Three residuals from review, all of the same family --- a claim that
looked covered and was not.
B1's disposal was implemented for panels only. Terminal(BufferId) is a
residual owner too, and exit_terminal_mode dropped four terminal-only
caches without dropping the bank, so leaving a terminal and re-entering
the SAME one inherited it: the key is the buffer id and it has not
changed. clear_terminals() now runs at that teardown, with a row that
enters, banks 0.6, leaves, re-enters the same buffer, and finds nothing
waiting. The type's own doc still said disposal was unimplemented and
owed; it now says where both halves live.
R5 and the panel-disposal row stopped after the successor's first 0.6
produced nothing. Unlike R4, neither completed the successor's own
0.6 + 0.6 --- so both passed just as well against an accumulator that
banks nothing at all, which is exactly the state they exist to rule
out. Both now carry the completion leg and assert the exact expected
effect. Demonstrated rather than asserted: with accumulation broken
outright (bank = delta instead of bank += delta) those two rows now
fail, and before this change they did not.
The Absent arm resets EIGHT fields before the new clear, not nine. Both
places that said nine are corrected.
Gates: fmt; clippy --workspace --all-targets -D warnings; pmacs-gpu 322;
--lib 2009; git diff --check.
Levi Neuwirth
a7006faf47