惯性聚合 高效追踪和阅读你感兴趣的博客、新闻、科技资讯
阅读原文 在惯性聚合中打开

推荐订阅源

人人都是产品经理
人人都是产品经理
有赞技术团队
有赞技术团队
L
LangChain Blog
C
Check Point Blog
博客园 - 【当耐特】
OSCHINA 社区最新新闻
OSCHINA 社区最新新闻
V
V2EX
Cyber Security Advisories - MS-ISAC
Cyber Security Advisories - MS-ISAC
GbyAI
GbyAI
美团技术团队
博客园 - 司徒正美
Google DeepMind News
Google DeepMind News
WordPress大学
WordPress大学
aimingoo的专栏
aimingoo的专栏
S
SegmentFault 最新的问题
A
About on SuperTechFans
Blog — PlanetScale
Blog — PlanetScale
Hugging Face - Blog
Hugging Face - Blog
博客园 - 叶小钗
腾讯CDC
B
Blog
G
Google Developers Blog
The Cloudflare Blog
P
Proofpoint News Feed

DEV Community

Authentication Security Deep Dive: From Brute Force to Salted Hashing (With Java Examples) Why AI Systems Don’t Fail — They Drift Spilling beans for how i learn for exam😁"Reinforcement Learning Cheat Sheet" I Replaced Chrome with Safari for AI Browser Automation. Here's What Broke (and What Finally Worked) How Python Borrows Other People's Work The $40 Architecture: Processing 1 Billion API Requests with 99.99% Uptime Vibe Coding: A Workflow Guide (From Zero to SaaS) Most webhook security guides protect the wrong side. The scary part is delivery. Headless CMS for TanStack Start: Build a Blog with Cosmic EU Age Verification App "Hacked in 2 Minutes" — What Actually Happened Comfy Cloud’s delete function does not actually remove files Running AI Models on GPU Cloud Servers: A Beginner Guide Event-driven media intelligence with AWS Step Functions and Bedrock I scored 500 AI prompts across 8 quality dimensions — here's what broke How to Call Google Gemini API from Next.js (Free Tier, No Backend Needed) The Portal Protocol: Reclaiming Human Connection in the Age of AI How to Fix Your Team's Scattered Knowledge Problem With a Self-Hosted Forum Intro to tc Cloud Functors: A Graph-First Mental Model for the Modern Cloud Designing Multi-Tenant Backends With Both Ownership and Team Access I Built a Neumorphic CSS Library with 77+ Components — Here's What I Learned PostgreSQL Performance Optimization: Why Connection Pooling Is Critical at Scale Cómo construí un SaaS multi-rubro para gestionar expensas en Argentina con FastAPI + Vue 3 🚀 I Built an Ethical Hacking Scanner Tool – Open Source Project I Replaced /usage and /context in Claude Code With a Single Statusline A Pythonic Way to Handle Emails (IMAP/SMTP) with Auto-Discovery and AI-Ready Design I Collected 8.9 Million Polymarket Price Points — Here's What I Found About How Markets Really Move EcoTrack AI — Carbon Footprint Tracker & Dashboard Everyone's Using AI. No One Agrees How. 5 self-hosted ebook managers worth trying in 2026 Building Your First AI Agent with LangChain: From Chatbot to Autonomous Assistant
Engineering Post: Locking the public surface before writi...
Ernesto Herrera Salinas · 2026-06-15 · via DEV Community

Before implementing v1.0, I spent time designing its API and architecture and
captured the result in a single design document. I then split implementation into
stages so I could test one group of ideas at a time: M0 for the repository
scaffold, M1 for determinism, followed by metadata, inference, compilation, and
runtime.

M0 tested the first architectural claim: the public API should be deliberate,
and the build should enforce that boundary before the first feature exists.

The layout

I wanted each kind of verification to have a clear home, so the initial solution
contains six projects:

src/Munchausen/                    the single v1.0 package
tests/Munchausen.Tests/            subsystem unit tests
tests/Munchausen.AcceptanceTests/  compiled API scenarios
tests/Munchausen.DeterminismTests/ PRNG vectors + golden outputs
tests/Munchausen.Benchmarks/       BenchmarkDotNet
tests/Munchausen.TestModels/       models shared by every test project

A Directory.Build.props keeps the shared assumptions visible in one place:
net8.0, <Nullable>enable</Nullable>, and <TreatWarningsAsErrors>. The
library project also enables <GenerateDocumentationFile>, which activates
CS1591 warnings. With warnings treated as errors, a missing XML comment on a
public member breaks the build. Nullability and documentation therefore become
API-design decisions, not cleanup for later.

The surface as an executable contract

The most interesting experiment in M0 uses
Microsoft.CodeAnalysis.PublicApiAnalyzers. It tracks two files,
PublicAPI.Shipped.txt and PublicAPI.Unshipped.txt, that together list every
public symbol the assembly exposes. If the code declares a public member that
isn't listed, the analyzer raises RS0016. If a listed member disappears, it
raises RS0017. Because warnings are errors, either change breaks the build.

At M0 both files have zero API entries, only a #nullable enable header.
The surface starts at zero and grows only when I decide a later stage needs a new
public capability. The analyzer turns "remember to review the public API" into a
boundary the build can check.

There's a subtlety worth noting for anyone wiring this up: do not add
<AdditionalFiles Include="PublicAPI.*.txt" /> to the csproj. The analyzer
package already registers matching files; adding them again double-registers
them and quietly breaks dotnet format's ability to auto-populate entries. (I
didn't learn that until a much later milestone, see M7.)

Testing the test

Installing an analyzer and seeing a green build did not tell me much. The current
project had no public members, so there was nothing for it to reject. To learn
whether the boundary worked, I needed to cross it deliberately.

So I committed a canary:

public sealed class Canary
{
    public int Answer => 42;
}

Undocumented and unlisted. The build failed with five useful errors:
RS0016 for the type, its property getter, and its implicit constructor, plus
CS1591 for the two missing XML comments. One canary exercised both guardrails
at once. Then I removed the canary commit and the tree built clean again.

The canary clarified something useful: a green build shows that current code
passes; a deliberate failure demonstrates what the build will protect later.

Shared models

Every test project references Munchausen.TestModels, giving them the same
fixtures: Car/Owner, Customer/Order/Item, a positional record, an
init-only model, and Employee with a self-referential Manager. That last
model records a question the runtime must eventually answer: how should
generation stop when a model contains a cycle?

Verification

dotnet build and dotnet test are green in Release with zero warnings. CI
(.github/workflows/ci.yml) runs restore → build → test on every push and PR to
master. The canary proved the surface and documentation gates; the clean build
confirmed that removing it restored the intended zero-API baseline.

There are still no features to demonstrate, but M0 answered its architectural
question. The repository can now distinguish an intentional public API change
from an accidental one.

What's next: M1, Determinism Core

M1 tests the next design claim: random data can still be reproducible. The
same model and seed should produce the same output on every runtime and OS. Since
.NET does not guarantee that System.Random will preserve its algorithm across
versions, I will build an owned PRNG using SplitMix64 and xoshiro256**.

The central test is simple and unforgiving: output must match published
reference vectors, and a captured golden must reproduce byte-for-byte across
process runs. Like the M0 canary, it turns an architectural intention into
something the build can prove.