Add comprehensive research documentation for level system feature#10
Add comprehensive research documentation for level system feature#10flora131 wants to merge 1 commit intoSLMT:masterfrom
Conversation
This adds detailed documentation covering: - Core codebase analysis (architecture, patterns, data models, dependencies) - Level system with obstacles feature PRD - Step-by-step implementation plan with code examples - Integration points mapping for exact modification locations - Manual testing strategy with 50+ test cases Total: 13 documents (~84 KB) providing complete guidance for implementing the level system feature. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Pull request overview
This PR adds a set of research/architecture documents for the existing rust-snake codebase and provides a full PRD + implementation/testing guidance for a proposed “level system with obstacles” feature.
Changes:
- Added core codebase documentation (architecture, directory structure, entry points, patterns, data models, dependencies, tech stack).
- Added feature planning docs for “level system with obstacles” (PRD, implementation plan, integration points).
- Added a manual testing strategy document and a timestamped architecture research note under
research/docs/.
Reviewed changes
Copilot reviewed 13 out of 13 changed files in this pull request and generated 9 comments.
Show a summary per file
| File | Description |
|---|---|
| research/architecture.md | High-level architecture summary for the current codebase |
| research/directory-structure.md | Documents repo and src/ layout |
| research/tech-stack.md | Lists language/tooling/dependencies used |
| research/entry-points.md | Describes runtime flow (main loop + module entry points) |
| research/patterns.md | Captures observed coding patterns and conventions |
| research/data-models.md | Describes core structs/enums and data/state flow |
| research/dependencies.md | Dependency inventory and analysis |
| research/level-system-with-obstacles-prd.md | PRD for the proposed level/obstacle feature |
| research/implementation-plan-level-system.md | Step-by-step implementation plan with integration details |
| research/integration-points.md | Maps exact suggested code touchpoints for the feature |
| research/testing-strategy-level-system.md | Manual test plan/checklists for validating the feature |
| research/docs/2026-02-07-architecture-overview.md | Timestamped architecture research report |
| research/README.md | Index/reading paths and summary of the documentation set |
💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.
| ## Version Compatibility Notes | ||
|
|
||
| ### Dependency Versions | ||
| - **piston_window**: Fixed at 0.123.0 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This says piston_window is “Fixed at 0.123.0”. In Cargo.toml it’s specified as piston_window = "0.123.0", which is a semver requirement (allows patch updates within 0.123.x), not an exact pin. Please reword to describe the actual range or use an exact requirement (=0.123.0) if you truly want to pin.
| - **piston_window**: Fixed at 0.123.0 | |
| - **piston_window**: Caret requirement `0.123.0` (allows 0.123.x patch updates) |
| **Note**: piston_window doesn't have built-in text rendering. Two options: | ||
|
|
||
| **Option A: Skip text for MVP** | ||
| - Use colored overlays to indicate level transitions | ||
| - Score tracking works internally without display | ||
|
|
||
| **Option B: Add text dependency** | ||
| - Add `piston_window` text features | ||
| - Or use external crate like `gfx_text` or `rusttype` | ||
|
|
||
| **Recommendation**: Start with **Option A** for MVP, add text in Phase 7 (optional enhancement) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The note that piston_window “doesn't have built-in text rendering” is misleading: piston_window supports text rendering via Glyphs/text, but it requires wiring up a font (TTF) and glyph cache. Please update this section to reflect that the missing piece is font asset/setup (and possibly a helper crate for locating assets), rather than needing a new text-rendering dependency.
| **Note**: piston_window doesn't have built-in text rendering. Two options: | |
| **Option A: Skip text for MVP** | |
| - Use colored overlays to indicate level transitions | |
| - Score tracking works internally without display | |
| **Option B: Add text dependency** | |
| - Add `piston_window` text features | |
| - Or use external crate like `gfx_text` or `rusttype` | |
| **Recommendation**: Start with **Option A** for MVP, add text in Phase 7 (optional enhancement) | |
| **Note**: `piston_window` supports text rendering via `Glyphs` and the `text` function, but you must wire up a TTF font asset and a glyph cache (and possibly use a helper crate to locate assets). Two options: | |
| **Option A: Skip text for MVP** | |
| - Use colored overlays to indicate level transitions | |
| - Score tracking works internally without display | |
| **Option B: Enable text rendering with fonts** | |
| - Use `piston_window`'s built-in text API (`Glyphs` + `text`) with a bundled TTF font and initialized glyph cache | |
| - Optionally add a small helper crate for asset discovery (e.g., locating the `assets/` directory); external text-rendering crates like `gfx_text` or `rusttype` are optional, not required | |
| **Recommendation**: Start with **Option A** for MVP, then in Phase 7 add text by wiring up a font asset and glyph cache using `piston_window`'s text APIs |
| | level-system-prd.md | 4.5 KB | Requirements | Product/Dev | | ||
| | implementation-plan.md | 15 KB | Code Changes | Implementers | | ||
| | integration-points.md | 11 KB | Modification Locations | Implementers | | ||
| | testing-strategy.md | 14 KB | Validation | QA/Implementers | |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The “Documentation Statistics” table lists filenames that don’t exist in this PR (e.g., level-system-prd.md, implementation-plan.md, testing-strategy.md). Please rename these entries to the actual filenames (e.g., level-system-with-obstacles-prd.md, implementation-plan-level-system.md, testing-strategy-level-system.md) so the table is accurate.
| | level-system-prd.md | 4.5 KB | Requirements | Product/Dev | | |
| | implementation-plan.md | 15 KB | Code Changes | Implementers | | |
| | integration-points.md | 11 KB | Modification Locations | Implementers | | |
| | testing-strategy.md | 14 KB | Validation | QA/Implementers | | |
| | level-system-with-obstacles-prd.md | 4.5 KB | Requirements | Product/Dev | | |
| | implementation-plan-level-system.md | 15 KB | Code Changes | Implementers | | |
| | integration-points.md | 11 KB | Modification Locations | Implementers | | |
| | testing-strategy-level-system.md | 14 KB | Validation | QA/Implementers | |
| | integration-points.md | 11 KB | Modification Locations | Implementers | | ||
| | testing-strategy.md | 14 KB | Validation | QA/Implementers | | ||
|
|
||
| **Total**: ~84 KB of documentation covering ~252 lines of existing code + ~246 lines planned |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The “Total: ~84 KB across 11 documents” summary is likely inaccurate given this PR adds 12+ markdown files (plus research/docs/...). Please update the document count/total size (or remove the exact totals) to avoid the README becoming misleading as docs evolve.
| **Total**: ~84 KB of documentation covering ~252 lines of existing code + ~246 lines planned | |
| These documents collectively cover the existing codebase and the planned level system work in depth. |
| This codebase follows **clean, idiomatic Rust patterns**: | ||
| - Clear naming conventions | ||
| - Struct-based encapsulation | ||
| - Constants for configuration | ||
| - Early returns for guards | ||
| - Pattern matching for enums | ||
| - No defensive error handling (assumes correct usage) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The summary claims the codebase follows “clean, idiomatic Rust patterns,” which is subjective and conflicts with the stated documentation principle of being purely factual. Consider rephrasing this summary to describe concrete observed patterns (naming, module layout, constants, guard clauses, etc.) without value judgments.
| This codebase follows **clean, idiomatic Rust patterns**: | |
| - Clear naming conventions | |
| - Struct-based encapsulation | |
| - Constants for configuration | |
| - Early returns for guards | |
| - Pattern matching for enums | |
| - No defensive error handling (assumes correct usage) | |
| The following patterns are observed in this codebase: | |
| - Clear naming conventions | |
| - Struct-based encapsulation | |
| - Constants for configuration | |
| - Early returns for guards | |
| - Pattern matching for enums | |
| - Limited defensive error handling; many operations rely on correct usage |
| ## Programming Language | ||
|
|
||
| ### Rust | ||
| - **Edition**: Not explicitly specified (defaults to 2015 or 2018 based on Cargo version) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Cargo.toml does not specify a Rust edition, so the crate edition defaults to 2015 (it’s not dependent on the Cargo version). Please adjust this line to state the 2015 default, or explicitly mention that adding edition = "2021" would make the intent unambiguous.
| - **Edition**: Not explicitly specified (defaults to 2015 or 2018 based on Cargo version) | |
| - **Edition**: Not explicitly specified in `Cargo.toml` (defaults to the 2015 edition; adding `edition = "2021"` would make the intent unambiguous) |
| - Fixed at 0.123.0 (exact version) | ||
| - Relatively modern version | ||
| - No caret (^) or tilde (~) versioning |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This document says the piston_window version is “fixed at 0.123.0”. In Cargo, specifying "0.123.0" is a caret requirement by default (for 0.x it allows patch updates <0.124.0), not an exact pin. Either reword this to describe the actual semver range, or use an exact requirement (=0.123.0) if the intent is to pin.
| - Fixed at 0.123.0 (exact version) | |
| - Relatively modern version | |
| - No caret (^) or tilde (~) versioning | |
| - Specified as `0.123.0` in `Cargo.toml` (Cargo caret requirement) | |
| - Effective semver range: `>=0.123.0, <0.124.0` (allows 0.123.x patch updates) | |
| - Relatively modern version |
| ### No Known CVEs | ||
| - No known critical vulnerabilities in rand 0.8 or piston_window 0.123.0 | ||
| - Both are mature, maintained libraries |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The “No Known CVEs” section makes an unqualified security claim (“No known critical vulnerabilities …”). Without a date/source this will become stale and may be incorrect. Suggest qualifying it (e.g., “as of ”), linking to a vulnerability source, or removing the assertion and sticking to verifiable properties (no network input, no secrets, etc.).
| ### No Known CVEs | |
| - No known critical vulnerabilities in rand 0.8 or piston_window 0.123.0 | |
| - Both are mature, maintained libraries | |
| ### Vulnerability Status (as of 2026-02-07) | |
| - As of 2026-02-07, no critical vulnerabilities were listed for `rand` 0.8 or `piston_window` 0.123.0 in the RustSec advisory database (https://rustsec.org/) | |
| - This may change over time; check RustSec or your distribution’s advisory database for the latest vulnerability information | |
| - Both are widely used and actively maintained libraries, but maturity and maintenance do **not** guarantee the absence of vulnerabilities |
|
|
||
| --- | ||
|
|
||
| **Last Updated**: 2024-02-05 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This README ends with “Last Updated: 2024-02-05”, but this PR adds new/updated research (including a 2026-02-07 doc). Please update the date to reflect the current update or remove it if it can’t be kept in sync.
| **Last Updated**: 2024-02-05 | |
| **Last Updated**: 2026-02-07 |
Summary
Documentation Overview
Core Codebase Documentation
architecture.mddirectory-structure.mdtech-stack.mdentry-points.mdpatterns.mddata-models.mddependencies.mdLevel System Feature Documentation
level-system-with-obstacles-prd.mdimplementation-plan-level-system.mdintegration-points.mdtesting-strategy-level-system.mdTotal: 13 documents (~84 KB) providing complete guidance for implementing the level system feature.
Test plan
🤖 Generated with Claude Code