OPTION-COMPARISON — Keep unlike option results distinct

Preface node heading:option-comparison-keep-unlike-option-results-distinct:568

What this page is

This is generated FPF reference text from the specification preface or supporting sections. It helps interpret FPF; it is not FPF Reference product documentation.

Methodology

Use it to understand how the specification wants to be read, then return to a route, pattern, or work packet for active work. Cite generated IDs only when the wording changes the task decision.

Content

  • Situation: A candidate list mixes labels such as build, buy, reuse, provider, internal, outsource, or AI; or one unresolved question makes a costly commitment unsafe.
  • Question: Must you form complete ways to obtain one result, compare or retain them, govern a pool, prepare a set for another chooser, choose now, or resolve the uncertainty blocking commitment?
  • First useful result or honest blocker: A complete-enough same-result way set, comparison or retained set, pool rule, prepared OptionSet, ChoiceResult, answer to the blocking question, or exact gap.
  • Mantra: Name one result, use, situation, horizon, and acceptance basis. Turn labels into complete ways on one parity basis, keeping supported, proposed, and unknown premises visible. Compare or choose only when current; preserve worthwhile variants and gaps. For costly action, resolve only the uncertainty blocking commitment. Return when the result, basis, evidence, or use changes.
  • Start with: C.38 when labels or fragments need complete ways; otherwise open only the current branch in A.19.ECS, C.18, C.19, G.5, or C.11. For costly action, use only the current check in A.10, B.3, A.20, A.21, C.28, C.11, or A.15.5.
  • Stop or return: Stop at the result for the present question. An option description does not choose or establish capability, authority, Work, provision, delivery, acceptance, or use.

Last Updated: 2026-09-03 — upstream FPF commit b999972c (github.com/ailev/FPF)