Per user direction ('make a custom DSL ideal for recording the
call-graph or other metrics', 'I want a post-fix heiarchy', 'JSON
is ill-performant'): replaced JSON serializer with a custom
postfix (RPN) DSL tailored to the audit's record shapes.
THE CUSTOM DSL
- Postfix (operands before operator); no brackets, braces,
commas, or colons.
- Length-prefixed lists: N items followed by 'list' word.
- Tagged records: each 'word' is a constructor with a known
arity (action=3, fn=3, call=1, mut=3, exp-op=5, pair=2, int=1).
- Whitespace-tokenized; bare atoms unquoted; double quotes
only when whitespace/special chars present.
- nil for null; backslash for line comments; true/false for bool.
- Trivial parser (~30 lines): _tokenize_dsl splits on
whitespace and respects quotes + comments; parse_dsl
walks tokens and evaluates tagged words against a known
arity table (DSL_WORD_ARITY).
- Round-trips: to_dsl(profile) -> parse_dsl(to_dsl(profile))
yields the same in-memory structure.
DELIVERABLES (updated spec + plan)
- src/code_path_audit.py: to_dsl, dump_dsl, parse_dsl,
_tokenize_dsl, to_tree (prefix-tree text renderer),
to_markdown, to_mermaid.
- Output: .dsl files (machine) + .tree (human prefix view) +
.md (summary tables) + .mmd (Mermaid diagrams).
- No new pip dependencies; pure stdlib.
WHAT STAYED
- The 7 cost classes (file_io, network, ast_parse, json_io,
pickle, deep_copy, loop_amplified) and 5 mutation kinds
are unchanged. The json_io cost class is for JSON file
I/O the audit detects, not the output format.
- 36 tests total (15 + 8 + 10 + 3 across the 4 implementation
phases).
6 phases, one per commit:
Phase 1: data structures (CallGraph, ExpensiveOp, StateMutation)
- 15 unit tests
Phase 2: trace_action + ActionProfile + cost model + AST walking
- 8 tests (synthetic + integration on real src/)
Phase 3: JSON / markdown / Mermaid output
- 4 tests
Phase 4: MCP tool + CLI surface
- 3 tests
Phase 5: run audit on 3 actions; commit report
Phase 6: tracks.md update
TDD pattern: each task has synthetic-data unit test, then
real implementation, then integration with real src/, then
commit. The state.toml scaffold is created in Phase 0 Step 0.1
and advanced after each phase.
3 actions in scope (MMA is cold per user):
- ai_message_lifecycle (5 entry points)
- discussion_save_load (4 entry points)
- gui_startup (3 entry points)
Two follow-up tracks recorded but NOT in this track:
- pipeline_runtime_profiling_20260607
- pipeline_pruning_20260607
No new pip dependencies; pure stdlib (ast, json, pathlib,
dataclasses). Read-only on src/; new files are the tool, the
tests, and the report under docs/reports/code_path_audit/2026-06-07/.
Design for a data-oriented static-analysis tool
(src/code_path_audit.py) that audits the 3 major actions (AI
message lifecycle, discussion save/load, GUI startup) for
expensive operations, redundant calls, and pipelining
candidates. Output: JSON data files + markdown summaries +
Mermaid per-action call graphs in docs/reports/code_path_audit/.
61 src/ files, 27,447 total lines. Call graph is non-trivial;
per-action traversal is what makes analysis tractable.
Cost model: 7 cost classes (file_io, network, ast_parse,
json_io, pickle, deep_copy, loop_amplified) with heuristic
weights; EXPENSIVE_THRESHOLD = 40,000 module constant. 5
state mutation kinds (attr_write, container_mutate, file_write,
ipc_emit, global_write).
The 3 action entry points are per-action defined (see Per-Action
Design table). MMA worker spawn is OUT of scope per user (cold
until 1:1 discussion UX is dogfooded).
Two follow-up tracks recorded but NOT in this track:
- pipeline_runtime_profiling_20260607: calibrate the heuristic
cost model with real measurements; catch C-extension cost,
decorator dispatch, JIT effects that static analysis can't
resolve.
- pipeline_pruning_20260607: implement the high-priority
optimization candidates surfaced by this track's report.
6 atomic commits planned: data structures; trace_action +
ActionProfile + cost model; output (JSON/MD/Mermaid); MCP +
CLI; run audit + commit report; tracks.md update.
ed