Yeah, that's a triangle,

that's a square.

Okay, they're composed here and there.

And maybe something is ductile or whatever.

And I have to reason a lot.

But when I'm looking at Avercode, it occurred to me, okay, those functions are usually this or that.

So this function is much more.

One thing I'm curious about your perspective on is if you write a function definition, just the inputs and outputs and effects and the intent string, and then you write a test or a law for that function, How valuable is the body of that function, the actual implementation? As a human, do I even care if I've got the inputs and outputs and intent and effects and the tests, the verifications of that function? Do I ever need to care about how the AI came up with the actual body of that thing? I