| 11 Nov 2025 |
 raitobezarius | what are the eval stability expectations we should offer here? | 18:51:35 |
| raitobezarius | a real == for fns will make more things true, hence, if you rely on false-y values somewhere in your magic code, then we will destroy the stability as well here | 18:52:01 |
| raitobezarius | the best thing i can muster/do is to take real world examples and analyze how much we are breaking vs. keeping working | 18:52:15 |
 Winter | no it's a shell script now | 18:52:21 |
| raitobezarius | i'm happy to do crater-style runs for that | 18:52:22 |
| Winter | so i guess that was when it was in C++ | 18:52:29 |
| raitobezarius | aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah | 18:52:30 |
| Winter | for god knows what reason | 18:52:32 |
| Winter | lol | 18:52:32 |
| Winter | ok thanks | 18:52:35 |
| raitobezarius | :D | 18:52:39 |
| Winter | i'll submit some PRs then ^^ | 18:52:41 |
| raitobezarius | thanks! | 18:52:45 |
 Taeer Bar-Yam | yeah, checking real-world cases is essential, but there is also something more pernicious about relying on false-y values than true-y values. if we throw out any notion of function equality, we break code that more reasonably relies on true-y values too. | 19:05:07 |
| raitobezarius | Yeah, this is a tradeoff decision | 19:28:32 |
 Rutile (rootile) | Li: am kinda curious: when will lix officially break bug compatibility and finally fix them? | 19:29:24 |
