Skip to content

extdeps: model the cited FS BOX V4 data sheet and the V3/V4/V5 FAQ, without over-discharging the leg-programming obligation - #11168

Closed
briansrls wants to merge 12 commits into
mainfrom
session/still-boar-543
Closed

briansrls wants to merge 12 commits into
mainfrom
session/still-boar-543

Conversation

@briansrls

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Auto-opened by session-dashboard for session still-boar-543.
Pushing to session/still-boar-543 advances this PR.

Worker attestation

Before flipping this PR to ready for review, confirm each item:

  • Title describes the change (not the session id or branch).
  • PR body summarises what and why (replace the TODO below).
  • Tests run: name the command (e.g. npm test, cargo test) and the result.
  • If this closes a work item, the body contains a Closes #N directive.
  • No commits on this branch are surprises (no fork/cherry-pick I did not make).
  • No secrets / credentials / large binaries staged.

Summary

TODO: replace this paragraph with one or two sentences naming the change and its motivation. Reviewers read this first.

Test plan

  • TODO: list the commands that ran (or "no tests changed; relied on CI") and the outcome.

Brian Searls and others added 12 commits September 12, 2026 02:48
…ted leg-programming claims.

The two publications are separate authorities; the join keeps QSFP56 and browser disagreements unmerged, and the four per-leg properties stay TranscribedUncited after those documents were read and found not to carry them.

Co-authored-by: Cursor <cursoragent@cursor.com>
…me rows.

Mechanical, connector, battery, SKU and warranty lines, plus the FAQ review window and account trial terms, now have executing witness readers; leg-programming standing stays TranscribedUncited.

Co-authored-by: Cursor <cursoragent@cursor.com>
Co-authored-by: Cursor <cursoragent@cursor.com>
…s join resolves.

The SKU helpers had replaced this fold; form-factor membership is what the QSFP56 join actually asks.

Co-authored-by: Cursor <cursoragent@cursor.com>
…position value.

The module-index skipper does not treat `test` as an item start, so a data row immediately followed by tests was scanned as one value and refused on an unmatched delimiter. The disposition row now follows the tests.

Co-authored-by: Cursor <cursoragent@cursor.com>
…those carriers exist.

28.7 mm, 3.7 V, -10 C and 9 h/3.5 h are micrometres, millivolts, Celsius and minutes. Mass and milliampere-hour stay counts: std.measure has no Gram or AmpereHour.

Co-authored-by: Cursor <cursoragent@cursor.com>
…amed Nats.

Gram is Milli of kilogram; milliampere-hour is Milli of ampere-hour as published charge capacity, so the V4 sheet no longer forks those quantities as bare scalars.

Co-authored-by: Cursor <cursoragent@cursor.com>
Hand-grouping those types next to Ampere drifted the generated mirror; the emitter follows declaration order beside the constructors.

Co-authored-by: Cursor <cursoragent@cursor.com>
Gram and milliampere-hour are the grains the V4 sheet actually stores; floor converters to whole kilograms or ampere-hours would discard 0.2 kg and 0.2 Ah.

Co-authored-by: Cursor <cursoragent@cursor.com>
The robot-check is why there is no third form-factor list; it is not a programming-instruction input, and flooring it into the intervention would mix a coverage note with a hand procedure.

Co-authored-by: Cursor <cursoragent@cursor.com>
…ing or twice.

Firefox membership is one predicate over a browser list; form-factor, BOX Pro field, ordering, HPE, and macOS spelling use the same query rather than a fresh acc || eq recursion each.

Co-authored-by: Cursor <cursoragent@cursor.com>
Milli of that quantity is millicoulomb, not milliampere-hour; ChargeMicro already uses microcoulombs. 3200 mAh is exactly 11520 C.

Co-authored-by: Cursor <cursoragent@cursor.com>
@briansrls
briansrls marked this pull request as ready for review September 12, 2026 09:58
@chatgpt-codex-connector

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot commented Sep 12, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codex Review Summary

This comment shows the latest Codex review activity on this pull request.

Review Status Commit Review trigger
📝 Code Review ✅ Completed 2026-09-12T10:14:34.032002Z 2f5016e Draft marked ready
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review" or "@codex security review".

Codex reacts with 👀 while any review is running, comments if it has suggestions, and reacts with 👍 once all reviews finish with no findings.

@gunbai-bot

gunbai-bot Bot commented Sep 12, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Closing as a duplicate — but the finding in review 64502 is correct and I am acting on it separately.

Why this PR is closed rather than fixed here. This branch is the dashboard's flush of session still-boar-543's worktree at closeout (opened 09:57:21Z, two seconds before that session was archived). Its content already landed as #11131, merged as a0eee4acc. I verified rather than assumed: the three-dot diff proposes the same 8 files, and dag/std/measure.dag at this head is byte-identical to main's. Its merge base is 2090c1b01 with main 34 commits ahead, so there is nothing here to land.

The finding is not closed with it. Review 64502 is right that trial_period: "seven-day" and formal_account_buffer: "24-hour" are durations with a magnitude and a unit hiding in a NonEmptyStr, that std.measure Minute is the carrier, and that the same change uses it correctly one file over (fs_box_v4.dag → minute(count: 540) / minute(count: 210)). Two representations of "a duration FS printed" inside one change is DESIGN §2 deep decomposition, and the witness asserting on the string spelling rather than the quantity is the tell.

The arithmetic checks: 7 × 24 × 60 = 10080, 24 × 60 = 1440.

I am also taking the reviewer's carve-out: box_pro_customization_review: "1-2 working days" stays prose. It is a range over business days, which Minute cannot represent without inventing a calendar semantics, and there is no interval carrier yet.

That defect is on main now, via #11131. It is being fixed forward in its own change rather than by reviving this branch.

— sent from cool-crane-190

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant