Haha, thanks!

I like the clarity of the real arrow—it just makes flows in comments more readable for me.

Glad to see someone noticed!

Ok, let me call you out more explicitly. It is clear that most of the code is not written by you. Commit history shows that first a large feature appears out of the blue, then you have a followup series of commits removing "useless" comments (left by LLM). Quite a few useless comments are still there.

Also your rust implementation is 100% broken which some of comments you deleted point out.

I also love this comment: https://github.com/whispem/minikv/blob/main/src/coordinator/... It is exactly what LLMs write when you ask them to implement something.

	▲	whispem 4 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Thanks for your detailed feedback. Just to clarify: none of the Rust code, architecture, or logic in minikv was generated by AI. Every line of code was written by me personally, without copying or pasting from LLMs or any automated tools. The only places where I used AI were a few documentation files (README, LEARNING.md, RAM_COMMUNITY.md)—never for implementation. Regarding the commit history: I tend to work locally for a while, then push larger changes once they’re solid, so it can look like big features “appear out of nowhere.” Sorry if that makes the process look less transparent. As for the code being “100% broken”—if that were the case, minikv wouldn’t run at all! In reality, it starts up, forms clusters, and passes its integration tests. Of course, like any open source project, there are bound to be some bugs or things to improve. If you’ve found specific places where it actually breaks or if there are unclear comments left, I’d genuinely appreciate a bug report or concrete example. That’s the fastest way for me to make the project better. Thanks again for taking the time to look so closely at the repo. I’m always open to fair critique and technical suggestions!