Comments join attachments on the card face — a quiet bubble-and-count chip, present-only
A card whose thread holds one comment or more now draws a second trailing chip beside the paperclip: a secondary-tinted bubble glyph plus its count, shown only when the count is above zero (design ruling 2026-08-09, card e729e30a). Same styling family as the attachments chip — caption size, secondary tint, decorative and hidden outright from the accessibility tree — but this one carries a visible count rather than staying icon-only, per the ruling's own "bubble-style SF Symbol + count." It sits after the attachments chip at the row's trailing edge, in both the live title row and the drag replica. The count is a new `Card.commentCount` field the loader fills with a readdir over `comments/`'s identity-shaped children that carry their own `index.md` — `BoardLoader.commentCount(in:)`, built on the same `identityShapedChildren` predicate a trash entry's held-card count already uses. Never a parse: `.draft` and `.trash/` are excluded for free, the same dot-prefixed hidden-entry skip `CommentThread.load` documents for both, so the walk stays exactly the O(cards) shape 01-storage-format.md § Enhanced schema already commits to. Because the count rides inside the `card: Card` parameter `CardFaceView` already takes — not a new parameter of its own — drawing the chip costs nothing beyond a field read on an already-compared value: no new Observable read joins the body, and the equatable gate already covers it via `Card`'s synthesized `Equatable`. The one divergence from the comments pane's parsed count is documented rather than hidden: a comment folder whose `index.md` exists but fails to parse is a `Stray` the thread read excludes by opening and rejecting it, a cost this readdir does not pay. The face may then read one comment high until that folder is fixed or removed — the trade the ruling's "cheap directory-entry count… not a parse" asks for, over paying full parse cost on every card of every load. Every well-formed comment, and every card with no malformed one, agrees with the pane exactly. VoiceOver: `AccessibilityPhrases.cardValue` gains a `comments: Int` parameter, appended after attachments and before the cut-pending phrase — the same left-to-right order the two chips draw in, so a sighted read and a VoiceOver read never disagree about which comes first. The trashed lane row's own call site (an opaque unit with no comments to speak of) passes `comments: 0`. Docs: DESIGN/03-board-ui.md's card-face section describes both chips and retires the stale "closed with no growth" sentence, honestly recording the 2026-08-09 growth (the hero banner landed hours earlier, this chip after it) as exposure of facts the card already carries rather than a body excerpt. DESIGN/10-accessibility.md's flattened-element sentence gains the comment count. DESIGN/01-storage-format.md's Enhanced schema paragraph records the chip as shipped. WISHLIST #9 is marked shipped in place — not renumbered, since #10 and #11 are cross-referenced elsewhere. Tests: CardCommentCountListingTests (BoardLoaderTests.swift) pins the readdir against a synthetic tree — no comments/ folder, an empty one, non-identity-shaped and index-less strays excluded, .draft/.trash/ excluded for free, agreement with CommentThread.load's parsed count in the well-formed case, and the one documented divergence on a malformed index.md. AccessibilityPhrasesTests covers cardValue's new parameter alone, alongside attachments, and all three fragments together. ViewEquatableTests pins that a comment landing on a card is a gate difference. BoardRenderPerformanceTests adds a render-cost guard: one comment added to one card on a hosted 180-card board re-renders a handful of bodies, not the board. Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_014PtZdPwqZuqEDLc6wZMtEy
This commit is contained in:
@@ -330,6 +330,40 @@ struct BoardRenderPerformanceTests {
|
||||
"a one-card external edit re-rendered \(edit.containers) bodies for \(laneCount) containers")
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
/// **The comments chip's render-cost guard** (design ruling 2026-08-09, card e729e30a): a
|
||||
/// comment landing on one card must cost this suite's card budget, not the board's — proof that
|
||||
/// `Card.commentCount` riding inside the already-compared `card` parameter (no new
|
||||
/// `CardFaceView` parameter, no new Observable read) actually holds under a real hosted board,
|
||||
/// not just in the equality-gate unit tests (`ViewEquatableTests.aCommentCountChangeIsADifference`
|
||||
/// pins the gate; this pins what the gate is *for*). Structurally `aOneCardEditIsNotAWholeBoardRebuild`,
|
||||
/// a comment folder in place of an edited `index.md`.
|
||||
@Test("A comment added to one card re-renders a handful of bodies, not the board")
|
||||
func aOneCommentAddedIsNotAWholeBoardRebuild() async throws {
|
||||
let fixture = try makeFixture()
|
||||
defer { fixture.tearDown() }
|
||||
let board = try host(fixture)
|
||||
let total = laneCount * cardsPerLane
|
||||
|
||||
// A foreign comment arriving under exactly one card — the shape a card window's post, or an
|
||||
// agent's own `mkdir` + `index.md`, leaves on disk.
|
||||
try fixture.item(
|
||||
"\(laneName(3))/\(cardName(3, 17))/comments/\(UUID().uuidString.lowercased())",
|
||||
"---\nschema: 1\n---\nA comment.\n"
|
||||
)
|
||||
|
||||
BoardRenderMetrics.reset()
|
||||
await board.reload()
|
||||
let commented = Cost()
|
||||
|
||||
print("── reload, ONE comment added — \(commented.summary)")
|
||||
|
||||
#expect(board.store.snapshotGeneration > 0, "the comment never landed")
|
||||
#expect(commented.cards <= 8,
|
||||
"one comment on one card re-rendered \(commented.cards) of \(total) card faces")
|
||||
#expect(commented.containers <= laneCount,
|
||||
"one comment on one card re-rendered \(commented.containers) bodies for \(laneCount) containers")
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
@Test("Every lane re-runs on a one-card edit, and not because its gate compared unequal")
|
||||
func theLaneCostFollowsTheBoard() async throws {
|
||||
let wide = laneCount * 2
|
||||
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user