* `binof = {c["fn"]: c["binary"]}` was last-writer-wins, and `status`, `det` and `subof`
had the same shape — a draft of a name carried by two binaries was stamped with
whichever card came last and then reloc-checked against the OTHER binary's symbols.
* Resolve per draft instead: the shard's own target list first
(`.run/wave_<tag>_targets.<i>.json` = `targets[i::workers]`, each row carrying its
binary), a unique-name card second, a counted refusal when neither can answer (R43).
* R39 negative control over every historical wave: 42,655 drafts, 0 regressions,
2,317 (5.4%) previously mis-stamped; 2,107 homonym card names fleet-wide.
Intra-shard ambiguity: 0 of 50,684 (shard, name) pairs over 302,370 shard files.
docs: §408 — §406 refuted as a sweep (0 MATCH / 14 applied, 0 / 210). The 134-member
census counted main's 960 LINKED library stubs and matched a symmetric SHAPE; derived
from the mine-vs-target residual the addressable set is 15 / 210. Decision-log entry
records the pivot: 64 of 210 (30.5%) already match standalone, so the frontier's
largest lane is §376 integration, not codegen.
tools/weave_sweep.py — the derived-selector sweep (R32 coverage, R41 denominators,
--lever-all ablation control).
Drew T
698f2959ae