diff --git a/.specify/memory/constitution.md b/.specify/memory/constitution.md index a4670ff..84a309a 100644 --- a/.specify/memory/constitution.md +++ b/.specify/memory/constitution.md @@ -1,50 +1,149 @@ -# [PROJECT_NAME] Constitution - + + +# Pattern HS Constitution ## Core Principles -### [PRINCIPLE_1_NAME] - -[PRINCIPLE_1_DESCRIPTION] - +### I. Code Quality (NON-NEGOTIABLE) + +All code MUST be clear, maintainable, and well-documented. Code quality is not negotiable; it is the foundation of a reference design that will be implemented across multiple languages. + +**Rules:** +- Code MUST be self-documenting through clear naming and structure +- Complex logic MUST include inline comments explaining the "why," not just the "what" +- Functions and types MUST have explicit documentation describing their purpose, inputs, outputs, and invariants +- Code MUST follow language-specific style guides and best practices +- All public APIs MUST be documented with usage examples +- Code MUST be organized to reflect the conceptual structure, not just implementation convenience + +**Rationale:** As a reference design, this codebase serves as the canonical example for implementations in other languages. Poor quality here propagates to all downstream implementations. Clear, well-structured code reduces cognitive load and enables accurate translation to other languages. + +### II. Testing Standards (NON-NEGOTIABLE) + +Comprehensive testing is mandatory. Tests serve both as verification and as executable specifications of the data structure's behavior. + +**Rules:** +- Every public function and type MUST have corresponding tests +- Tests MUST cover both happy paths and edge cases +- Property-based tests MUST be used where applicable to verify mathematical properties +- Tests MUST be written before or alongside implementation (TDD preferred) +- Test failures MUST provide clear diagnostics about what failed and why +- Tests MUST be independent and runnable in isolation +- Integration tests MUST verify cross-component interactions +- Category-theoretic properties (functors, natural transformations, etc.) MUST be tested explicitly + +**Rationale:** As a reference design rooted in category theory, mathematical correctness is paramount. Tests serve as formal specifications that implementations in other languages must satisfy. Comprehensive testing catches errors early and provides confidence when translating to new languages. + +### III. Conceptual Consistency + +All implementations and documentation MUST align with the underlying category theory formalisms. The mathematical structure is the source of truth. + +**Rules:** +- Category-theoretic concepts (functors, morphisms, natural transformations) MUST be explicitly identified in code +- Terminology MUST match standard category theory nomenclature +- Structural properties (commutativity, associativity, identity laws) MUST be preserved +- Documentation MUST explain the categorical interpretation of each component +- Violations of categorical laws MUST be documented as intentional design decisions with justification + +**Rationale:** This project is a reference design for a data structure rooted in category theory. Inconsistencies in conceptual understanding will lead to incorrect implementations across languages. The mathematical foundation provides the constraints and guarantees that make the design sound. + +### IV. Mathematical Clarity + +Mathematical concepts MUST be clearly explained and formally stated. Ambiguity in formal definitions leads to implementation divergence. + +**Rules:** +- Formal definitions MUST precede implementation code +- Category-theoretic properties MUST be stated explicitly (e.g., functor laws, naturality conditions) +- Notation MUST be consistent with standard mathematical conventions +- Examples MUST illustrate both the mathematical structure and the implementation +- Proof sketches or references MUST accompany non-obvious mathematical claims + +**Rationale:** Implementers in other languages need to understand the mathematical foundations to correctly translate the design. Clear formal statements prevent misinterpretation and ensure all language implementations share the same conceptual model. -### [PRINCIPLE_2_NAME] - -[PRINCIPLE_2_DESCRIPTION] - +### V. Multi-Language Reference Alignment -### [PRINCIPLE_3_NAME] - -[PRINCIPLE_3_DESCRIPTION] - +The reference design MUST be structured to facilitate accurate translation to other languages while maintaining conceptual consistency. -### [PRINCIPLE_4_NAME] - -[PRINCIPLE_4_DESCRIPTION] - +**Rules:** +- Core data structures MUST be clearly separated from language-specific concerns +- Type signatures MUST be explicit and language-agnostic where possible +- Language-specific idioms MUST be documented and justified +- Cross-language compatibility considerations MUST be addressed in design decisions +- Reference implementations MUST be clearly marked and maintained as the canonical source -### [PRINCIPLE_5_NAME] - -[PRINCIPLE_5_DESCRIPTION] - +**Rationale:** This project serves as a reference for implementations in multiple languages. The structure and documentation must enable developers to understand the core design independently of any single language's syntax or conventions. -## [SECTION_2_NAME] - +## Development Standards -[SECTION_2_CONTENT] - +### Category Theory Foundations -## [SECTION_3_NAME] - +All code MUST respect and explicitly represent category-theoretic structures: -[SECTION_3_CONTENT] - +- Functors MUST satisfy the functor laws (preservation of identity and composition) +- Natural transformations MUST satisfy naturality conditions +- Morphisms MUST preserve the relevant structure +- Composition MUST be associative and have identity elements where required + +Violations of these foundations MUST be documented as intentional design decisions with clear justification. + +### Cross-Language Consistency + +When making design decisions, consider: + +- How will this translate to statically-typed languages? Dynamically-typed languages? +- Are the core concepts independent of language-specific features? +- Can the mathematical structure be preserved across all target languages? + +Documentation MUST address these considerations for any non-trivial design choice. + +### Version Control Standards + +- **Intermediate Commits**: Work MUST be committed frequently as "checkpoints" to the feature branch. +- **Scope**: Checkpoint commits should capture logical steps or partial implementations (e.g., "passing 1 of 5 tests"). +- **Safety**: This prevents data loss and allows easy rollback of experimental changes. + +## Quality Assurance + +### Testing Requirements + +- **Unit Tests**: Every function MUST have unit tests covering normal cases, edge cases, and error conditions +- **Property Tests**: Category-theoretic properties (functor laws, naturality, etc.) MUST be verified with property-based testing +- **Integration Tests**: Component interactions MUST be tested to ensure correct composition +- **Specification Tests**: Tests MUST serve as executable specifications for implementers in other languages + +### Documentation Standards + +- **Type Documentation**: Every public type MUST have documentation explaining its categorical interpretation +- **Function Documentation**: Every public function MUST document its mathematical meaning, not just its implementation +- **Example Documentation**: Key concepts MUST have working examples demonstrating both usage and mathematical properties +- **Cross-Reference**: Documentation MUST link to relevant mathematical definitions and category theory concepts ## Governance - -[GOVERNANCE_RULES] - +This constitution supersedes all other development practices. Amendments require: + +1. **Documentation**: Clear explanation of why the amendment is needed +2. **Impact Analysis**: Assessment of how the change affects existing code and future implementations +3. **Versioning**: Incremental version number following semantic versioning (MAJOR.MINOR.PATCH) +4. **Approval**: Amendments affecting core principles require explicit approval + +All code reviews MUST verify compliance with these principles. Violations of NON-NEGOTIABLE principles (Code Quality, Testing Standards) block merge approval. + +Complexity additions MUST be justified against the principle of conceptual clarity. When in doubt, prefer the simpler design that maintains mathematical correctness. -**Version**: [CONSTITUTION_VERSION] | **Ratified**: [RATIFICATION_DATE] | **Last Amended**: [LAST_AMENDED_DATE] - +**Version**: 1.0.0 | **Ratified**: 2025-01-27 | **Last Amended**: 2025-01-27