`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 corpus recorded that some unit fields the disc leaves defaulted inherit
from a sibling: Size_Y from Size_X, FCSRange from RadarRange, DefencePoint
from AttackVesselPoint. Size_Y was marked the one to trust, on 9/9 support
across 7 independent ships, and it is restated in INDEX.md.
The premise is false. These fields are not defaulted -- they are on disc for
113-114 of 114 unit tables -- and Size_Y DIFFERS from Size_X in 90 of them.
The mechanism, cross-tabulating "legacy reader missed it" against "equal on
disc":
pair seen+differ seen+equal miss+differ miss+equal
Size_Y / Size_X 90 0 0 24
FCSRange / RadarRange 54 0 1 58
DefencePoint / AttackVesselPoint 51 0 1 61
seen+equal is 0 for all three: a value shared with a sibling is ALWAYS
invisible to the string-pool reader, because the pool stores each distinct
string once. And the reader almost never misses a value that differs. So
"the missing value equals the sibling's" was true BY CONSTRUCTION -- the rule
re-derived the very condition that made the field go missing. That is why the
support looked perfect: it could not fail on the cases it was fitted to.
The two miss+differ cells are its real wrong predictions, both named:
UN_e104_ADAN_Carrier DefencePoint is 0.2 (rule says 0.003), and
UN_e011_ADAN_Attacker_B_HF_Wayne FCSRange is 3000.0 (rule says 6000.0).
Retracted in unit-struct-runtime.md (original reasoning kept below the
correction), live-unit-definitions.md and INDEX.md. Pinned by a disc test
that asserts the seen+equal cells stay zero, so the mechanism itself is
guarded, not just the counts. Artifact: examples/sibling_rule_check.rs.
This one was found by my own check after the subagent assigned to it stalled.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01PMRJjbxLqZtsb5Vb7KunPE
