I’ll analyze the DSPEx MVP design and create a comprehensive implementation plan.Now let me create the detailed technical specification for the foundational module - DSPEx.Signature
:Based on my analysis of the DSPy codebase and the proposed DSPEx design, I’ve created a comprehensive implementation plan and detailed specification for the foundational DSPEx.Signature
module.
Key Insights from the Analysis:
Clean Separation: The Elixir design properly separates concerns - signatures are pure compile-time contracts, while adapters handle the runtime formatting complexity.
BEAM Advantages: The proposed concurrent evaluation engine using
Task.async_stream
will significantly outperform Python’s threading model for I/O-bound LLM calls.Type Safety: The macro-based approach provides compile-time guarantees that the Python version lacks, while maintaining the same developer ergonomics.
Why Start with DSPEx.Signature:
- Zero Dependencies: Can be implemented and tested in complete isolation
- Foundation: All other modules depend on this working correctly
- Compile-Time Safety: Catches errors early in the development cycle
- Clear Mapping: Direct correspondence to Python DSPy’s signature system
Next Steps:
After implementing DSPEx.Signature
, the natural progression would be:
DSPEx.Client
(HTTP layer with mocks)DSPEx.Adapter
(depends on Signature)DSPEx.Program
/DSPEx.Predict
(orchestration layer)DSPEx.Evaluate
(concurrent evaluation engine)DSPEx.Teleprompter
(optimization algorithms)
The implementation plan provides line-by-line mappings to the original Python code, ensuring we maintain feature parity while leveraging BEAM’s strengths in concurrency and fault tolerance.