No video available
As a founding engineer at Odapt, I led a comprehensive frontend architecture overhaul that transformed 10,000+ lines of vanilla JavaScript into a robust TypeScript + Next.js system. The platform enables AI to generate fully functional web applications and dynamically modify its own interface in real-time—a category of challenges few engineering teams have tackled.
Skills
Key Deliverables
- Refactored 10,000+ lines from vanilla JS to TypeScript
- Implemented recursive iframe architecture for self-modifying UIs
- Built runtime type validation pipeline for AI-generated code
- Achieved 45% performance improvement
- Reduced runtime defects by 35%
The Challenge: When the UI Rewrites Itself
Building for self-modifying interfaces breaks fundamental web development assumptions
Traditional web applications operate under a foundational assumption: the code that renders the UI is static. Developers write components, compile them, and deploy them. The UI might be dynamic in behavior (responding to user input, fetching data), but the structure of the components themselves remains fixed.
Odapt breaks this assumption entirely. The platform doesn't just generate a static application once—it operates within a recursive iframe architecture where the AI generates UI components on the fly, injects them into iframes that can themselves contain AI-generated interfaces, observes the result, and modifies its own output in real time. Changes hot-reload instantly without page refreshes, and this process can recurse indefinitely: AI-generated UIs can spawn additional AI-generated UIs.
This created a cascade of engineering challenges that had never been solved before:
Type Safety in Dynamic Contexts
TypeScript's static type system assumes code is known at compile time. When an AI is generating and modifying TypeScript components at runtime, how do you maintain type guarantees without sacrificing the flexibility AI needs?
Hot-Reload Stability
React's Fast Refresh is designed for human developers making incremental changes to a single file. When an AI is rapidly iterating on component structure, making multi-file changes, and potentially triggering cascading updates, how do you prevent infinite reload loops, state corruption, and UI crashes?
Recursive Complexity Management
Iframes embedding iframes embedding iframes—each with their own AI-generated content. How do you manage parent-child communication, state synchronization, error propagation, and memory usage at arbitrary nesting depth?
Runtime Safety and Debugging
When code is being dynamically evaluated and injected, how do you sandbox execution to prevent self-destructive changes or security vulnerabilities? And when the AI breaks something, how do you debug code that doesn't exist in your editor?
The Solution: Architectural Reimagination
Strategic approach to building systems where AI can safely modify its own interface
I led the migration from a 10,000+ line vanilla JavaScript/HTML/CSS codebase to a fully typed, modular TypeScript + Next.js architecture designed specifically for AI-driven dynamism. This wasn't a simple refactor—it required reimagining how web applications could be structured to support self-modification.
1. Incremental TypeScript Migration with Zero Downtime
Rather than attempting a big-bang rewrite that would halt product development, I implemented a gradual conversion strategy that maintained continuous deployment throughout the migration.
The approach established a strict tsconfig.json with progressive strictness, converted files incrementally starting with core abstractions (.js → .ts, .jsx → .tsx), and leveraged TypeScript's superset compatibility to maintain uninterrupted feature shipping. Comprehensive type checking in CI/CD prevented regression.
This allowed the team to ship features daily while the migration progressed over several weeks—a critical capability for a Y Combinator company moving at startup velocity.
2. Modular Abstraction Layers for Dynamic Component Injection
The key architectural innovation was creating abstraction boundaries that separated static, type-safe code from dynamic, AI-generated code. This pattern allowed type safety at the boundaries while maintaining flexibility in the middle.
interface ComponentDescriptor {
name: string;
schema: JSONSchema;
defaultProps: Record<string, unknown>;
render: (props: unknown) => ReactElement;
}
const DynamicComponentLoader = dynamic(() =>
validateAndInject(aiGeneratedComponentCode), {
loading: () => <SafeFallback />,
ssr: false,
}
);This pattern enabled type safety at the boundaries (inputs/outputs are validated), flexibility in the middle (AI can generate arbitrary component logic), and error isolation (failures in AI-generated code don't crash the entire application). The component registry serves as a contract that both human engineers and the AI must respect.
3. Recursive Iframe Architecture with Controlled Communication
To enable AI-generated interfaces to safely embed other AI-generated interfaces, I designed a sandboxed iframe system with strict communication protocols. Each iframe runs an isolated Next.js context with its own Fast Refresh instance, preventing failures in one branch from cascading throughout the entire application.
Parent-child communication uses a typed postMessage API with JSON schema validation, recursion depth limits prevent infinite nesting, and each iframe has its own error boundary and fallback UI. This architecture allows the AI to create arbitrarily complex nested interfaces while maintaining stability and debuggability.
The isolation also provides security benefits: AI-generated code runs in a confined context, limiting potential damage from malicious or incorrect code generation.
4. Hot-Reload Optimization for AI Iteration Speed
Next.js Fast Refresh is optimized for human development patterns: edit file → save → see change. AI iteration patterns are fundamentally different: autonomous, rapid, and often multi-file. I adapted the system specifically for AI workflows:
Implemented batched reload debouncing to prevent reload storms when AI makes multi-file changes
Created component-level memoization to preserve user state (form inputs, scroll position) across AI-driven updates
Built reload health monitoring to detect and recover from Fast Refresh failures automatically
Designed pure component patterns to maximize Fast Refresh compatibility and minimize state loss
5. Backend Integration: FastAPI + Docker Microservices
The frontend needed to communicate seamlessly with a FastAPI backend for AI inference and code generation. I designed a clean integration architecture with RESTful API contracts, OpenAPI schema generation, and CORS-enabled endpoints.
The system includes type-safe request/response handling and end-to-end type safety using generated TypeScript clients from FastAPI schemas. The backend uses Dockerized microservices for independent scaling, allowing the inference service, code generation service, and application runner to scale independently based on demand.
Engineering Deep Dive: Key Challenges and Solutions
How we solved the technical problems that make self-modifying UIs possible
Challenge 1: Type Safety with Dynamic Code Generation
Maintaining compile-time guarantees in a runtime code generation system
The core problem: The AI generates TypeScript component code as strings at runtime. How do you validate it's type-safe before executing it without losing the flexibility AI needs?
The solution was a multi-layered runtime type validation pipeline. AI-generated code is parsed with the TypeScript Compiler API to extract type information. The extracted types are compared against known interfaces and schemas. Generated components are wrapped in a validation layer that checks props at runtime using Zod schemas. Only validated components are injected into the live UI.
This approach provides defense in depth: compile-time types for human code, runtime validation for AI code. It caught bugs before users saw them, while still giving the AI flexibility to generate creative solutions.
Challenge 2: State Management Across Recursive Contexts
Preserving user state when the AI rewrites components
When the AI modifies a component, how do you preserve user state (form inputs, scroll position, unsaved work) without breaking the application or losing user progress?
I implemented a state persistence layer where components annotate which state should survive component updates using a @preserve decorator. Before hot-reload, state is serialized and stored in a parent context. After reload, state is rehydrated into the new component version. Mismatches (like removed state keys) are handled gracefully with sensible defaults.
This elegant solution meant that even as the AI was fundamentally changing the UI structure, users never lost their work or had to restart their workflow.
Challenge 3: Debugging Self-Modifying Code
Creating observability for code that doesn't exist in your editor
Traditional debugging tools (breakpoints, stack traces, source maps) assume the code you're debugging exists somewhere in your codebase. When the AI generates and then modifies code at runtime, these tools break down. How do you debug something that doesn't exist in your editor?
I built comprehensive observability infrastructure: all AI-generated code is logged with timestamps and generation context, runtime errors capture the generated code snapshot that caused them, a debugging UI shows the history of AI modifications leading to any error, and source maps link runtime errors back to AI generation prompts.
This transformed debugging from 'impossible' to 'straightforward.' Engineers could see exactly what the AI generated, when it generated it, what the AI's reasoning was, and what went wrong. It was like having a perfect audit trail of the AI's decision-making process.
Impact and Results
Quantitative and qualitative improvements from the architecture redesign
Performance Improvement
Optimized rendering, lazy loading, memoization
Maintainability Increase
Measured by code complexity metrics
Fewer Runtime Defects
Type safety and validation pipeline
Qualitative Improvements
Developer Velocity
New features ship 2-3x faster with the modular architecture. Engineers can reason about and extend the system with confidence, knowing that the abstractions protect them from complexity.
AI Reliability
Self-modifying UIs are now stable enough for production use. The validation pipeline and error boundaries prevent the AI from creating code that crashes the application.
User Experience
Instant UI updates without page refreshes create a "magical" feel. Users can watch the AI redesign interfaces in real-time while maintaining their state and context.
Team Confidence
Engineers can reason about AI-generated code through clear abstractions. With comprehensive logging and debugging tools, they never feel like they're debugging a black box.
Product Differentiation
The refactored architecture became a core product differentiator for Odapt. The platform could now support more complex app generation (multi-page apps, nested interfaces, recursive UI patterns). The AI could iterate faster on user feedback thanks to stable hot-reload. Bugs in AI-generated code were caught before users saw them through the validation pipeline. And the platform could scale to handle more concurrent users thanks to performance improvements and optimized resource usage.
What started as an engineering challenge became a competitive advantage.
Lessons Learned
Key insights from pioneering a new category of AI-native systems
1. Type Safety and Dynamism Aren't Mutually Exclusive
The common wisdom says dynamic code generation and static typing are incompatible. This project proved that with the right architecture—validation layers, abstraction boundaries, runtime checks—you can have both type safety and the flexibility AI needs.
2. Observability Is Critical for AI-Generated Code
Traditional debugging tools fail when systems modify themselves. Investing in custom observability—logging generated code, capturing snapshots, building debugging UIs—was essential. You need to be able to see what the AI generated, when, and why.
3. Incremental Migration Enables Continuous Delivery
Attempting a big-bang rewrite would have stalled product development for months. The gradual TypeScript migration allowed feature work to continue uninterrupted while engineering improvements shipped every week.
4. AI Iteration Patterns Differ from Human Patterns
Tools like Fast Refresh are designed for human development workflows. Adapting them for AI required deep understanding of both the tool and the AI's behavior patterns. What works for humans (immediate feedback on single-file changes) doesn't work for AI (rapid multi-file modifications).
Technical Stack
Frontend
- TypeScript
- Next.js 14 (App Router)
- React 18
- Tailwind CSS
Backend & AI
- Python FastAPI
- Docker Microservices
- Custom Component Generation Pipeline
Type Safety & Validation
- Zod Runtime Validation
- TypeScript Compiler API
- JSON Schema
Architecture
- Recursive Iframe Isolation
- postMessage Communication Protocol
- Error Boundaries
Conclusion: The Frontier of AI-Native Systems
Odapt represents the frontier of AI-powered development tools: systems where the AI doesn't just generate code once, but actively participates in building and modifying its own interface. This case study demonstrates that with thoughtful architecture—modular abstractions, runtime validation, recursive isolation, and comprehensive observability—it's possible to bring the reliability and maintainability of traditional software engineering to self-modifying AI systems.
The technical challenges were substantial: maintaining type safety in dynamic contexts, stabilizing hot-reload for AI iteration, managing recursive iframe complexity, and ensuring runtime safety. But the solutions—incremental TypeScript migration, abstraction layers, sandboxed iframe architecture, and custom observability tools—didn't just solve immediate problems. They created a foundation for the next generation of AI-native applications.
As AI agents become more capable and autonomous, the ability to build interfaces that the AI itself can safely modify will become increasingly critical. This project charts a path forward: combining the flexibility AI needs with the safety and reliability users deserve.
Lines Refactored
Performance Gain
More Maintainable
Fewer Defects
First-of-its-kind recursive self-modifying UI architecture with type safety
Production system serving active users with zero human intervention in AI UI modifications
Ready to bring your vision to life?
Let's collaborate on your next project with the same precision and innovation demonstrated in this case study.
Schedule a Meeting
Ready to discuss your project? Choose a convenient time to meet with us.
Contact Information
Schedule a consultation to discuss your software development needs. I'm here to help bring your ideas to life.