<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Retry on Programmer.ie: Modern AI programming</title>
    <link>http://programmer.ie/tags/retry/</link>
    <description>Recent content in Retry on Programmer.ie: Modern AI programming</description>
    <generator>Hugo</generator>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 14 Sep 2026 05:00:22 +0100</lastBuildDate>
    <atom:link href="http://programmer.ie/tags/retry/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
    <item>
      <title>Retries Are Side Effects Too</title>
      <link>http://programmer.ie/books/applied-ai/22-chapter/</link>
      <pubDate>Mon, 14 Sep 2026 05:00:22 +0100</pubDate>
      <guid>http://programmer.ie/books/applied-ai/22-chapter/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Part 4 — Make It Safe and Verifiable&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2 id=&#34;the-line-that-may-already-be-there&#34;&gt;The line that may already be there&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Constructed scene.&lt;/strong&gt; An adapter appends one line to a file. The process dies before the completion is recorded. On restart the ledger shows no completed result — but the file has changed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Three responses are available, and two of them lie. Appending again may write the line twice. Writing a success record by hand manufactures evidence for an effect nobody observed. Saying “unknown” is the only honest answer, and it is also the least actionable one. The question that matters is narrower than “what do we do?” It is: &lt;strong&gt;what evidence would justify another append?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
