rustledger rustfava PTA Standards
rustledger

ADR-0001: Crate Organization ​

Status ​

Accepted

Context ​

Rustledger aims to be a Beancount-compatible accounting library and CLI toolkit. We need to decide how to structure the codebase - as a single monolithic crate or as multiple smaller crates.

Key considerations:

  • Users may want only parsing, only validation, or the full toolkit
  • Compile times increase with crate size
  • Testing and documentation are easier with focused modules
  • WASM builds need minimal dependencies

Decision ​

Organize the codebase as a workspace with multiple focused crates:

  • rustledger-core: Core types (Directive, Transaction, Amount, etc.) with no dependencies beyond std
  • rustledger-parser: Beancount file parser, depends only on core
  • rustledger-loader: File loading with include resolution, depends on parser
  • rustledger-validate: Validation rules, depends on core
  • rustledger-booking: Balance booking algorithms, depends on core
  • rustledger-query: BQL query language, depends on core
  • rustledger-plugin: Plugin infrastructure, depends on core
  • rustledger-importer: Bank statement import framework (CSV, OFX)
  • rustledger: CLI binary (rledger, bean-* commands)
  • rustledger-wasm: WebAssembly bindings for JS/TS
  • rustledger-lsp: Language Server Protocol for editor integration
  • rustledger-ffi-wasi: FFI via WASI for embedding in any language

Consequences ​

Positive ​

  • Users can depend on only what they need (rustledger-parser for parsing only)
  • Faster incremental compilation due to smaller compilation units
  • Clear boundaries between concerns
  • WASM builds can exclude unnecessary dependencies
  • Each crate can have focused documentation and tests

Negative ​

  • More boilerplate for inter-crate dependencies
  • Need to maintain version compatibility across crates
  • Initial setup complexity is higher

Neutral ​

  • Using a Cargo workspace for coordinated releases