Start with working language, execution and editor components
CREXX contains the cREXX compiler, the RXAS assembler, RXLINK, CREXX virtual machines, libraries and packaging tools. A cREXX program can therefore move from source, through assembly and linking, to bytecode execution. Within this portfolio, cREXX is primarily a surface for business rules, transformations and scripting. Other components remain free to use Rust, TypeScript, React or another suitable technology.
DSLSH receives document changes from an editor, keeps the corresponding parser state up to date and returns structured language information. THE CREXX Edition uses DSLSH and CREXX in a working editor and can produce parser-backed HTML and TeX source rendering.
THE also has an opt-in Preact and TypeScript browser interface. The proof of concept keeps the native editor as the source of truth while the browser renders semantic snapshots and returns typed actions, text and keys. Its current limits include a fixed 24-by-80 virtual screen, full-state snapshots, one controlling client, no browser-exposed macros or transient dialogs, and a deployment model that leaves authentication and session routing to a reverse proxy. It is a working experiment, not a production multi-user web editor.
These working components give later experiments a concrete starting point. They do not yet supply the new CoreLang language, parser, common base or complete DomainLang workbench. A suitable future CoreLang or DomainLang example could emit RXAS and use the existing CREXX execution stack without adopting REXX language syntax or behaviour. That connection remains proposed. The LLVM compiler infrastructure remains later backend research.
Keep retrieval and desktop orchestration separate
crexx-rag is developing the
knowledge, retrieval and source-grounding role. Its retained native executable
keeps source passages, proposed and accepted claims, ambiguity and retrieval
results distinct. Accepted cREXX slices cover source revisions, claims,
source-backed packets, exact vector ordering, provider contracts and durable
jobs. A schema-v2 storage foundation also exists.
The target cREXX product is not yet a complete ingestion and query path and has not replaced the native reference. The representative corpus is a capacity and migration fixture, not a promise of general production throughput, high availability or multi-worker operation.
Cognitive Pipelines is a working experimental Qt desktop application. A user can compose a graph with model calls, retrieval, scripts, external processes, control flow and human input, and then observe asynchronous execution. It is an AI and tool orchestration workbench, not a durable business-workflow service, distributed scheduler or production multi-user platform.
The next proposed slice connects distinct roles
A proposed composition would request source-backed material from crexx-rag,
run defined computational steps in Cognitive Pipelines and ask an Open BPM
interface to create durable human work. None of those integrations exists
today. Open BPM’s reference component, application programming interface and
participant interface have not been built, and Public Purpose Lab has not
published an integrated demonstration. Architecture Portal owns the logical
roles and quality questions; each project repository would remain authoritative
for the software it implements.
Use rebooking to test one complete path
The rebooking scenario is deliberately small. It tests whether the method and blueprint can connect an authoritative appointment record, one repeatable work request, a versioned deadline rule, communication failure and recovery.
Open BPM could manage the work item. A cREXX rule could return the deadline or priority. Public Purpose Lab could introduce delays and failures with synthetic data and report what happened. Those connections have not yet been implemented, but the slice is concrete enough to challenge both the loop settings and the component catalogue.
Return each result through a delivery record
A useful record begins with the service question, the active loop settings, the alternatives considered and the person with decision authority. It links the changed code and configuration to defined checks, review decisions, operating observations and limitations. It ends by saying whether the lesson changes the implementation, an asset, the method or the blueprint.
For agent-assisted work, record what the agent changed, what a person reviewed and which actions were outside the agent’s authority. Then use the project map to follow each capability claim to its canonical source.