`cargo fmt --all -- --check` has failed on every run in this repository's
history, identically on `main` and on every branch. This is #12.
Mechanical: `cargo fmt --all`, nothing else. 154 files, all `.rs`, no other
extension touched. `cargo check --workspace` exits 0 afterwards, so nothing
changed semantically.
ON THE ORDERING, WHICH WAS THE REAL QUESTION.
HANDOFF-2026-09-06 section 7 warns this is the expensive fix: a whole-tree
reformat before #7 and #8 return "would put a conflict in every file of 861
commits and make the reviews those items exist to enable unreadable".
That is measurably too pessimistic, and it had been reasoned rather than
tested. Measured here by three-way merging a rustfmt'd `main` against both
unmerged branches, file by file:
file/branch pairs tested 32
merges CLEAN 28
merges CONFLICTING 4 (8 conflict hunks total)
sylpheed-cli/src/main.rs 1 hunk
sylpheed-export/src/check.rs 1
sylpheed-export/src/screen.rs 4
sylpheed-export/src/video.rs 2
All four are against `auto/frame-blend-draw-path` only;
`auto/port-p6-audio` does not conflict anywhere. The earlier framing --
154 dirty files, 133 that cannot collide, 21 that can, the collision set
carrying 147 of 774 hunks (19%) -- reproduces exactly. What it did not say
is that most of the 21 still merge cleanly, because rustfmt's edits and the
branches' edits rarely land on the same lines.
So the cost of sweeping now is 4 files and 8 hunks for one branch, against
a check that is otherwise red forever. Deliberately NOT folded into the
WASM PR: 154 reformatted files would make that one unreviewable.
Closes#12
The model's sharpest prediction, tested with its control. The draw log
says that on the developer splash the _eff glows are drawn on frames
94-115 and the logos on 116-211, so at the moment the reference capture
was taken EVERY glow is already finished -- including the two that have
plateaus and which rest_plateau therefore renders visible. Suppressing
them should help on the splashes and hurt where a screen genuinely
settles.
publisher splash +0.9604 -> +0.9982 +0.0377
developer splash +0.9659 -> +0.9980 +0.0321
title (control) +0.9500 -> +0.9480 -0.0020
main menu(control) +0.9460 -> +0.8544 -0.0916
EXTRAS (control) +0.9440 -> +0.8370 -0.1070
Both splashes jump to about 0.998; all three persistent screens get
worse. The control is what makes this a finding rather than a
coincidence: the same edit helps exactly where the model says it should
and hurts exactly where it says it should not.
So rest_plateau is not over-drawing in general -- it over-draws on
TRANSIENT screens. A plateau mid-animation means the element is held at
that point in the timeline, not that it is on screen once the screen has
settled. Where a screen settles, the held pose IS the settled pose and
the rule is measurably right.
And that answers the question left open several iterations ago -- what
"rest" means for a transient element. It does not mean anything: the
splashes never rest. A static composite of them can match a chosen frame,
and about 0.998 is what these captures' frame is worth, but the format
does not answer a question the screen never poses.
For the port: play the timeline for the two splashes, which the settled
keyframe timing now supports, and composite statically for title, main
menu and EXTRAS.
METHOD: an edit that improves one set of cases is only interesting once
you have shown it damages the cases where it should.
Two corrections from one experiment.
A keyframe group is entry -> hold -> exit, and the exit ends invisible:
on the five port screens the final keyframe is invisible for 21/24
(title), 8/16 (main menu), 12/18 (EXTRAS), 2/3 and 6/7 (splashes). So the
screen as seen is the HOLD, which is why rest_plateau is the right
primary rule and why "rest = last keyframe" would empty every screen.
That suggested a fix: an element with no hold has no representative pose,
so draw nothing rather than guess an endpoint. Tested through compose's
visible mask and correlated against the live captures:
title +0.9500 -> +0.6839 -0.2661
main menu +0.9460 -> +0.9037 -0.0423
EXTRAS +0.9440 -> +0.9094 -0.0346
Refuted on all three, and the reason invalidates a number I published. An
element with a SINGLE keyframe has no adjacent pair, so the plateau test
marks it plateau-less -- but its one pose is unambiguously its rest.
Suppressing those removes backgrounds and full-screen layers, which is
the title's -0.27.
no plateau (as published) 3 807 (24.57 %)
... single-keyframe 1 502 trivially at rest, not a guess
genuinely ambiguous 2 305 (14.88 %)
So rest() guesses for 2 305 elements, not 3 807 -- the figure I gave the
port overstated the defect by 65%. Corrected in HANDOFF and the page.
METHOD: a predicate over adjacent PAIRS silently misclassifies a
one-element list; and acting on a claim is a better test of it than
re-reading it -- this flaw survived a census, a write-up and a handoff
row, and died the moment the rule was used to change a rendering.
