A modern PHP, code slingin ninja
## Build & Development Commands
- Use composer for dependency management of PHP files, NPM for javascript.
## Testing Guidelines
- Use BDD and behat/gerkin stories for testing
## Code Style & Guidelines
- Use design patterns and best practices where appropriate.
- Prefer to not use a framework
- Dependency Injection, OOP, etc.. are all to be used unless you have a valid/good reason not too.
- Use traits for shared functionality amongst objects/classes.
- Use attributes to define routes, command, event and query handlers, CQRS, event driven/domain driven development, w/ event sourcing. Prefer microservices or modular monoliths that run as services using OpenSwoole.
## Documentation Guidelines
- Comment any code that might not be readily apparent what it's for/does, as well as any work arounds.
- Add PHP Doc Blocks for general documentation
# SOLID Design Principles - Coding Assistant Guidelines
When generating, reviewing, or modifying code, follow these guidelines to ensure adherence to SOLID principles:
## 1. Single Responsibility Principle (SRP)
- Each class must have only one reason to change.
- Limit class scope to a single functional area or abstraction level.
- When a class exceeds 100-150 lines, consider if it has multiple responsibilities.
- Separate cross-cutting concerns (logging, validation, error handling) from business logic.
- Create dedicated classes for distinct operations like data access, business rules, and UI.
- Method names should clearly indicate their singular purpose.
- If a method description requires "and" or "or", it likely violates SRP.
- Prioritize composition over inheritance when combining behaviors.
## 2. Open/Closed Principle (OCP)
- Design classes to be extended without modification.
- Use abstract classes and interfaces to define stable contracts.
- Implement extension points for anticipated variations.
- Favor strategy patterns over conditional logic.
- Use configuration and dependency injection to support behavior changes.
- Avoid switch/if-else chains based on type checking.
- Provide hooks for customization in frameworks and libraries.
- Design with polymorphism as the primary mechanism for extending functionality.
## 3. Liskov Substitution Principle (LSP)
- Ensure derived classes are fully substitutable for their base classes.
- Maintain all invariants of the base class in derived classes.
- Never throw exceptions from methods that don't specify them in base classes.
- Don't strengthen preconditions in subclasses.
- Don't weaken postconditions in subclasses.
- Never override methods with implementations that do nothing or throw exceptions.
- Avoid type checking or downcasting, which may indicate LSP violations.
- Prefer composition over inheritance when complete substitutability can't be achieved.
## 4. Interface Segregation Principle (ISP)
- Create focused, minimal interfaces with cohesive methods.
- Split large interfaces into smaller, more specific ones.
- Design interfaces around client needs, not implementation convenience.
- Avoid "fat" interfaces that force clients to depend on methods they don't use.
- Use role interfaces that represent behaviors rather than object types.
- Implement multiple small interfaces rather than a single general-purpose one.
- Consider interface composition to build up complex behaviors.
- Remove any methods from interfaces that are only used by a subset of implementing classes.
## 5. Dependency Inversion Principle (DIP)
- High-level modules should depend on abstractions, not details.
- Make all dependencies explicit, ideally through constructor parameters.
- Use dependency injection to provide implementations.
- Program to interfaces, not concrete classes.
- Place abstractions in a separate package/namespace from implementations.
- Avoid direct instantiation of service classes with 'new' in business logic.
- Create abstraction boundaries at architectural layer transitions.
- Define interfaces owned by the client, not the implementation.
## Implementation Guidelines
- When starting a new class, explicitly identify its single responsibility.
- Document extension points and expected subclassing behavior.
- Write interface contracts with clear expectations and invariants.
- Question any class that depends on many concrete implementations.
- Use factories, dependency injection, or service locators to manage dependencies.
- Review inheritance hierarchies to ensure LSP compliance.
- Regularly refactor toward SOLID, especially when extending functionality.
- Use design patterns (Strategy, Decorator, Factory, Observer, etc.) to facilitate SOLID adherence.
## Warning Signs
- God classes that do "everything"
- Methods with boolean parameters that radically change behavior
- Deep inheritance hierarchies
- Classes that need to know about implementation details of their dependencies
- Circular dependencies between modules
- High coupling between unrelated components
- Classes that grow rapidly in size with new features
- Methods with many parameters
We analyze and improve the given code according to this plan:
1. Restructure the Namespace: Organize the codebase to allow modularity and scalability.
- Break down large entities into smaller, well-clustered units.
- Extract reusable components into separate files or modules.
2. Improve Identifier Names: Use more descriptive variable and function names for clarity.
3. Enhance Code Documentation: Add meaningful comments and docstrings to explain functionality.
4. Implement Logging Best Practices: Introduce structured logging for better debugging and monitoring.
- Use JSONL format for logs.
- Define log levels (INFO, DEBUG, ERROR) for better traceability.
5. Finally: Create a single solution.
Please analyze the provided code and rate it on a scale of 1-10 for how well it follows the Single Responsibility Principle (SRP), where:
1 = The code completely violates SRP, with many unrelated responsibilities mixed together
10 = The code perfectly follows SRP, with each component having exactly one well-defined responsibility
In your analysis, please consider:
1. Primary responsibility: Does each class/function have a single, well-defined purpose?
2. Cohesion: How closely related are the methods and properties within each class?
3. Reason to change: Are there multiple distinct reasons why the code might need to be modified?
4. Dependency relationships: Does the code mix different levels of abstraction or concerns?
5. Naming clarity: Do the names of classes/functions clearly indicate their single responsibility?
Please provide:
- Numerical rating (1-10)
- Brief justification for the rating
- Specific examples of SRP violations (if any)
- Suggestions for improving SRP adherence
- Any positive aspects of the current design
Rate more harshly if you find:
- Business logic mixed with UI code
- Data access mixed with business rules
- Multiple distinct operations handled by one method
- Classes that are trying to do "everything"
- Methods that modify the system in unrelated ways
Rate more favorably if you find:
- Clear separation of concerns
- Classes/functions with focused, singular purposes
- Well-defined boundaries between different responsibilities
- Logical grouping of related functionality
- Easy-to-test components due to their single responsibility
No Data configured
npx -y @jetbrains/mcp-proxy
npx -y @modelcontextprotocol/server-memory