1 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
c897526e47 Following a pointer was never a type question; it was a permission question
(Ptr Enemy) already says Enemy, at compile time, in the walk. What the renderer
lacked was any way to know whether the storage at the far end is still there —
and an allocation registry is exactly a record of which addresses it is still
true to read. So the inspector follows a live one and renders the pointee by the
same walk as anything else, and names what died at a dead one.

println does not, and the split is not squeamishness: spec-memory.md fixes what
a printed Ptr prints, a printed line belongs to the program and has to read the
same in a release build, and a release build has no registry to ask. The two
callers already differ in an emitter record; they differ in one more.

No address appears in the text. An address is not stable across two runs, so
printing one would make a rendering depend on where the heap landed — the rule
Render already follows for an allocator. What a reader wants from a dangling
pointer is what died.

registry.flan is one program read twice: a dev build answers for an address at
the heap, arena and pool tiers, and a release build answers 0 to all of it. The
arena row is the free-all Valgrind cannot see — this does not make memcheck
report it, it makes the same read answerable.
2026-09-13 09:17:47 +07:00