diff --git a/js/scripting-lang/WORKAROUND_ANALYSIS.md b/js/scripting-lang/WORKAROUND_ANALYSIS.md
index 40e7efe..fcc9560 100644
--- a/js/scripting-lang/WORKAROUND_ANALYSIS.md
+++ b/js/scripting-lang/WORKAROUND_ANALYSIS.md
@@ -206,4 +206,489 @@ Cell: 42
- **Cross-Platform Goal**: ⭐⭐ (JavaScript implementation needs major work)
- **Tutorial/Educational Use**: ⭐⭐⭐⭐ (Works well with C, with documented limitations)
-**Updated Bottom Line**: **C implementation is production-ready and should be the primary implementation. JavaScript implementation has critical bugs that prevent it from serving as a reference implementation. Focus should be on fixing JavaScript parser issues and establishing C as the definitive Baba Yaga implementation.**
\ No newline at end of file
+**Updated Bottom Line**: **C implementation is production-ready and should be the primary implementation. JavaScript implementation has critical bugs that prevent it from serving as a reference implementation. Focus should be on fixing JavaScript parser issues and establishing C as the definitive Baba Yaga implementation.**
+
+---
+
+## IMPLEMENTATION/REMEDIATION PLAN
+
+### **OVERVIEW**
+This section provides a comprehensive, actionable plan to address all identified issues in the WORKAROUND_ANALYSIS.md document, plus additional language improvements for string operations and error message standardization.
+
+### **PRIORITY CLASSIFICATIONS**
+- **URGENT**: Critical bugs preventing basic functionality
+- **HIGH**: Significant limitations affecting usability
+- **MEDIUM**: Important improvements for language consistency
+- **LOW**: Nice-to-have enhancements
+
+---
+
+## **PHASE 1: JAVASCRIPT IMPLEMENTATION CRITICAL FIXES (URGENT)**
+
+### **1.1 String Key Parsing Bug Fix**
+**Issue**: JavaScript parser fails on `{"key": value}` syntax
+**Location**: `js/parser.js` - `parseTableLiteral()` function
+**Impact**: **CRITICAL** - Prevents valid table literals from parsing
+
+**Implementation Steps**:
+1. **Debug Table Literal Parsing** (Day 1)
+ - Add debug logging to `parseTableLiteral()` function
+ - Identify exact failure point for string keys
+ - Test with minimal case: `{"a": 1}`
+
+2. **Fix String Key Handling** (Day 2)
+ - Update token handling for string literal keys
+ - Ensure proper key-value pair parsing
+ - Add comprehensive tests for string keys
+
+3. **Validation** (Day 3)
+ - Test with complex table literals
+ - Verify cross-platform compatibility with C implementation
+ - Update test suite
+
+**Success Criteria**:
+- ✅ `{"key": value}` syntax parses correctly
+- ✅ Mixed key types work: `{1: "num", "str": 2}`
+- ✅ Nested tables with string keys work
+- ✅ No regression in existing functionality
+
+### **1.2 Function Execution Bug Fix**
+**Issue**: Functions return objects instead of executing
+**Location**: `js/interpreter.js` - function call resolution
+**Impact**: **CRITICAL** - Fundamental execution failure
+
+**Implementation Steps**:
+1. **Debug Function Resolution** (Day 1)
+ - Add debug logging to function call execution
+ - Identify where functions return objects vs execute
+ - Test with simple function calls
+
+2. **Fix Function Execution** (Day 2)
+ - Update function call resolution logic
+ - Ensure proper argument evaluation
+ - Fix scope handling for function calls
+
+3. **Validation** (Day 3)
+ - Test complex function compositions
+ - Verify recursive function calls work
+ - Test with Game of Life tutorial
+
+**Success Criteria**:
+- ✅ Functions execute and return values
+- ✅ Function compositions work correctly
+- ✅ Recursive functions execute properly
+- ✅ No function objects returned instead of execution
+
+### **1.3 Parser Error Handling Improvements**
+**Issue**: Unclear "Unexpected token" errors on valid syntax
+**Location**: `js/parser.js` - various parsing functions
+**Impact**: **HIGH** - Poor developer experience
+
+**Implementation Steps**:
+1. **Error Message Enhancement** (Day 1)
+ - Add context to all error messages
+ - Include expected vs actual token information
+ - Add line/column position to errors
+
+2. **Error Recovery** (Day 2)
+ - Implement better error recovery strategies
+ - Add suggestions for common syntax errors
+ - Improve error message formatting
+
+3. **Validation** (Day 3)
+ - Test error messages with invalid syntax
+ - Verify error messages are actionable
+ - Update error handling tests
+
+**Success Criteria**:
+- ✅ Clear, actionable error messages
+- ✅ Context information in all errors
+- ✅ Suggestions for common mistakes
+- ✅ Consistent error message format
+
+---
+
+## **PHASE 2: C IMPLEMENTATION PARSER ENHANCEMENTS (HIGH)**
+
+### **2.1 Multi-line Function Body Support**
+**Issue**: Functions with intermediate assignments return function references
+**Location**: `c/src/parser.c` - `parseFunctionDefinition()`
+**Impact**: **HIGH** - Fundamental function definition limitation
+
+**Implementation Steps**:
+1. **Analyze Current Parser** (Day 1)
+ - Review `parseFunctionDefinition()` implementation
+ - Identify where intermediate assignments fail
+ - Test with minimal multi-line function
+
+2. **Enhance Function Parsing** (Day 2)
+ - Update parser to handle intermediate assignments
+ - Ensure proper scope handling for variables
+ - Maintain function execution flow
+
+3. **Validation** (Day 3)
+ - Test with Game of Life `get_cell` function
+ - Verify complex multi-line functions work
+ - Update function definition tests
+
+**Success Criteria**:
+- ✅ Multi-line functions with intermediate assignments work
+- ✅ Variable scope is properly maintained
+- ✅ Functions execute instead of returning references
+- ✅ No regression in single-line functions
+
+### **2.2 Boolean Pattern Matching Support**
+**Issue**: `true`/`false` cannot be used as patterns in `when` expressions
+**Location**: `c/src/parser.c` - `parseWhenExpression()`
+**Impact**: **MEDIUM** - Pattern expressiveness limitation
+
+**Implementation Steps**:
+1. **Extend Pattern Parsing** (Day 1)
+ - Add boolean literal support to pattern parsing
+ - Update `parseWhenExpression()` to handle boolean patterns
+ - Test with simple boolean patterns
+
+2. **Pattern Matching Logic** (Day 2)
+ - Implement boolean pattern matching in interpreter
+ - Ensure proper boolean comparison logic
+ - Add comprehensive boolean pattern tests
+
+3. **Validation** (Day 3)
+ - Test complex boolean pattern combinations
+ - Verify pattern matching works correctly
+ - Update when expression tests
+
+**Success Criteria**:
+- ✅ `when x is true then ...` works correctly
+- ✅ `when x is false then ...` works correctly
+- ✅ Boolean patterns work with other patterns
+- ✅ No regression in existing pattern matching
+
+### **2.3 Complex Expression Support**
+**Issue**: Nested expressions and complex syntax cause parse errors
+**Location**: `c/src/parser.c` - various parsing functions
+**Impact**: **MEDIUM** - Expression expressiveness limitation
+
+**Implementation Steps**:
+1. **Expression Parsing Analysis** (Day 1)
+ - Review current expression parsing hierarchy
+ - Identify specific complex expression failures
+ - Test with minimal complex expressions
+
+2. **Parser Enhancement** (Day 2)
+ - Improve nested expression handling
+ - Enhance parentheses and precedence handling
+ - Add better error reporting for complex expressions
+
+3. **Validation** (Day 3)
+ - Test with complex mathematical expressions
+ - Verify function composition expressions work
+ - Update expression parsing tests
+
+**Success Criteria**:
+- ✅ Complex nested expressions parse correctly
+- ✅ Parentheses work as expected
+- ✅ Operator precedence is maintained
+- ✅ Clear error messages for invalid expressions
+
+---
+
+## **PHASE 3: STRING OPERATIONS REDESIGN (MEDIUM)**
+
+### **3.1 Remove String Concatenation from `+` Operator**
+**Issue**: `+` operator concatenates strings (JavaScript-like behavior)
+**Location**: `c/src/stdlib.c:250-283`, `js/parser.js:940-950`
+**Impact**: **MEDIUM** - Language design inconsistency
+
+**Implementation Steps**:
+1. **Analysis** (Day 1)
+ - Document current string concatenation behavior
+ - Identify all locations where `+` handles strings
+ - Create migration plan for existing code
+
+2. **Remove String Concatenation** (Day 2)
+ - Update `stdlib_add()` to only handle numeric addition
+ - Update JavaScript parser to not translate `+` to string concatenation
+ - Add deprecation warnings for string concatenation
+
+3. **Validation** (Day 3)
+ - Test that `+` only works with numbers
+ - Verify error messages for string + number
+ - Update all tests and examples
+
+**Success Criteria**:
+- ✅ `+` operator only works with numbers
+- ✅ Clear error messages for string + number attempts
+- ✅ No regression in numeric addition
+- ✅ Deprecation warnings guide users to new syntax
+
+### **3.2 Implement String Operations Namespace (`s.`)**
+**Issue**: Need dedicated string operations namespace
+**Location**: `c/src/stdlib.c` - new functions
+**Impact**: **MEDIUM** - Language feature enhancement
+
+**Implementation Steps**:
+1. **Design String Operations** (Day 1)
+ - Define core string operations: `concat`, `append`, `prepend`, `join`, `split`
+ - Design function signatures and behavior
+ - Create comprehensive test cases
+
+2. **Implement String Functions** (Day 2)
+ - Add `s.concat()` function
+ - Add `s.append()` and `s.prepend()` functions
+ - Add `s.join()` and `s.split()` functions
+ - Add `s.length()` and `s.substring()` functions
+
+3. **Validation** (Day 3)
+ - Test all string operations thoroughly
+ - Verify performance and memory usage
+ - Update documentation and tutorials
+
+**Success Criteria**:
+- ✅ `s.concat "hello" "world"` returns `"helloworld"`
+- ✅ `s.join " " ["hello", "world"]` returns `"hello world"`
+- ✅ `s.split " " "hello world"` returns `["hello", "world"]`
+- ✅ All string operations work consistently
+
+### **3.3 Update Documentation and Tutorials**
+**Issue**: All documentation assumes `+` string concatenation
+**Location**: All tutorial and documentation files
+**Impact**: **MEDIUM** - User experience and adoption
+
+**Implementation Steps**:
+1. **Audit Documentation** (Day 1)
+ - Identify all files using `+` for string concatenation
+ - Create list of required updates
+ - Prioritize by usage frequency
+
+2. **Update Content** (Day 2)
+ - Replace `+` string concatenation with `s.` operations
+ - Update all tutorials and examples
+ - Create migration guide
+
+3. **Validation** (Day 3)
+ - Test all updated tutorials
+ - Verify examples work correctly
+ - Update test files
+
+**Success Criteria**:
+- ✅ All tutorials use new string operations
+- ✅ Examples work correctly with new syntax
+- ✅ Migration guide is clear and helpful
+- ✅ No broken examples or tutorials
+
+---
+
+## **PHASE 4: ERROR MESSAGE STANDARDIZATION (HIGH)**
+
+### **4.1 Create Centralized Error System**
+**Issue**: Inconsistent error messages across implementations
+**Location**: Both C and JavaScript implementations
+**Impact**: **HIGH** - Poor developer experience and maintenance
+
+**Implementation Steps**:
+1. **Design Error System** (Day 1)
+ - Define error message constants
+ - Create error formatting utilities
+ - Design error code system
+
+2. **Implement Error System** (Day 2)
+ - Create centralized error definitions
+ - Implement error formatting functions
+ - Add error code mapping
+
+3. **Validation** (Day 3)
+ - Test error system with various scenarios
+ - Verify consistent formatting
+ - Update error handling tests
+
+**Success Criteria**:
+- ✅ Consistent error message format
+- ✅ Centralized error definitions
+- ✅ Error codes for automated testing
+- ✅ Clear, actionable error messages
+
+### **4.2 Update Both Implementations**
+**Issue**: Different error message formats in C vs JavaScript
+**Location**: `c/src/` and `js/` directories
+**Impact**: **HIGH** - Cross-platform inconsistency
+
+**Implementation Steps**:
+1. **C Implementation Updates** (Day 1)
+ - Replace `DEBUG_ERROR()` calls with centralized system
+ - Update error message formatting
+ - Add error codes to all errors
+
+2. **JavaScript Implementation Updates** (Day 2)
+ - Replace `throw new Error()` with centralized system
+ - Update error message formatting
+ - Add error codes to all errors
+
+3. **Cross-Platform Testing** (Day 3)
+ - Verify consistent error messages
+ - Test error handling across platforms
+ - Update error handling documentation
+
+**Success Criteria**:
+- ✅ Identical error messages across platforms
+- ✅ Consistent error formatting
+- ✅ Error codes for automated testing
+- ✅ Clear error handling documentation
+
+---
+
+## **PHASE 5: CROSS-PLATFORM TESTING AND VALIDATION (HIGH)**
+
+### **5.1 Establish Parity Testing**
+**Issue**: No systematic comparison between C and JavaScript implementations
+**Location**: Test infrastructure
+**Impact**: **HIGH** - Cannot ensure cross-platform compatibility
+
+**Implementation Steps**:
+1. **Design Parity Tests** (Day 1)
+ - Create comprehensive test suite for cross-platform comparison
+ - Define success criteria for each test
+ - Design automated comparison system
+
+2. **Implement Parity Tests** (Day 2)
+ - Create test runner for both implementations
+ - Implement result comparison logic
+ - Add failure reporting system
+
+3. **Validation** (Day 3)
+ - Run parity tests on existing functionality
+ - Document platform-specific limitations
+ - Create compatibility matrix
+
+**Success Criteria**:
+- ✅ Automated cross-platform testing
+- ✅ Clear compatibility matrix
+- ✅ Platform-specific limitation documentation
+- ✅ Automated failure reporting
+
+### **5.2 Performance and Reliability Testing**
+**Issue**: No systematic performance or reliability testing
+**Location**: Test infrastructure
+**Impact**: **MEDIUM** - Cannot ensure production readiness
+
+**Implementation Steps**:
+1. **Performance Testing** (Day 1)
+ - Create performance benchmarks
+ - Test memory usage patterns
+ - Measure execution time for complex programs
+
+2. **Reliability Testing** (Day 2)
+ - Create stress tests for complex programs
+ - Test error recovery mechanisms
+ - Validate memory management
+
+3. **Validation** (Day 3)
+ - Run performance benchmarks
+ - Document performance characteristics
+ - Create reliability guidelines
+
+**Success Criteria**:
+- ✅ Performance benchmarks established
+- ✅ Memory usage patterns documented
+- ✅ Stress tests pass consistently
+- ✅ Reliability guidelines created
+
+---
+
+## **IMPLEMENTATION TIMELINE**
+
+### **Week 1: JavaScript Critical Fixes**
+- **Days 1-3**: String key parsing bug fix
+- **Days 4-5**: Function execution bug fix
+- **Days 6-7**: Parser error handling improvements
+
+### **Week 2: C Implementation Enhancements**
+- **Days 1-3**: Multi-line function body support
+- **Days 4-5**: Boolean pattern matching support
+- **Days 6-7**: Complex expression support
+
+### **Week 3: String Operations Redesign**
+- **Days 1-2**: Remove string concatenation from `+` operator
+- **Days 3-5**: Implement string operations namespace
+- **Days 6-7**: Update documentation and tutorials
+
+### **Week 4: Error Message Standardization**
+- **Days 1-2**: Create centralized error system
+- **Days 3-5**: Update both implementations
+- **Days 6-7**: Cross-platform testing and validation
+
+### **Week 5: Final Testing and Documentation**
+- **Days 1-3**: Comprehensive testing across all changes
+- **Days 4-5**: Performance and reliability testing
+- **Days 6-7**: Documentation updates and final validation
+
+---
+
+## **SUCCESS CRITERIA SUMMARY**
+
+### **JavaScript Implementation**
+- ✅ All table literals with string keys parse correctly
+- ✅ All functions execute properly instead of returning objects
+- ✅ Parser provides clear, actionable error messages
+- ✅ Cross-platform compatibility with C implementation
+
+### **C Implementation**
+- ✅ Multi-line function bodies with intermediate assignments work
+- ✅ Boolean literals can be used as patterns in `when` expressions
+- ✅ Complex nested expressions parse correctly
+- ✅ Lambda expressions work inline
+
+### **String Operations**
+- ✅ `+` operator no longer concatenates strings
+- ✅ `s.` namespace provides comprehensive string operations
+- ✅ All tutorials and examples updated
+- ✅ Migration path documented
+
+### **Error Messages**
+- ✅ Consistent error message format across implementations
+- ✅ Centralized error definitions for easy maintenance
+- ✅ Clear, actionable error messages with context
+- ✅ Error codes for automated testing
+
+### **Cross-Platform Compatibility**
+- ✅ Automated parity testing between implementations
+- ✅ Clear compatibility matrix
+- ✅ Platform-specific limitation documentation
+- ✅ Performance and reliability benchmarks
+
+---
+
+## **RISK ASSESSMENT AND MITIGATION**
+
+### **High Risk Items**
+1. **JavaScript Parser Fixes**: Complex parser logic, risk of introducing new bugs
+ - **Mitigation**: Extensive testing, incremental changes, rollback plan
+2. **String Operator Removal**: Breaking change affecting existing code
+ - **Mitigation**: Deprecation warnings, migration guide, gradual rollout
+
+### **Medium Risk Items**
+1. **C Parser Enhancements**: May affect existing functionality
+ - **Mitigation**: Comprehensive regression testing, incremental implementation
+2. **Error Message Changes**: Could break existing error handling
+ - **Mitigation**: Backward compatibility, gradual migration
+
+### **Low Risk Items**
+1. **Documentation Updates**: Non-breaking changes
+ - **Mitigation**: Version control, backup of original content
+2. **Test Updates**: Validation of existing functionality
+ - **Mitigation**: Automated testing, continuous validation
+
+---
+
+## **CONCLUSION**
+
+This implementation/remediation plan provides a comprehensive, actionable roadmap for addressing all identified issues in the WORKAROUND_ANALYSIS.md document. The phased approach ensures critical issues are addressed first while maintaining system stability and providing clear success criteria for each phase.
+
+The plan prioritizes:
+1. **JavaScript implementation fixes** (URGENT) - to establish cross-platform compatibility
+2. **C implementation enhancements** (HIGH) - to improve language expressiveness
+3. **String operations redesign** (MEDIUM) - to improve language consistency
+4. **Error message standardization** (HIGH) - to improve developer experience
+5. **Cross-platform testing** (HIGH) - to ensure long-term maintainability
+
+Each phase includes specific, measurable success criteria and risk mitigation strategies to ensure successful implementation and validation.
\ No newline at end of file
|