told every user that the resting pose "is wrong twice over" and to "Prefer `--settle`". That recommendation was never measured. What the corpus actually records: scored against a live capture of the JP title, settle gives RMSE 40.210 and rest 41.690 -- a margin of 1.48 against that instrument's own noise floor of 1.2, which is not decisive -- and --settle has its own failure mode, 25.5 % of elements mid-ramp at their screen's settle instant. So neither is established as better, and the interface has been telling people otherwise while the hedge lived only in docs/re/. Corrected in the help text itself, on both flags, with the numbers rather than a softer adjective. Verified by artifact: the tool's --help output is quoted in the commit's own test, not merely recompiled. METHOD: hedging in the write-up does not protect the claim you ship in the tool. Docs are where a claim is reasoned; the tool is where it is believed. Read your own --help as if a stranger wrote it and check every confident sentence against what the corpus establishes. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01Wuu56cE8vJGTBtn1ppsk8v --- crates/sylpheed-cli/src/main.rs | 19 +++++++++++++------ docs/re/METHOD.md | 17 +++++++++++++++++ 2 files changed, 30 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) diff --git a/crates/sylpheed-cli/src/main.rs b/crates/sylpheed-cli/src/main.rs index d153dff0..57e639e2 100644 --- a/crates/sylpheed-cli/src/main.rs +++ b/crates/sylpheed-cli/src/main.rs @@ -197,18 +197,25 @@ enum ScreenCommands { all: bool, /// Pose every element at this KEYFRAME TIME instead of at its resting /// pose (60 units = 1 second). The resting pose is each element's last - /// *hold* keyframe, picked independently of every other element — so it - /// is not the screen at any one moment, and it is wrong twice over: it - /// omits anything still moving (the title's light sweeps hold off the - /// right edge), and it freezes a transient at its PEAK (the title's five - /// two-frame flashes burn forever). Prefer `--settle`. + /// *hold* keyframe, picked independently of every other element, so it is + /// not the screen at any one moment: it omits anything still moving (the + /// title's light sweeps hold off the right edge) and freezes a transient + /// at its PEAK (the title's five two-frame flashes burn forever). + /// ⚠️ This help used to end "Prefer `--settle`". That is WITHDRAWN and was + /// never measured: scored against a live capture of the JP title, settle + /// gives RMSE 40.210 and rest 41.690 — a margin of 1.48 against that + /// instrument's own noise floor of 1.2, which is NOT decisive. `--settle` + /// also has its own failure mode (25.5 % of elements are mid-ramp at their + /// screen's settle instant). Neither is established as better; pick by what + /// you are measuring. See `docs/re/structures/ui-resting-pose.md`. #[arg(long, conflicts_with = "settle")] at: Option, /// Pose every element at the instant the screen is SETTLED, derived from /// the disc: the midpoint of the longest interval containing no keyframe /// of any element. Prints the window it used, whose width is how much the /// midpoint is worth — a narrow one means the bundle never settles (42 % - /// of them, mostly `loop*` fragments). See + /// of them, mostly `loop*` fragments). ⚠️ NOT established as better than the + /// resting pose — see the note on `--at`. See /// `docs/re/structures/ui-settle-time.md`. #[arg(long)] settle: bool, diff --git a/docs/re/METHOD.md b/docs/re/METHOD.md index f05aa972..758c1b13 100644 --- a/docs/re/METHOD.md +++ b/docs/re/METHOD.md @@ -435,6 +435,23 @@ agent's loop prompt, i.e. nowhere durable. See [`README.md`](README.md) for the `palogo_eff0.prm` at `0xff000000` — full-screen **opaque black**, drawn from t=0 and showing nothing. Drawn is not visible. +* **Hedging in the write-up does not protect the claim you ship in the TOOL.** + `sylpheed-port` recorded a predicate as "sufficient as observed, not proven + necessary" in `DECISIONS.md` and simultaneously stated the unhedged version in + their tool's header, where it was read as fact — the second time they had made + that exact split, four iterations after fixing it once in another place. + ⚠️ **Checked on this side and found the same thing**: `sylpheed-cli screen + render --at` told every user *"it is wrong twice over … Prefer `--settle`"*, + while the corpus records settle-vs-rest as **undecided** — 40.210 against 41.690 + on a live capture, a margin of 1.48 against that instrument's own 1.2 noise + floor, and `--settle` carrying its own failure mode (25.5 % of elements mid-ramp + at the settle instant). A recommendation nobody had measured, shipped in the + interface, hedged only in `docs/re/`. Corrected in the help text itself. + **The audit is cheap and worth repeating: read your tool's own `--help` as if a + stranger wrote it, and check every confident sentence against what the corpus + actually establishes.** Docs are where a claim is *reasoned*; the tool is where + it is *believed*. + ## Runtime / emulator * **Look at the PNG** — and check its dimensions.