smokeeaasd

Yes.

Any circular reference to an ancestor on the stack turns into the same CIRCULAR byte, so two structures with identical shape but whose cycle points to different ancestors in the nesting chain produce the same hash.

This will be fixed in the next patch, which will encode the distance to the referenced ancestor instead of a flat marker, so self-reference and reference-to-parent will stop colliding. Note that every existing hash will change as a result, breaking any persisted hash (acceptable since this is pre-1.0). I could also bump the marker byte so new hashes can't accidentally collide with old ones, though the old ones remain broken either way.

The internally-reported benchmarks (Frontier-Bench, AutomationBench) and the customer quotes (Cursor, Devin, Lovable) all have a commercial stake in the outcome

worth waiting for independent evals before drawing conclusions.

I think one of the most interesting takeaways is that model selection may matter more than model size.

The industry has largely focused on building larger models, but your results suggest that intelligently routing requests to the right combination of specialized models can deliver greater gains at a much lower cost.

It also reinforces the idea that weaker models are not necessarily obsolete. They may simply excel in different areas and become much more valuable when combined with others. I'm curious to see whether this still holds for coding and agentic tasks, where choosing the right models is likely much more challenging.