- Introduced a comprehensive data model for route definitions, parameters, and validation rules. - Established component interfaces for route parsing, comment parsing, import resolution, route building, validation, and rendering. - Developed a detailed implementation plan outlining execution flow, user requirements, and compliance with design principles. - Created a quickstart guide to assist users in utilizing the refactored system effectively. - Conducted thorough research on existing architecture, identifying key improvements and establishing a refactoring strategy. - Specified functional requirements and user scenarios to ensure clarity and testability. - Generated a task list for implementation, emphasizing test-driven development and parallel execution where applicable.
255 lines
11 KiB
Markdown
255 lines
11 KiB
Markdown
|
||
# Implementation Plan: Refactor AST Generation Routes Workflow
|
||
|
||
**Branch**: `002-refactor-ast-gen` | **Date**: 2025-09-22 | **Spec**: [/specs/002-refactor-ast-gen/spec.md](/specs/002-refactor-ast-gen/spec.md)
|
||
**Input**: Feature specification from `/specs/002-refactor-ast-gen/spec.md`
|
||
**User Requirements**: 1. 重构 @pkg/ast/route/ 的实现流程,使更易读,逻辑更清晰,2.保证 @cmd/gen_route.go 对重构后方法调用的生效,3. 一切功能重构保证测试优先。
|
||
|
||
## Execution Flow (/plan command scope)
|
||
```
|
||
1. Load feature spec from Input path
|
||
→ If not found: ERROR "No feature spec at {path}"
|
||
2. Fill Technical Context (scan for NEEDS CLARIFICATION)
|
||
→ Detect Project Type from context (web=frontend+backend, mobile=app+api)
|
||
→ Set Structure Decision based on project type
|
||
3. Fill the Constitution Check section based on the content of the constitution document.
|
||
4. Evaluate Constitution Check section below
|
||
→ If violations exist: Document in Complexity Tracking
|
||
→ If no justification possible: ERROR "Simplify approach first"
|
||
→ Update Progress Tracking: Initial Constitution Check
|
||
5. Execute Phase 0 → research.md
|
||
→ If NEEDS CLARIFICATION remain: ERROR "Resolve unknowns"
|
||
6. Execute Phase 1 → contracts, data-model.md, quickstart.md, agent-specific template file (e.g., `CLAUDE.md` for Claude Code, `.github/copilot-instructions.md` for GitHub Copilot, `GEMINI.md` for Gemini CLI, `QWEN.md` for Qwen Code or `AGENTS.md` for opencode).
|
||
7. Re-evaluate Constitution Check section
|
||
→ If new violations: Refactor design, return to Phase 1
|
||
→ Update Progress Tracking: Post-Design Constitution Check
|
||
8. Plan Phase 2 → Describe task generation approach (DO NOT create tasks.md)
|
||
9. STOP - Ready for /tasks command
|
||
```
|
||
|
||
**IMPORTANT**: The /plan command STOPS at step 7. Phases 2-4 are executed by other commands:
|
||
- Phase 2: /tasks command creates tasks.md
|
||
- Phase 3-4: Implementation execution (manual or via tools)
|
||
|
||
## Summary
|
||
重构AST生成路由工作流程,提高代码可读性和逻辑清晰度,确保与现有gen_route.go命令的兼容性,并采用测试驱动开发方法。
|
||
|
||
## Technical Context
|
||
**Language/Version**: Go 1.21+
|
||
**Primary Dependencies**: go standard library (ast, parser, token), cobra CLI, logrus
|
||
**Storage**: File-based route definitions and generated Go code
|
||
**Testing**: Go testing with TDD approach (testing/fstest for filesystem tests)
|
||
**Target Platform**: CLI tool for Go projects
|
||
**Project Type**: Single project with existing pkg/ast/provider refactoring patterns
|
||
**Performance Goals**: Fast parsing (< 2s for typical project), minimal memory overhead
|
||
**Constraints**: Must maintain backward compatibility with existing @Router and @Bind annotations
|
||
**Scale/Scope**: Support medium to large Go projects with extensive route definitions
|
||
|
||
## Constitution Check
|
||
*GATE: Must pass before Phase 0 research. Re-check after Phase 1 design.*
|
||
|
||
### SOLID Principles Compliance
|
||
- [x] **Single Responsibility**: Route parsing, generation, and rendering will have separate, focused components
|
||
- [x] **Open/Closed**: Design will follow existing provider patterns with extensible interfaces
|
||
- [x] **Liskov Substitution**: New route components will implement consistent interfaces
|
||
- [x] **Interface Segregation**: Specific interfaces for parsing, generation, and validation
|
||
- [x] **Dependency Inversion**: Core functionality will depend on interfaces, not concrete implementations
|
||
|
||
### KISS Principle Compliance
|
||
- [x] Design avoids unnecessary complexity - will follow existing refactored provider patterns
|
||
- [x] CLI interface maintains consistency - existing gen_route.go interface preserved
|
||
- [x] Code generation logic is simple and direct - clear separation of concerns
|
||
- [x] Solutions are intuitive and easy to understand - follows established patterns
|
||
|
||
### YAGNI Principle Compliance
|
||
- [x] Only implementing clearly needed functionality - focus on readability and clarity improvements
|
||
- [x] No over-engineering or future-proofing without requirements - minimal changes to achieve goals
|
||
- [x] Each feature has explicit user requirements - based on gen_route.go compatibility needs
|
||
- [x] No "might be useful" features without justification - scope limited to refactoring
|
||
|
||
### DRY Principle Compliance
|
||
- [x] No code duplication across components - will share patterns with pkg/ast/provider
|
||
- [x] Common functionality is abstracted and reused - leverage existing interfaces and utilities
|
||
- [x] Template system avoids repetitive implementations - consistent with provider generation
|
||
- [x] Shared utilities are properly abstracted - reuse existing AST parsing infrastructure
|
||
|
||
### Code Quality Standards
|
||
- [x] **Testing Discipline**: TDD approach with Red-Green-Refactor cycle - testing first requirement
|
||
- [x] **CLI Consistency**: Unified parameter formats and output standards - existing interface maintained
|
||
- [x] **Error Handling**: Complete error information and recovery mechanisms - consistent with provider patterns
|
||
- [x] **Performance**: Generation speed and memory usage requirements met - <2s parsing goal
|
||
|
||
### Complexity Tracking
|
||
| Violation | Why Needed | Simpler Alternative Rejected Because |
|
||
|-----------|------------|-------------------------------------|
|
||
| [Document any deviations from constitutional principles] | [Justification for complexity] | [Why simpler approach insufficient] |
|
||
|
||
## Project Structure
|
||
|
||
### Documentation (this feature)
|
||
```
|
||
specs/[###-feature]/
|
||
├── plan.md # This file (/plan command output)
|
||
├── research.md # Phase 0 output (/plan command)
|
||
├── data-model.md # Phase 1 output (/plan command)
|
||
├── quickstart.md # Phase 1 output (/plan command)
|
||
├── contracts/ # Phase 1 output (/plan command)
|
||
└── tasks.md # Phase 2 output (/tasks command - NOT created by /plan)
|
||
```
|
||
|
||
### Source Code (repository root)
|
||
```
|
||
# Option 1: Single project (DEFAULT)
|
||
src/
|
||
├── models/
|
||
├── services/
|
||
├── cli/
|
||
└── lib/
|
||
|
||
tests/
|
||
├── contract/
|
||
├── integration/
|
||
└── unit/
|
||
|
||
# Option 2: Web application (when "frontend" + "backend" detected)
|
||
backend/
|
||
├── src/
|
||
│ ├── models/
|
||
│ ├── services/
|
||
│ └── api/
|
||
└── tests/
|
||
|
||
frontend/
|
||
├── src/
|
||
│ ├── components/
|
||
│ ├── pages/
|
||
│ └── services/
|
||
└── tests/
|
||
|
||
# Option 3: Mobile + API (when "iOS/Android" detected)
|
||
api/
|
||
└── [same as backend above]
|
||
|
||
ios/ or android/
|
||
└── [platform-specific structure]
|
||
```
|
||
|
||
**Structure Decision**: Option 1 - Single project with pkg/ast/route refactoring following pkg/ast/provider patterns
|
||
|
||
## Phase 0: Outline & Research
|
||
1. **Extract unknowns from Technical Context** above:
|
||
- For each NEEDS CLARIFICATION → research task
|
||
- For each dependency → best practices task
|
||
- For each integration → patterns task
|
||
|
||
2. **Generate and dispatch research agents**:
|
||
```
|
||
For each unknown in Technical Context:
|
||
Task: "Research {unknown} for {feature context}"
|
||
For each technology choice:
|
||
Task: "Find best practices for {tech} in {domain}"
|
||
```
|
||
|
||
3. **Consolidate findings** in `research.md` using format:
|
||
- Decision: [what was chosen]
|
||
- Rationale: [why chosen]
|
||
- Alternatives considered: [what else evaluated]
|
||
|
||
**Output**: research.md with all NEEDS CLARIFICATION resolved
|
||
|
||
## Phase 1: Design & Contracts
|
||
*Prerequisites: research.md complete*
|
||
|
||
1. **Extract entities from feature spec** → `data-model.md`:
|
||
- Entity name, fields, relationships
|
||
- Validation rules from requirements
|
||
- State transitions if applicable
|
||
|
||
2. **Generate API contracts** from functional requirements:
|
||
- For each user action → endpoint
|
||
- Use standard REST/GraphQL patterns
|
||
- Output OpenAPI/GraphQL schema to `/contracts/`
|
||
|
||
3. **Generate contract tests** from contracts:
|
||
- One test file per endpoint
|
||
- Assert request/response schemas
|
||
- Tests must fail (no implementation yet)
|
||
|
||
4. **Extract test scenarios** from user stories:
|
||
- Each story → integration test scenario
|
||
- Quickstart test = story validation steps
|
||
|
||
5. **Update agent file incrementally** (O(1) operation):
|
||
- Run `.specify/scripts/bash/update-agent-context.sh claude` for your AI assistant
|
||
- If exists: Add only NEW tech from current plan
|
||
- Preserve manual additions between markers
|
||
- Update recent changes (keep last 3)
|
||
- Keep under 150 lines for token efficiency
|
||
- Output to repository root
|
||
|
||
**Output**: data-model.md, /contracts/*, failing tests, quickstart.md, agent-specific file
|
||
|
||
## Phase 2: Task Planning Approach
|
||
*This section describes what the /tasks command will do - DO NOT execute during /plan*
|
||
|
||
**Task Generation Strategy**:
|
||
- Load `.specify/templates/tasks-template.md` as base
|
||
- Generate tasks from Phase 1 design docs (contracts, data model, quickstart)
|
||
- Each contract → contract test implementation task [P]
|
||
- Each data model entity → implementation task [P]
|
||
- Each interface → component implementation task
|
||
- Integration tasks to ensure compatibility with gen_route.go
|
||
- Test-driven implementation following TDD principles
|
||
|
||
**Ordering Strategy**:
|
||
- TDD order: Write failing tests first, then implement to make tests pass
|
||
- Component dependency order: Core interfaces → Parsers → Builders → Validators → Renderers
|
||
- Backward compatibility: Ensure gen_route.go works throughout implementation
|
||
- Mark [P] for parallel execution (independent components)
|
||
|
||
**Estimated Output**: 25-30 numbered, ordered tasks in tasks.md covering:
|
||
- Core interface implementations
|
||
- Data model and error handling
|
||
- Route parsing and validation
|
||
- Template rendering and code generation
|
||
- Integration and compatibility testing
|
||
- Performance and validation testing
|
||
|
||
**IMPORTANT**: This phase is executed by the /tasks command, NOT by /plan
|
||
|
||
## Phase 3+: Future Implementation
|
||
*These phases are beyond the scope of the /plan command*
|
||
|
||
**Phase 3**: Task execution (/tasks command creates tasks.md)
|
||
**Phase 4**: Implementation (execute tasks.md following constitutional principles)
|
||
**Phase 5**: Validation (run tests, execute quickstart.md, performance validation)
|
||
|
||
## Complexity Tracking
|
||
*Fill ONLY if Constitution Check has violations that must be justified*
|
||
|
||
| Violation | Why Needed | Simpler Alternative Rejected Because |
|
||
|-----------|------------|-------------------------------------|
|
||
| [e.g., 4th project] | [current need] | [why 3 projects insufficient] |
|
||
| [e.g., Repository pattern] | [specific problem] | [why direct DB access insufficient] |
|
||
|
||
|
||
## Progress Tracking
|
||
*This checklist is updated during execution flow*
|
||
|
||
**Phase Status**:
|
||
- [x] Phase 0: Research complete (/plan command)
|
||
- [x] Phase 1: Design complete (/plan command)
|
||
- [x] Phase 2: Task planning complete (/plan command - describe approach only)
|
||
- [ ] Phase 3: Tasks generated (/tasks command)
|
||
- [ ] Phase 4: Implementation complete
|
||
- [ ] Phase 5: Validation passed
|
||
|
||
**Gate Status**:
|
||
- [x] Initial Constitution Check: PASS
|
||
- [x] Post-Design Constitution Check: PASS
|
||
- [x] All NEEDS CLARIFICATION resolved
|
||
- [x] Complexity deviations documented
|
||
|
||
---
|
||
*Based on Constitution v1.0.0 - See `/memory/constitution.md`*
|