ryanthedev/aposd-designing-deep-modules

Skill: aposd-designing-deep-modules

STOP - Before Implementing

Never implement your first design. Generate 2-3 radically different approaches, compare them, then implement.

---

Design-It-Twice Workflow

BEFORE implementing any module:

1. DEFINE - What are you designing? (class, API, service)
2. GENERATE - 2-3 RADICALLY different approaches
3. SKETCH - Rough outline each (important methods only, no implementation)
4. COMPARE - List pros/cons, especially ease of use for callers
5. EVALUATE - Is there a clear winner or hybrid?
6. VERIFY - Does chosen design pass depth evaluation?
7. IMPLEMENT - Only then write the code

If none attractive: Use identified problems to drive a new iteration of step 2.

---

Depth Evaluation

| Metric | Deep (Good) | Shallow (Bad) | |--------|-------------|---------------| | Interface size | Few methods | Many methods | | Method reusability | Multiple use cases | Single use case | | Hidden information | High | Low | | Caller cognitive load | Low | High | | Common case | Simple | Complex |

Exemplar: Unix file I/O - 5 methods hide hundreds of thousands of lines of implementation.

---

Three Questions Framework

Ask these when designing interfaces:

| Question | Purpose | Red Flag Answer | |----------|---------|-----------------| | "What is the simplest interface that covers all current needs?" | Minimize method count | "I need many methods" | | "In how many situations will this method be used?" | Detect over-specialization | "Just this one situation" | | "Is this easy to use for my current needs?" | Guard against over-generalization | "I need lots of wrapper code" |

---

Information Hiding Checklist

When embedding functionality in a module:

• [ ] Data structures and algorithms stay internal
• [ ] Lower-level details (page sizes, buffer sizes) hidden
• [ ] Higher-level assumptions (most files are small) hidden
• [ ] No knowledge shared across module boundaries unnecessarily
• [ ] Common case requires no knowledge of internal details

---

Generality Sweet Spot

Target: Somewhat general-purpose

| Aspect | Should Be | |--------|-----------| | Functionality | Reflects current needs | | Interface | Supports multiple uses | | Specialization | Pushed up to callers OR down into variants |

Push specialization UP: Top-level code handles specific features; lower layers stay general.

Push specialization DOWN: Define general interface, implement with device-specific variants.

---

Red Flags

| Red Flag | Symptom | Fix | |----------|---------|-----| | Shallow Module | Interface complexity rivals implementation | Combine with related functionality | | Classitis | Many small classes with little functionality each | Consolidate related classes | | Single-Use Method | Method designed for exactly one caller | Generalize to handle multiple cases | | Information Leakage | Same knowledge in multiple modules | Consolidate in single module | | Temporal Decomposition | Structure mirrors execution order | Structure by knowledge encapsulation | | False Abstraction | Interface hides info caller actually needs | Expose necessary information | | Granularity Mismatch | Caller must do work that belongs in module | Move logic into module | | Silent Failure | Module handles errors internally but gives callers no way to know something went wrong (no error return, no observable state change, no logging) | Errors are implementation details that can be hidden; failures are not — surface failure states even when hiding the mechanism |

---

Mandatory Output Format

When designing, produce:

## Design: [Component Name]

### Approaches Considered
1. [Approach A] - [1-2 sentence description]
2. [Approach B] - [1-2 sentence description]
3. [Approach C] - [1-2 sentence description] (if applicable)

### Comparison
| Criterion | A | B | C |
|-----------|---|---|---|
| Interface simplicity | | | |
| Information hiding | | | |
| Caller ease of use | | | |
| [Domain-specific criterion] | | | |

### Choice: [A/B/C/Hybrid]
Rationale: [Why this wins, what's sacrificed]

### Depth Check
- Interface methods: [count]
- Hidden details: [list]
- Common case complexity: [simple/moderate/complex]

---

Chain

| After | Next | |-------|------| | Design chosen | Read(${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/skills/cc-pseudocode-programming/SKILL.md) |