An audit of code quality and extensibility, written because the answer to
"how hard is it to add a feature here?" splits cleanly in two and the split
is not where it looks.
The develop pipeline is genuinely open: a new operation is one file in
`ops/`, and the claim that no code in `ui/` names an operation turns out to
be true — all fifteen ids grepped across every .rs and .slint file in `ui/`
yield one hit, a localisation test. `dr-ui` is the opposite: every feature
lands in `run()`, one of the `wire()` functions, and a root component
carrying 472 members, so contributors collide by construction.
Five findings, CH-1 to CH-5, each with a falsifiable "done when" in the
idiom technical-debt.md already uses. The distinction from that document is
deliberate and stated: it records compromises that were chosen and are
load-bearing until their criterion is met; this records friction nobody
chose. A section listing what must NOT be tidied comes before the findings
for the same reason.
CH-1 is not a new diagnosis. view-composition.md specified the fix on
2026-08-09, when `run()` was 500 lines; it is 1,810 now, the two view
booleans it described are five, and the conditional chains it predicted in
app.slint are five-term conjunctions. The entry references that spec rather
than restating it, and quantifies the cost of the delay.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
