Fr0zka 588f9e0294 docs: Sol investigation -- refutes my boundary-tile hypothesis, corrects my false accusation
Sol High investigated with Luna xHigh sub-agents; two approaches built in
isolated worktrees, main tree untouched.

Two corrections to my own assertions:

1. "One un-ticked neighbouring strate kills boundary tiles" is WRONG.
   UsesOperatorStackForChunk depends only on ChunkCoord.Z, and ClassifyTile's
   earlier Z loop already required the predicate for every sampled cave Z within
   one slot -- so the later XYZ sweep is redundant, not over-strict. Removing it
   unlocks nothing; boundary tiles still fail the one-slot/type/params guards,
   correctly.

2. I falsely wrote that VF-03's fixture citation was fabricated. It exists
   (VoxelForgeTestFixture.h ~134/146, explicit about CP_UseOpStack
   contamination). I had read only the 30-line header and asserted a negative
   from a partial read. Header corrected. VF-03's core claim is now CONFIRMED:
   GetDensityAt keys thread_local CP_* by (ChunkCoord, LayoutVersion) with no
   world identity, and every manager's version starts equal.

Also: the Cave Bail Not Op Stack counter I specced is ambiguous -- it fires
before the different-slot attribution, so it cannot distinguish "flown slot
un-ticked" from "boundary tile met an un-ticked slot first". My 80% reading was
over-confident. Same defect I fixed for TilesSkippedAllSolid, reintroduced one
layer down.

Approach A recommended (explicit opt-in + six-box LRU) over B (code-enforced
cutover): the code does not justify weakening ClassifyTile, and B would delete
the flag, which is the only same-route A/B lever available to prove the
refactor. Narrow A's warning to cave archetypes before adopting.

Nothing built. Worktrees left in place for review.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-08-16 23:22:06 +02:00
S
Description
No description provided
6.6 MiB
Languages
C++ 97.6%
C 2.3%
C# 0.1%