Posts pulled in to (-4.5,5.5)/(4.0,6.0) with p3 at (0,7), and dress() now swaps
Lane E's house_yardside and both gum trees over the graybox, adopting their baked
anchors rather than my constants (decision 6). E's fascia sits at x=-3..3, not my
guessed -5..5 — narrowing the house span by 4 m is a real part of why small quads
exist at all.
Every anchor now carries E's rating_hint: fascia 0.35 with collateral "gutter"
(they encoded DESIGN.md's "the fascia board is a lie" straight into the asset),
tree branches descending 1.0/0.88/0.76 from fork to thin limb. branch_anchor_01
keeps the t1/t2 ids so nothing referencing them breaks; the rest are added.
The yard went from 7 anchors offering nothing under 110 m² to 11 offering 34
quads in the 18-45 m² band, 8 of which shade a quarter of the bed or more.
Measured through the same storm_02: the big house-to-post span loses its
carabiner at t=3.7 s and cascades to 2/4, while a 37.7 m² tree-to-post rig at
0.85 tension survives all 90 s intact and shades 58% of the bed. That is
DESIGN.md's thesis finally standing up in the yard rather than in a doc.
Lane B's "cascade at t=0.4 s from pre-tension alone" is gone: calm peaks are now
634 N (big) and 200 N (small) against a 1200 N carabiner, and no rig breaks
before the storm starts.
Two asserts pin it, because both halves are easy to lose by accident: at least 3
riggable quads in 18-45 m² must shade the bed, AND full bed coverage must stay
above 45 m² — if a small quad ever covers the whole bed, the rigging puzzle has
no wrong answers left. Selftest 172/0/0.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>
0cabb19dc7