Skip to content

ARG-PROFILE.adoc

Latest commit

 

History

History
220 lines (169 loc) · 5.91 KB

ARG-PROFILE.adoc

File metadata and controls

220 lines (169 loc) · 5.91 KB
Raw

ARG-PROFILE — Ephapax

Table of Contents
Field Value

Language

Ephapax (dyadic: ephapax-linear + ephapax-affine sublanguages)

Repository

https://github.com/hyperpolymath/ephapax

Current ARG Grade

E (bare minimum: it qualifies as a language, runs core fragment, nobody outside maintainer uses it)

Assessed

2026-05-28

Assessor

Jonathan D.A. Jewell <j.d.a.jewell@open.ac.uk>

ARG Spec Version

1.0

FRG Profile

spec/FRG-PROFILE.adoc

TRG Profile

spec/TRG-PROFILE.adoc (TBD)

About this profile

Ephapax is a research language targeting WebAssembly memory safety via dyadic linear/affine discipline. It is internally usable but has no external adoption. ARG = E (bare minimum), supported by a robust mathematical research narrative (FRG = D, headed for C) but lacking adoption surfaces.

ARG = E. The full chain of axes:

  • ARG: E

  • TRG: TBD (likely D)

  • FRG: D (see spec/FRG-PROFILE.adoc)

  • CRG: TBD (worst-of any released component)

  • RSR: Compliant at TRG-D level

Cross-axis rule: ARG ≤ TRG holds.

Grade rationale (evidence for E)

Criterion Met? Evidence

D1 — Landing page / README

YES

README.adoc (top-level, comprehensive; includes disambiguation from AffineScript per cross-repo discipline)

D2 — Elevator pitch

YES

README §1 "Once for all" — dyadic substructural discipline for WebAssembly memory safety

D3 — Provenance

YES

Maintainer = Jonathan D.A. Jewell; project start 2025; current version pre-alpha

TRG ≥ E for front-end (F1-F4, F6-F7)

YES (assumed)

Rust crate with parser, AST, basic diagnostics

TRG ≥ E for one back-end (B1, B2, B6)

PARTIAL

Typed-wasm target wired; codegen partial

TRG ≥ E for stdlib (T8)

NO

Stdlib minimal

RSR-compliant at TRG-E

YES

SPDX headers, CODE_OF_CONDUCT, CONTRIBUTING, recent admin-merge sweep complete

O1 — 5-minute hello-world

NO

Demo path exists but not "clean install in 5 min" tested

O2 — Tutorial covering distinctive features

NO

Dyadic-modality discipline tutorial absent

O3 — Playground

NO

O4 — Cookbook in ≥ 2 substantive domains

NO

R1 — Reference manual

NO

R2 — Stdlib reference

NO

R3 — Formal grammar

YES (via formalisation)

formal/Syntax.v (informally also documented in README)

R4 — Operational semantics

YES (via formalisation)

formal/Semantics_L1.v; this is genuinely strong for ARG-E

R5 — Stable error-code index

NO

Community C1-C5

PARTIAL

GitHub Issues active; CONTRIBUTING present; CoC present; no external venue; ADR/RFC process implicit (PRESERVATION-DESIGN.md is the canonical decision document, but not formalised as RFC)

Distribution Δ1-Δ5

MOSTLY NO

Tagged releases via git; no registry; no versioning policy document; no SECURITY.md disclosure path documented

Education E1-E4

NO

Ecosystem X1-X4

NO

Founder is sole maintainer

Diversity metrics

NO (E-permissive)

VeriSimDB attestation

NO (E-permissive; required from C)

Language-specific tightening

For Ephapax, the following ARG tightening applies:

  • Grade C tightening: MUST have at least one external tutorial in the dyadic-modality discipline written by someone other than the maintainer.

  • Grade B tightening: MUST have at least 3 external users successfully writing programs in the ephapax-linear sublanguage (the strict core) — not just ephapax-affine.

  • Grade A tightening: The four-layer redesign (L1 regions / L2 modality / L3 echo / L4 dyadic) MUST be presented externally at a type-theory venue with materials made publicly available.

What is NOT yet met (honest gaps)

  • No onboarding surface (no tutorial, no playground, no cookbook).

  • No reference manual or stdlib reference.

  • No external users.

  • No public discussion venue.

  • No registry presence.

  • No education materials.

  • The strong FRG/formalisation work has not translated into ARG surfaces — adoption needs different artefacts than the formalisation produces.

Path to next grade (D — toy-project usable)

  • TRG estate-wide at D.

  • Author 3 cookbook examples ≥ 100 LoC each in the ephapax-linear sublanguage.

  • Write 5-minute hello-world tutorial.

  • Stand up CI for example programs.

  • Tag signed release artefact.

  • Recruit 2+ distinct external program authors.

Realistic timeline estimate: 3-6 months — onboarding surface is the long pole. The formalisation work is not what gates ARG-D.

Path to grade beyond that (C — alpha gate)

  • Stand up browser playground (single-page-app with WASM execution).

  • Operational/denotational semantics document at R4 (the PRESERVATION-DESIGN.md is the seed but needs a non-prover-reader presentation).

  • Stable error-code index.

  • RFC process activated.

  • Wire VeriSimDB ingestion of ARG/FRG attestations.

  • 10 dogfood users meeting diversity-metrics.

  • 2 substantive domains, ≥ 3 cookbook examples each.

Demotion risk

  • Lowest: README and adoption claims drift such that D1/D2 no longer ground — drops to X.

  • Medium: Maintainer absence past 6 months without delegation signal — risks F.

  • Catastrophic: Public announcement that ephapax is superseded without preserving evacuation path — drops to F.

Iteration history

Date Grade Notes

2026-05-28

E

Initial ARG assessment. Strong FRG narrative, minimal adoption surface.

Review cycle

  • Routine: Reassess on every release cycle (per ARG §6).

  • Immediate: Reassess within 7 days of any demotion trigger.

Footer

This profile is itself a VCL-total proposition. Its content is `DECLARE’d to VeriSimDB on each commit (once ingestion wired).