You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Close M11 from current real-world evidence without turning reference-output parity into an open-ended product objective, then hand off to the tooling-first roadmap defined by #88.
Current reality
M11 began as an evidence-first expansion of Wright's real-world .opy compatibility corpus. That evidence has now driven several bounded corrections:
The architecture/product interpretation has also changed materially. #88 is now the authoritative rebaseline task: Wright is tooling-first, owns compiler-grade semantic frontends as enabling infrastructure, and targets observable semantics rather than compiler-output identity.
M11 must not create implementation work from a raw reference-output difference alone.
A newly discovered divergence is an M11 blocker only when evidence shows at least one of the following:
an observable semantic difference on the declared supported surface;
invalid Workshop syntax or failure of Wright's declared Workshop parse/emit round-trip contract;
a source identity, diagnostics, analysis, agent/source-edit, or other tooling correctness defect;
violation of another explicitly documented compatibility contract.
Presentation-only or upstream-canonical spelling differences remain useful N-level evidence, but they are not automatically product-critical work. Semantic compatibility is the governing criterion.
Final gate
M11 may close after all of the following are true:
The historical compiler-output work is not retroactively erased; its priority is simply interpreted under the new semantic-compatibility contract.
Evidence refreshed
Real-world gap inventory/support matrices reflect the current implementation, including settings support and the remaining explicitly deferred source constructs.
Supported, deferred, reference-limited, and inconclusive cases remain distinguishable.
Repository verification
Current main CI is green with required jobs actually executed.
Acceptance uses current code/tests/reports, not issue closure or implementation-agent self-report alone.
Expected gate result
accept-with-limitations is valid and expected if the declared supported surface is correct while corpus-evidenced language constructs remain explicitly deferred.
M11 does not need to make every real-world OPY project compile before closing. It must leave a trustworthy corpus-defined statement of what Wright can currently compile and analyze, which gaps block those projects, and which gaps are intentionally deferred.
Non-goals
Broad implementation of deferred OPY syntax (\\, ++/--, dict literals, triple-quoted strings, membership operators, comprehensions, bytes literals, etc.) merely because it exists in the expanded corpus.
Do not mechanically continue OPY surface expansion between M11 and M12. A future OPY compatibility item should be created only when real corpus/tooling evidence shows that it blocks meaningful compilation, analysis, source tooling, or an explicit semantic compatibility claim.
Goal
Close M11 from current real-world evidence without turning reference-output parity into an open-ended product objective, then hand off to the tooling-first roadmap defined by #88.
Current reality
M11 began as an evidence-first expansion of Wright's real-world
.opycompatibility corpus. That evidence has now driven several bounded corrections:.opysurface documentationmain, but final independent QA acceptance is still requiredThe architecture/product interpretation has also changed materially. #88 is now the authoritative rebaseline task: Wright is tooling-first, owns compiler-grade semantic frontends as enabling infrastructure, and targets observable semantics rather than compiler-output identity.
M11 compatibility rule after #88
M11 must not create implementation work from a raw reference-output difference alone.
A newly discovered divergence is an M11 blocker only when evidence shows at least one of the following:
Presentation-only or upstream-canonical spelling differences remain useful N-level evidence, but they are not automatically product-critical work. Semantic compatibility is the governing criterion.
Final gate
M11 may close after all of the following are true:
[M11 correctness] Close supported-surface Workshop emission and round-trip divergences #87 independent verification
Architecture contract reconciled
Evidence refreshed
Repository verification
mainCI is green with required jobs actually executed.Expected gate result
accept-with-limitationsis valid and expected if the declared supported surface is correct while corpus-evidenced language constructs remain explicitly deferred.M11 does not need to make every real-world OPY project compile before closing. It must leave a trustworthy corpus-defined statement of what Wright can currently compile and analyze, which gaps block those projects, and which gaps are intentionally deferred.
Non-goals
\\,++/--, dict literals, triple-quoted strings, membership operators, comprehensions, bytes literals, etc.) merely because it exists in the expanded corpus.Roadmap handoff
After M11 closes:
Do not mechanically continue OPY surface expansion between M11 and M12. A future OPY compatibility item should be created only when real corpus/tooling evidence shows that it blocks meaningful compilation, analysis, source tooling, or an explicit semantic compatibility claim.