What is the distinction between IMPLEMENTATION.md and *.rs source code files?

Implementation has the details for what is being implemented.

Details what algorithms/approaches to use etc. The reason is that often a single context is not enough and when CC continues the CLAUDE-CONTINUE tells the model What it should do. Not Why (architecture) and How (implementation).

The architecture file is usually more abstract/high level and may also contain info about how the stuff integrates with other parts of the codebase etc.

	▲	energy123 2 days ago \| parent [-]
		I'm very curious about how you do ARCHITECTURE.md. What level of description is allowed? What are the guardrails? I have something similar to that where all I do is list out the key types, structs, enums and traits, accompanied by comments describing what they are. I broke it down into four sections corresponding to different layers of abstraction. But I noticed that over time the LLM will puff up the size and start putting implementations into it, so some prompting discipline is required to keep things terse and inline. Is your ARCHITECTURE.md similar to mine or is it more like a UML diagram or perhaps an architectural spec in a DSL?