Measure Wado's performance or the size of the Wasm it generates, and refresh the benchmark/ and wasm-size/ README files. Use for any benchmarking or size-measurement request, whichever benchmark it names.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Cut the branch down to what the code cannot say: reuse what exists, remove duplication, dead code, and wasted work, turn invariants into asserts, and delete the comments the code already speaks. Run it after answering review feedback too — a fix written to satisfy a reviewer is the least distilled code on the branch.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
実行スコア 未検証
インストール方法を見るインストールする前に、エージェントに与えられる指示の中身を確認できます。
B=$(git merge-base origin/main HEAD)
scripts/changed-sources.sh # the files, one per line
git diff "$B" --stat -- $(scripts/changed-sources.sh)
git diff "$B" -- $(scripts/changed-sources.sh)
Every file that reports, whatever its type, plus any doc it made stale. Whatever
you notice on the way in is in scope too, pre-existing or not. A WEP keeps the
sections docs/AGENTS.md requires.
Generated files are the one exclusion, and the script is what applies it:
.gitattributes marks them linguist-generated, so a new generated path is
excluded the moment it is marked and nothing here lists paths a second time.
A plain git diff buries the branch under them — on a generator change they
outnumber the sources five to one. Read the sources; regenerate the rest.
This is the scope on every run. Distilling again means the whole branch again, never the diff since the last distill: an earlier pass is not a clean bill, and what the code between the two commits made stale is spread across everything the branch touched.
Answering review feedback is one of the times to run it. Such a fix is written to satisfy a reviewer rather than to fit the code, so it arrives with the reviewer's framing in its comments, an explanation of the bug beside the fix, and often a helper the codebase already had.
Distilling keeps what the code does. The only change of behaviour it makes is a bug fix, and a bug fix starts from a failing test.
assert! for what the caller owes and
unreachable! for the arm that cannot happen, and say which caller
establishes it where that is not obvious. A branch that genuinely can happen
is control flow and stays; the ban is on inventing an answer for a case you
have not shown to be reachable.Apply AGENTS.md § General Rules to every comment in scope. A comment saying what the code does is a rename or a decomposition to make. A comment stating an invariant is an assert to write. A comment that carries no information is deleted outright.
Apply the markdown skill to every Markdown file in scope.
In an instruction file (an AGENTS.md, a skill), also cut a rule that is
trivially deduced from a principle the file or the root AGENTS.md already
states: detail dilutes the rules that matter. Keep one that fences a principle
against a reading broader than intended.
Cut words, never a fact. A measurement, a name to grep for (a pass, a type, a function), a condition or an exception, and the bug behind a rule are facts, not detail. Before removing a passage, grep for what links to it. Keep a code block runnable on its own: every name it uses defined in it, every command and path real. Run only a block without side effects to check it.
A copy does not share a name, so grepping the name finds nothing.
For every predicate or helper the branch adds or moves, grep the tree for what its body looks like rather than what it is called. Two or three tokens of the body carry further than a signature.
Finish the sweep in the same pass. Fixing the sites a reviewer named and calling it a class fix leaves the rest standing, and the next review returns them one at a time.
Three passes over that scope; surviving one is no exemption. Stop when a pass finds nothing to cut.
mise run format
Code edits: run the tests covering what you touched (mise run test,
mise run test-wado). Comment, doc, and Markdown edits alone need only
mise run check, which holds the specification's examples to their fixtures.
まだレビューはありません。使ってみた感想をお寄せください。
ログインなしで書き込めます。使ってみた感想、質問、動かなかった環境などを気軽にどうぞ。
まだコメントはありません。最初のコメントを書いてみませんか。
Measure Wado's performance or the size of the Wasm it generates, and refresh the benchmark/ and wasm-size/ README files. Use for any benchmarking or size-measurement request, whichever benchmark it names.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Measure how long GitHub Actions jobs and steps took across past runs, and find the pull request that made CI slower. Use for any question about CI duration, a slow job, or when CI got slow.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
How to answer code review feedback — a human reviewer, CodeRabbit, or any review bot. Verify the findings, report the classes they are instances of to the user before fixing, then fix the class rather than the sites named. Put design decisions to the user, then run /distill. Invoke when responding to review comments on a pull request, or to the findings of a /code-review run.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Investigate and improve code coverage for the wado-compiler crate. Use for any question about what the tests do and do not reach, dead code included.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Review the branch with /code-review at high, then answer the findings with /code-review-response.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Use rust-gdb to inspect variables and step through code without modifying it. Prefer it over print debugging for any investigation into what the compiler is actually doing (lldb is unavailable on Claude Code Web).
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。