The Architecture Effect: How Structure Shapes Composition

When a painter approaches a landscape, the first decision isn't about color or brushwork — it's about composition. Where is the horizon? What dominates the foreground? How does the eye travel through the scene? Your code's architecture makes the same decisions for the algorithm. The way you organize files, separate concerns, and connect modules creates a spatial blueprint that the visual engine translates directly into compositional structure.

A monolithic codebase — one large application where components are tightly interwoven — produces artworks with dense, interconnected compositions. Visual elements flow into one another without clear boundaries. The painting feels like a single, unified scene: rich, complex, and immersive. Think of a detailed Renaissance fresco where every figure and element connects to tell one continuous story. The monolith's strength is visual coherence; its character is intensity.

A well-modularized codebase — clear directories, separated concerns, defined interfaces between parts — produces artworks with distinct visual zones. Each module contributes its own region of the canvas, connected but individually recognizable. The composition has rhythm: areas of detail alternate with breathing room. It's the visual equivalent of a well-organized gallery wall, where each piece stands alone but the arrangement tells a larger story.

A flat architecture — few directories, files at the same level, minimal nesting — creates open, expansive compositions with a wide horizon line. The visual weight is distributed evenly, like a prairie landscape. A deeply nested architecture — folders within folders, layers of abstraction — creates compositions with pronounced vertical depth, like looking down a corridor of archways. Neither is better. They're different visual languages for different architectural philosophies.

A single-file script is like a sketch — focused, immediate, with a strong central subject. A project spread across dozens of files is like a panoramic painting — broader scope, more elements, more relationships between parts. The algorithm reads the file count and distribution as signals about visual complexity. A single file with 500 lines and ten files with 50 lines each produce meaningfully different compositions, even if the total code volume is identical.

Your architectural choices are creative decisions, whether you think of them that way or not. Choosing a flat structure says something about how you value simplicity and directness. Choosing deep modularity says something about how you value separation and organization. The algorithm doesn't judge either approach — it interprets both faithfully. Your architecture is already a form of visual expression. DevPaint just makes it visible.