Record the MUST-binding measurement: no corpus offers a mechanical join - #6
Merged
Conversation
The planned MUST-clause-to-test binding was measured before building, and the measurement refuted it: the one qualifying RFC's 58 keyword clauses contain zero spec identifiers and zero requirement labels, only 5 carry a code token, and that repository's tests are shell/C infrastructure suites correctful has no runner for. A fuzzy textual join would mint false bindings — the class the doc-comment binding was cut for — so clauses stay honestly in the remainder. The bindable form is named so the path stays open: explicit clause labels (R-007-style) with tests naming the label bind through the existing test-name reconciliation; support lands when a corpus adopts labels. Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_015GeUG1gboWiZSnFyzQghyp
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Doc-only: the planned MUST-clause→test binding increment was measured before building, and the measurement refuted it — zero spec-ids and zero requirement labels across the qualifying corpus's 58 clauses, 5 thin code-token clauses, and no runnable test surface in the RFC-bearing repository. Recording the refutation in the README limitations and the harvester's doc comment keeps the remainder's honesty story accurate ("measured, not neglected") and names the bindable form (explicit clause labels) so the path stays open.
🤖 Generated with Claude Code
https://claude.ai/code/session_015GeUG1gboWiZSnFyzQghyp