I think a big issue we keep running into is this idea that language is ambiguous but code is somehow not. Code is merely an extension of language, a DSL if you will. Implicit assumptions become baked into the logic of the code and those assumptions can be wrong.

Look at the guy whose AI changed the entire rules of the game to avoid breaking the law. Was that really the desired outcome? And the more you try to lock it down the more language you add and therefore more ambiguity and assumptions.

You cannot solve the problems of language with more language.

Exactly. If humans were good at writing proofs, they'd just write the code.

There is just a lot of private data and even proprietary code (like SupGen) in the commit story, so I just squashed it. I didn't think that'd be an issue? Why?

Old repo can be accessed here https://github.com/HigherOrderCO/Bend1 . I guess we could have it as a branch on the bend2 repo

To give you a concrete reason why you should care to preserve the exact history and why it’s a matter of trust: in your paper, you reported the pinned SHA head of the benchmarks you ran. When you destroy the history you make it hard for people to duplicate your benchmark results. Why report the SHA if you are going to destroy the history?

https://github.com/bendlang/bend/blob/80b6539bc57621633ca68e...

Erm, because it looks weird? Do you know any other language projects that squash their repos down to 1 commit? That's a destruction of trust, which is kinda important if you want people to build on your language.

Virtually everyone has AI slop in the commit history. No one's judging you for the commit history. Everyone's code smells, but the fact that you're ashamed/hiding it is... odd.

> there's a lot of personal info

You should know that force pushing doesn't hide actual commits; it's trivially viewable if someone just iterates https://github.com/bendlang/bend/activity?ref=main e.g. https://github.com/bendlang/bend/commit/d184863 so like... why bother.