AILang

T

Brummel 338a4cd3fe docs: codify feature-acceptance criterion (LLM-author utility)

Adds DESIGN.md "Feature-acceptance criterion" as a top-level section:
a feature ships only if (1) an LLM author naturally produces code
that uses it, and (2) it measurably improves correctness or removes
redundancy. Aesthetic appeal and human ergonomics do not count.

Mirrored in CLAUDE.md as "Feature acceptance: LLM utility", paired
with the existing "Design rationale != implementation effort". The
two together narrow valid feature rationales to one thing: what the
LLM author gets out of the feature.

Trigger: the typeclass-design conversation around 22a. Rule was
implicit in many past decisions (Decision 1's JSON-over-text choice,
Decision 10's "what LLMs are good at" reasoning) but never stated
as a feature-gate. Codifying it now means future feature proposals
get evaluated against an articulated criterion instead of being
re-derived each time.

Documentation-only; no Rust, schema, or bench changes. Test state
288/0/3 unchanged.

2026-05-09 10:59:28 +02:00

agents

agents: add ailang-bencher — hypothesis-driven memory bench agent

2026-05-08 13:20:26 +02:00

bench

tidy: 21'g — resolve drift after 21'-arc close

2026-05-09 01:40:36 +02:00

crates

runtime: half-retirement of Boehm — flip CLI default to --alloc=rc

2026-05-09 00:14:56 +02:00

docs

docs: codify feature-acceptance criterion (LLM-author utility)