Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

build: Do not create archive twice when create bundle #1120

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Jul 4, 2024
Merged

Conversation

Czaki
Copy link
Collaborator

@Czaki Czaki commented Jul 4, 2024

Instead of double archive cretion, just make copy with simpler name

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • New Features

    • Improved the process for creating and packing executables by separating file path retrieval from archive creation.
  • Refactor

    • Renamed and restructured functions to enhance code clarity and maintainability.

Instead of double archive cretion, just make copy with simpler name
@Czaki Czaki added this to the 0.15.3 milestone Jul 4, 2024
Copy link
Contributor

sourcery-ai bot commented Jul 4, 2024

🧙 Sourcery has finished reviewing your pull request!


Tips
  • Trigger a new Sourcery review by commenting @sourcery-ai review on the pull request.
  • Continue your discussion with Sourcery by replying directly to review comments.
  • You can change your review settings at any time by accessing your dashboard:
    • Enable or disable the Sourcery-generated pull request summary or reviewer's guide;
    • Change the review language;
  • You can always contact us if you have any questions or feedback.

Copy link
Contributor

@sourcery-ai sourcery-ai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

We've reviewed this pull request using the Sourcery rules engine. If you would also like our AI-powered code review then let us know.

@Czaki Czaki changed the title Do not create archive twice when create bundle build: Do not create archive twice when create bundle Jul 4, 2024
Copy link
Contributor

coderabbitai bot commented Jul 4, 2024

Walkthrough

The create_and_pack_executable.py script has been restructured for better clarity and separation of concerns. Key functions were split and renamed: create_archive was divided into get_file_path for retrieving the file path and a new create_archive for creating the archive based on this path. Additionally, the with_version parameter was removed from archive_build, which now internally manages file path retrieval.

Changes

File Change Summary
build_utils/create_and_pack_executable.py - Renamed create_archive to get_file_path and updated its logic to return a file path.
- Introduced a new create_archive function to handle archive creation.
- Removed the with_version parameter from archive_build and adjusted its logic.

Sequence Diagram

sequenceDiagram
    participant User
    participant Script
    participant OS

    User ->> Script: Call archive_build(working_dir, dir_name)
    Script ->> Script: Call get_file_path(working_dir)
    Script -->> OS: Retrieve file path
    OS -->> Script: Return file path
    Script ->> Script: Create archive with file path
    Script -->> User: Return created archive
Loading

Poem

Here, in the code where bits align,
Functions unveiled, refined,
Paths and archives in sync they flow,
Packaging builds, ready to go!
Code rabbits hop, in harmony twined,
With changes clear and aptly designed. 🐇✨


Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media?

Share
Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

  • Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
    • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>.
    • Generate unit testing code for this file.
    • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
  • Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
    • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
  • PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai generate interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table.
    • @coderabbitai show all the console.log statements in this repository.
    • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
    • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
    • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (invoked as PR comments)

  • @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
  • @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
  • @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
  • @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
  • @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
  • @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai help to get help.

Additionally, you can add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.

CodeRabbit Configration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

  • You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
  • Please see the configuration documentation for more information.
  • If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json

Documentation and Community

  • Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
  • Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
  • Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

Copy link
Contributor

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Actionable comments posted: 0

Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL

Commits

Files that changed from the base of the PR and between 4162135 and 85906f9.

Files selected for processing (1)
  • build_utils/create_and_pack_executable.py (3 hunks)
Additional comments not posted (3)
build_utils/create_and_pack_executable.py (3)

20-32: Function get_file_path looks good.

The function correctly generates the file path based on platform and version information.


35-43: Function create_archive looks good.

The function correctly creates the archive file, handling both zip and tar.gz formats.


67-78: Function archive_build looks good.

The function correctly creates the archive and copies it with a simpler name. The use of tqdm for progress indication is a good addition.

Copy link

sonarcloud bot commented Jul 4, 2024

Copy link
Contributor

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Actionable comments posted: 0

Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL

Commits

Files that changed from the base of the PR and between 85906f9 and 989f26a.

Files selected for processing (1)
  • build_utils/create_and_pack_executable.py (3 hunks)
Additional comments not posted (3)
build_utils/create_and_pack_executable.py (3)

67-78: LGTM! But verify the function usage in the codebase.

The logic in archive_build correctly handles the archiving process and the creation of a copy with a simpler name.

However, ensure that all function calls to archive_build match the new signature.

Verification successful

Verified: Function usage is correct.

The function archive_build is only called once in the codebase, and it matches the new signature.

  • build_utils/create_and_pack_executable.py: archive_build(args.working_dir, dir_name)
Scripts executed

The following scripts were executed for the analysis:

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify all function calls to `archive_build` match the new signature.

# Test: Search for the function usage. Expect: Only occurrences of the new signature.
rg --type python $'archive_build'

Length of output: 63


Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify all function calls to `archive_build` match the new signature.

# Test: Search for the function usage. Expect: Only occurrences of the new signature.
rg --type py $'archive_build'

Length of output: 200


35-42: LGTM! But verify the function usage in the codebase.

The logic in create_archive correctly handles the creation of zip and tar.gz archives.

However, ensure that all function calls to create_archive match the new signature.

Verification successful

The function create_archive is used correctly within build_utils/create_and_pack_executable.py.

  • The function call create_archive(working_dir) matches the new signature.
Scripts executed

The following scripts were executed for the analysis:

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify all function calls to `create_archive` match the new signature.

# Test: Search for the function usage. Expect: Only occurrences of the new signature.
rg --type python $'create_archive'

Length of output: 64


Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify all function calls to `create_archive` match the new signature.

# Test: Search for the function usage. Expect: Only occurrences of the new signature.
rg 'create_archive\(' --glob '*.py'

Length of output: 205


20-32: LGTM! But verify the function usage in the codebase.

The logic in get_file_path correctly handles platform-specific naming and versioning.

However, ensure that all function calls to get_file_path match the new signature.

Verification successful

Verified!

The function get_file_path is called correctly with the working_dir argument and optionally with the with_version argument.

  • build_utils/create_and_pack_executable.py: line 21: file_path = get_file_path(working_dir)
  • build_utils/create_and_pack_executable.py: line 23: shutil.copy(get_file_path(working_dir), get_file_path(working_dir, with_version=False))
Scripts executed

The following scripts were executed for the analysis:

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify all function calls to `get_file_path` match the new signature.

# Test: Search for the function usage. Expect: Only occurrences of the new signature.
rg --type python $'get_file_path'

Length of output: 63


Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify all function calls to `get_file_path` match the new signature.

# Test: Search for the function usage. Expect: Only occurrences of the new signature.
rg --type py 'get_file_path'

Length of output: 340

@Czaki Czaki merged commit d7b0a43 into develop Jul 4, 2024
52 checks passed
@Czaki Czaki deleted the faster_bundle branch July 4, 2024 15:19
Copy link

codecov bot commented Oct 2, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 92.91%. Comparing base (4162135) to head (989f26a).
Report is 81 commits behind head on develop.

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff            @@
##           develop    #1120   +/-   ##
========================================
  Coverage    92.91%   92.91%           
========================================
  Files          205      205           
  Lines        32519    32519           
========================================
  Hits         30215    30215           
  Misses        2304     2304           

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant