David F GliddenandClaude Opus 4.8
3f9a89b00c
Basic Memory v0.21.6 first sync over the live memory dir (steward-authorized live-dir trial, Option A 2026-06-06): adds permalink: to frontmatter, refolds long YAML description lines, strips final newlines. Bodies untouched — verified via full diff classification. From this commit forward, any diff in claude/memory shows only what Basic Memory or the session writes. Trial design: MemPalace untouched as incumbent; git status check on this dir at every wrap; end-of-day evaluation (recall quality, sync robustness, rebuild-from-files, malformed-file behavior). Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
42 lines
3.7 KiB
Markdown
42 lines
3.7 KiB
Markdown
---
|
|
permalink: claude-memory/feedback-scss-file-organization-not-kitchen-sink
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
name: SCSS file organization — don't kitchen-sink into the most recently-touched file
|
|
description: Steward caught 2026-04-28 evening — across the day's apparatus work I added .preface, .section-break, .sequence-marker, and was about to add .sequence-index-* styles all to `_sidenotes.scss` because that's the file I had been editing. The file's own header declared its scope as §XII + §XII.b. I was violating that declared scope by aggregation. Steward verbatim: *"why in sidenotes.scss?"*
|
|
type: feedback
|
|
originSessionId: e5a1fa7c-cae6-49c4-8678-e27ce379639b
|
|
---
|
|
**Pattern caught**: when adding new CSS rules in a focused work session, I default to dropping them in the most recently-touched SCSS file (proximity bias) rather than the file scoped to their concern. Across one day's evening work I added four unrelated apparatus blocks (preface, section-break, sequence-marker, sequence-index) all to `_sidenotes.scss` — whose own header comment declared its scope as **§XII Sidenotes + §XII.b Register Markers**.
|
|
|
|
**Steward correction (verbatim)**: *"why in sidenotes.scss?"*
|
|
|
|
## Why this matters
|
|
|
|
- **The file's declared scope IS the contract.** Adding orthogonal concerns silently turns a focused partial into a kitchen-sink. Future readers (including future me) lose the file's organizing principle.
|
|
- **Cousin to blame-the-exotic-before-checking-the-boring** (saved 2026-04-28 earlier today): same shape — defaulting to the path of least resistance instead of the principled one. Different domain (file org vs diagnostics), same root impulse.
|
|
- **DX cost compounds**: a partial named `_sidenotes.scss` becomes harder to grep, refactor, or hand off to a collaborator when it secretly contains preface/section-break/sequence/etc.
|
|
|
|
## How to apply
|
|
|
|
- **Before adding a new SCSS rule, check the target partial's header comment / declared scope.** If the rule belongs to a different concern, create a new partial OR find the right existing one.
|
|
- **One concern per partial** is the working norm in `scss/AldineXXI/`. The split is by spec section (§XII Sidenotes), apparatus type (preface, section-break), or page-type (sequence-index, post, layout).
|
|
- **`@import` order in `main.scss` is already sectioned with comments** (`// 7. Sidenotes (§XII)…`, `// 7.b Preface (§XII.c)…`). Honor that organization — add new imports in the right numbered slot.
|
|
- **If a partial has been growing across concerns**, surface it for refactor before adding the next rule. The cost of pausing to split is much smaller than the cost of a kitchen-sink that compounds.
|
|
|
|
## Refactor as recovery
|
|
|
|
When caught (as today), the recovery is:
|
|
1. Identify the partial's true scope (re-read its header comment).
|
|
2. Split the orthogonal concerns into properly-scoped new partials.
|
|
3. Update `main.scss` imports with section comments preserving the spec mapping.
|
|
4. The file returns to its declared shape; new partials inherit the discipline.
|
|
|
|
Today's recovery: split `_sidenotes.scss` into `_preface.scss`, `_section-break.scss`, `_sequence.scss` — each with a proper header comment naming its concern. Imports added to `main.scss` at slots 7.b, 7.c, 7.d (preserving the §XII numbering visually).
|
|
|
|
## Cross-references
|
|
|
|
- Cousin: `feedback-blame-the-exotic-before-checking-the-boring` (2026-04-28) — same proximity-bias / path-of-least-resistance shape, different domain.
|
|
- Cousin: feedback-canonical-workstream-tracker-discipline (2026-04-26) — also a file-organization discipline (canonical trackers, not parallel siblings).
|
|
- Sibling: the `would-Alexander-do-it?` test (2026-04-27) — *one pattern at a time*; bulk-scaffold instinct fights principled placement. |