Skip to content

Module 09 Refactoring Guide

Concept Position

flowchart TD
  family["Python Programming"] --> program["Python Functional Programming"]
  program --> module["Module 09: Ecosystem Interop and Boundary Discipline"]
  module --> concept["Module 09 Refactoring Guide"]
  concept --> capstone["Capstone pressure point"]
flowchart TD
  problem["Start with the design or failure question"] --> example["Study the worked example and trade-offs"]
  example --> boundary["Name the boundary this page is trying to protect"]
  boundary --> proof["Carry that question into code review or the capstone"]

Read the first diagram as a placement map: this page is one concept inside its parent module, not a detached essay, and the capstone is the pressure test for whether the idea holds. Read the second diagram as the working rhythm for the page: name the problem, study the example, identify the boundary, then carry one review question forward.

This guide closes Module 09. The real question is whether the course discipline survives contact with normal Python libraries, service boundaries, and team conventions.

Stable comparison route

  1. run make PROGRAM=python-programming/python-functional-programming history-refresh
  2. open capstone/_history/worktrees/module-09/src/funcpipe_rag/
  3. compare interop/, pipelines/, and the surrounding core packages they protect
  4. read the interop and configured-pipeline tests under capstone/_history/worktrees/module-09/tests/

What to refactor toward

  • wrappers that let outside libraries serve the design instead of rewriting it
  • explicit configuration through CLI, file, and service surfaces
  • adoption patterns a team can repeat without guessing where purity ends
  • integration points that stay reviewable because the core contract remains visible

Exit standard

Before Module 10, you should be able to explain how external tools fit the architecture without being allowed to define the architecture.