fix(reply): one spelling for the status vocabulary the two surfaces share

coilyco-ops commented

2026-08-13 13:30:43 +00:00

Member

447 fixed two reaction glyphs that had drifted from Kai's approved set while
their test passed, because it asserted only that the four differed from each
other. The disclosure footer had the same precondition: I wrote it with its own
literals, so the cross existed twice with nothing relating the two.

The footer now reads the reaction constants for the hammer and the cross rather
than copying them. Drifting the surfaces apart requires editing the thing that
says what the symbol means, which is what 447 shows is worth having.

The tick and the mailbox have no reaction counterpart, so they stay defined in
the footer, as escapes for the same reason 447 escaped the reactions. That is
not special-casing the cross: every glyph in the file is now either a reference
or an escape, and none is a bare literal.

The test asserts the shared pair agree, pins the two that are the footer's own,
and keeps the all-distinct property the reaction test had rather than replacing
it. Distinctness was worth checking; it was not the property that was violated.

Mutation checked, and the first attempt was not. Substituting a perl escape
produced invalid Go, so the build failed rather than the test, which is a red
result from the wrong cause and proves nothing. The valid substitution fails the
assertion naming both spellings.

No member-visible glyph changes.

closes #448

Co-authored-by: Kai Siren coilysiren@gmail.com
Co-authored-by: Claude noreply@anthropic.com

447 fixed two reaction glyphs that had drifted from Kai's approved set while their test passed, because it asserted only that the four differed from each other. The disclosure footer had the same precondition: I wrote it with its own literals, so the cross existed twice with nothing relating the two. The footer now reads the reaction constants for the hammer and the cross rather than copying them. Drifting the surfaces apart requires editing the thing that says what the symbol means, which is what 447 shows is worth having. The tick and the mailbox have no reaction counterpart, so they stay defined in the footer, as escapes for the same reason 447 escaped the reactions. That is not special-casing the cross: every glyph in the file is now either a reference or an escape, and none is a bare literal. The test asserts the shared pair agree, pins the two that are the footer's own, and keeps the all-distinct property the reaction test had rather than replacing it. Distinctness was worth checking; it was not the property that was violated. Mutation checked, and the first attempt was not. Substituting a perl escape produced invalid Go, so the build failed rather than the test, which is a red result from the wrong cause and proves nothing. The valid substitution fails the assertion naming both spellings. No member-visible glyph changes. closes #448 Co-authored-by: Kai Siren <coilysiren@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>

coilyco-ops added 1 commit

2026-08-13 13:30:44 +00:00

fix(reply): one spelling for the status vocabulary the two surfaces share

ci / image-build (pull_request) Successful in 24s

Details

ci / test (pull_request) Successful in 42s

Details

ci / publish-echo-image (pull_request) Has been skipped

Details

ci / publish-observed (pull_request) Has been skipped

Details

e5c91631d4

447 fixed two reaction glyphs that had drifted from Kai's approved set while
their test passed, because it asserted only that the four differed from each
other. The disclosure footer had the same precondition: I wrote it with its own
literals, so the cross existed twice with nothing relating the two.

The footer now reads the reaction constants for the hammer and the cross rather
than copying them. Drifting the surfaces apart requires editing the thing that
says what the symbol means, which is what 447 shows is worth having.

The tick and the mailbox have no reaction counterpart, so they stay defined in
the footer, as escapes for the same reason 447 escaped the reactions. That is
not special-casing the cross: every glyph in the file is now either a reference
or an escape, and none is a bare literal.

The test asserts the shared pair agree, pins the two that are the footer's own,
and keeps the all-distinct property the reaction test had rather than replacing
it. Distinctness was worth checking; it was not the property that was violated.

Mutation checked, and the first attempt was not. Substituting a perl escape
produced invalid Go, so the build failed rather than the test, which is a red
result from the wrong cause and proves nothing. The valid substitution fails the
assertion naming both spellings.

No member-visible glyph changes.

closes #448

Co-authored-by: Kai Siren <coilysiren@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>

coilyco-ops requested review from coilysiren

2026-08-13 13:30:44 +00:00

coilyco-ops merged commit 38e12538a0 into main

2026-08-13 13:35:11 +00:00

coilyco-ops referenced this pull request from a commit

2026-08-13 13:35:13 +00:00

Merge pull request 'fix(reply): one spelling for the status vocabulary the two surfaces share' (#450) from fix/one-spelling-for-the-status-vocabulary into main

coilyco-ops referenced this pull request

2026-08-13 13:41:39 +00:00

feat(tracker): the harness labels every issue it files #454

Rows
Columns

fix(reply): one spelling for the status vocabulary the two surfaces share #450