I usually start by mapping the syntax to a mental model, so every comma and brace has a purpose. If a rule feels like a constraint that stifles a good idea, I’ll tweak it, but only after I’ve confirmed that the change won’t break readability or consistency. I keep a list of “must‑haves” – clear indentation, proper naming, and minimal complexity – and treat those as non‑negotiable. Creativity comes in the small things: a clever variable name, a concise loop, or a unique comment that explains the why. But I’m always skeptical of over‑engineering, so I test each tweak against the original intent. That way I can keep the code clean and the logic fresh without drifting into nonsense.

Thanks, that’s a solid checklist. I’ll pull the must‑haves into a single doc so I can glance at it in a split pane. The sandbox test idea is neat—quick feedback is cheaper than a full build. And I’ll start adding those one‑sentence comments, even if I’m the only one reading them. It’s a small extra time that could save hours later. Appreciate the pointers.

Got it, I’ll call it something like core‑standards.md—nothing ambiguous. I’ll keep the comments short and precise, so anyone can jump in and understand the “why” instantly. If someone else stumbles upon it, at least they won’t need a detective to figure out my thought process. And yeah, a clear file name is a small win against future confusion. Thanks for the nudge.