diff --git a/docs/exploration/engineering-review-2026-07.md b/docs/exploration/engineering-review-2026-07.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000..ecbe012 --- /dev/null +++ b/docs/exploration/engineering-review-2026-07.md @@ -0,0 +1,411 @@ +# Engineering Review — 2026-07-02 + +> Point-in-time record. Full-project engineering review requested by the maintainer, with a +> specific question attached: _"as we work session to session, we may forget to look back +> and see the bigger picture — the end-of-session skill checks aim to mitigate it, but I'm +> not sure to what extent it is successful."_ +> +> **Method:** five independent clean-context reviewers (code quality, test suite, +> documentation, build/tooling/delivery, cross-session coherence), each required to cite +> file/line/commit evidence, followed by an adversarial verification wave that reproduced +> every load-bearing claim (rebuilt the bundle, re-ran greps and git archaeology, hand-walked +> the flagged logic, re-checked the live site). Findings below are only those that survived +> verification; where a reviewer's number was wrong, the corrected number is used. +> Reviewed state: working tree at `c5e4c4c` plus the uncommitted spec-params/editor WIP. + +## Verdict + +The codebase itself is in excellent shape — the architecture contract holds under grep, not +just in prose, and the per-session review machinery demonstrably works at the session scale. +The problems are concentrated at two horizons the per-session view cannot see: **delivery** +(one measurable production defect: the marketing landing executes 1.3 MB gzipped of Monaco + +Vega it never uses) and **look-back**. The maintainer's fear is confirmed, mechanically: no +instrument — on-demand or scheduled — owns the whole-project view, so coherence work happens +only when a session happens to collide with it. (Maintainer clarification after the first +draft: the eng-council sweep and the ux-second-pass batch were designed as on-demand +session guardrails, not periodic instruments — which sharpens the finding rather than +softening it: the on-demand instruments have each fired once, and nothing at all runs on a +cadence.) + +## Scorecard + +| Dimension | Grade | One-line summary | +| ----------------------- | ----- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | +| Code quality | A | Zero `any`/suppressions, layering verifies by grep, error discipline is real | +| Test suite | A− | 1,366 tests, uniform harness, deterministic; one committed coverage hole that matters | +| Documentation | A− | Symbol-level accuracy at scale; drift is localized fossils plus one governance gap | +| Build / delivery | B | Strong local gates; landing bundle defect shipped because no gate measures output | +| Cross-session coherence | B− | A− for per-session machinery, D for look-back machinery | + +## Critical findings (all independently verified) + +### C1. The landing and /learn/ eagerly load and execute Monaco (940 kB gz) and Vega (285 kB gz) + +Verified on the live site and reproduced from a clean build. `dist/index.html` modulepreloads +both chunks and the landing entry's static import graph executes them +(`main-*.js` ends with bare `import"./vega-*.js";import"./monaco-*.js"`). `/learn/` is worse: +both arrive as direct `