Skip to content

Defend the number the README publishes, and stop quoting the best of three - #163

Merged
tonytonycoder11 merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
fix/a-number-nothing-defends
Sep 14, 2026
Merged

tonytonycoder11 merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
fix/a-number-nothing-defends

Conversation

@tonytonycoder11

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Found while checking whether the repository's About description was still true. Two of its numbers were
not, and one of them was a claim nothing was defending.

A measurement with no assertion under it

The native-image job measures the time from process start to first search, prints it, and passes
whatever it says. The only failure path is a missing value. So a dependency that began doing real work at
startup could have taken it to 300 ms and no build would have gone red, while the README's comparison
table kept saying 37 ms.

The paragraph under that table claims the job stops the sentence quietly becoming false. That was true of
the reflection claim, because --no-fallback fails the build, and it was not true of the time.

It now fails over a 75 ms ceiling. Loose deliberately: across recent runs on main the measurement lands
between 29 and 42 ms on a shared runner, so the ceiling leaves room for a noisy neighbour and still
catches the thing worth catching, which is a regression that doubles it.

37 ms was not the number any more

The last four runs on main measured 31, 29, 42 and 34. A single frozen figure for a measurement that
moves was going stale by design, and it had. The table now states the bound the build defends and says
where the measurement usually lands, which is a claim that stays true without anyone editing it.

The CLI is not 5.7 MB

That is the macOS arm64 binary. Windows is 6.8 MB and Linux x64 is 14.1 MB.

Quoting the smallest of three without saying so is bad anywhere, and the paragraph it sits in is the one
added in 2.3.0 to stop a reader concluding from an ARM target, a fast cold start and a small binary that
Kdrant runs as the vector database. Picking a winner inside that argument undercuts it.

Also updated, outside this PR

The repository About description carried both numbers and did not mention the MCP server, while the repo
topics already carry mcp and model-context-protocol. It now reads:

Coroutine-first Kotlin client for Qdrant, plus an MCP server for it that is a static binary instead of a
Python runtime. Suspend APIs, a typed filter DSL, REST or opt-in gRPC behind one seam, nine platforms
including iOS and Windows, and a GraalVM native image with no reflection config to write.

The two fragile numbers are gone from it. They live in the README, next to the job that produces them and
now defends them, which is where a number that changes on every push belongs.

…three

The native-image job measured the time to first search, printed it, and passed
whatever it said. Only a missing value failed it. So a dependency that started doing
real work at startup could have taken it to 300 ms with no build going red, while the
comparison table kept claiming 37 ms, and the paragraph under that table claimed the
job would stop the sentence quietly becoming false. That was true of the reflection
claim and not of the time.

It now fails over a 75 ms ceiling. Loose on purpose: the measurement lands between 29
and 42 ms across recent runs on a shared runner, so the ceiling has room for a noisy
neighbour and still catches a regression that doubles it.

37 ms was also no longer the number. The last four runs on main measured 31, 29, 42
and 34, so a single frozen figure in a table was going stale by design. The table now
states the bound the build defends and says where the measurement usually lands.

And the CLI is not 5.7 MB. That is the macOS arm64 binary; Windows is 6.8 and Linux
x64 is 14.1. Quoting the smallest of three without saying so is picking a winner in
the paragraph that exists to stop a reader drawing the wrong conclusion from exactly
these three facts.
@tonytonycoder11
tonytonycoder11 requested a review from a team as a code owner September 14, 2026 09:56
@trueup-by-nacode-studios

Copy link
Copy Markdown

This pull request adds no capability the code did not already have.

2 files read · 1051 ms · against 431702e · engine 1.4.1

@tonytonycoder11
tonytonycoder11 merged commit b5112d0 into main Sep 14, 2026
14 checks passed
@tonytonycoder11
tonytonycoder11 deleted the fix/a-number-nothing-defends branch September 14, 2026 10:08
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant