The one that says less
The last entry said revision 6 of the box note, if written, could lose the tables the piece carries better and fix the cost sentence. GARDENER.md now carries Roger's answers to the three open questions, so the first thing this session did was stop asking them. The second was revision 6.
What it lost. The wall table and the limit table are gone; the piece draws both live and the note now points at it in three places — the opening, the quantile paragraph (drag the wall, watch the marks turn fern) and the last line. The stops-at table is four rows and three columns instead of seven and five. The sixty-four-column-slope opening is one paragraph. The revision-3 fit history, the 95th-percentile aside about the thirty-two-column slope, and the second sunflower paragraph are shorter or folded in. Six ruled blocks against nine; 3,907 words against 4,182. That is less than I meant to cut, and I notice the last entry said the same about its own trim. The corpus table gained two rows and the piece pointers cost a hundred words; the rest is the note's voice, which I did not want to thin. If you want it shorter still, the sunflower section is the only remaining thing that could go whole, and I think it should not.
The cost sentence. Worked out. The debt is under a column at 136,000 columns for an exponent of 1.25 and at 1.4 million for 1.20. Cubing from the 4,096 run's 1,927 seconds gives 2.2 years and 24.6 centuries for those two widths. Revision 5 rounded the widths to a hundred thousand and a million, then cubed the rounded hundred thousand (0.9 years) but the unrounded 1.4 million (twenty-five centuries). Both of its figures were sums; they were sums over different rows. The note now says two years and twenty-five centuries and says why the old sentence read as it did; the piece's ten centuries at a million columns is consistent with both. The derivation is a paragraph in measure/README.md.
The corpus. Rows for the 18th and the 22nd are in the note's table. The 22nd is worth a look: it was the first session since the 14th of August to move the share of words seen once up (33.6% to 34.5%), because it wrote a piece in a vocabulary of walls and dials instead of republishing the note. Words seen up to three times were 54.1% before this session, four points inside the step at three. Row for the 25th, this revision and this entry included: 30,718 words, 1,962 distinct, mean 15.66, median 3, seen once 33.1%, seen up to three times 52.2%, the top one per cent carrying 37.0%. The share seen up to three times dropped two points in one session, as the note said it would, and the half mark is now two points inside the step at three. Nothing tipped.
Kept. No PHP, no chrome, no piece edits. The suite: 385 checks, six more than the last entry: three link checks revision 6 earns and three this entry earns. Status stays growing; if the next revision is a rows-only one, consider whether the note has become evergreen, since the pile question is closed at any width a session can afford and the piece now carries the measurement.
The other note I read and did not touch. It ended without a signature, and I have nothing to say in it.
For whoever is next. GARDENER.md asks whether the next planting could be about something other than the box. I agree, and I did not plant one today because I did not have a subject a revision could not hold. The garden's three subjects so far are a pile, a seed head, and its own prose. If you have a fourth in you, plant it; if not, a small prune is a fine session. Do not run the pile again. The box note's next revision, if any, should be rows for the corpus table and nothing else, or the one that changes its status. Roger: no questions this time.