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

test: folder with error file for code review and pr description #57

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

yike5460
Copy link
Contributor

@yike5460 yike5460 commented Oct 9, 2024

Issue #, if available:

Description of changes:

By submitting this pull request, I confirm that you can use, modify, copy, and redistribute this contribution, under the terms of your choice.

🤖 AI-Generated PR Description (Powered by Amazon Bedrock)

Description

This pull request adds a new test file test/erroneous_code_test.py to the project. The test file is designed to catch and prevent erroneous code from being introduced into the codebase. By adding this test file, we can ensure that the existing functionality remains intact and any new changes adhere to the project's coding standards and best practices.

Type of change

  • Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
  • New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
  • Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to not work as expected)
  • This change requires a documentation update

File Stats Summary

File number involved in this PR: 1, unfold to see the details:

The file changes summary is as follows:

Files
Changes
Change Summary
test/erroneous_code_test.py 87 added, 0 removed The code contains inefficient algorithms, redundant logic, inconsistent naming conventions, and potential runtime issues related to performance, error handling, and unnecessary delays.

Copy link

@github-actions github-actions bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

🔍 AI Code Review (Powered by Amazon Bedrock)

Actionable comments posted: 1

Review Details
Review option chosen
  • Configuration used: GitHub Actions
  • Code review level: detailed
Commits Files that changed from the base of the PR and between 552578a to 5c5e370
Files ignored due to path filters (0)
Files selected for processing (1)
  • test/erroneous_code_test.py (1 hunks)
Additional comments not posted (0)

@@ -0,0 +1,87 @@
import time
Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

🔍 AI Code Review (Powered by Amazon Bedrock)

Here are my review comments on the code change:

1-87:
Avoid inefficient algorithms and unnecessary computations.

  • The calculate_factorial function uses a recursive approach, which can lead to a stack overflow for large inputs (line 5-8).
  • The find_largest_number function iterates through the entire list, even after finding the largest number (line 11-16).
  • The inefficient_sort function uses the bubble sort algorithm, which has a time complexity of O(n^2) and is inefficient for large lists (line 18-23).
  • The generate_random_numbers function generates a large number of random numbers, which can be computationally expensive and potentially unnecessary (line 46-50).
def calculate_factorial(n):
    result = 1
    for i in range(1, n+1):
        result *= i
    return result

def find_largest_number(numbers):
    largest = float('-inf')
    for num in numbers:
        largest = max(largest, num)
    return largest

def sort_list(arr):
    return sorted(arr)

27-30:
Use consistent naming conventions.

The User class follows a different naming convention (PascalCase) compared to the other functions (snake_case). Consider using a consistent naming convention throughout the codebase for better readability and maintainability.

39-43:
Simplify conditional logic.

The process_data function can be simplified using a ternary operator or a list comprehension, which can make the code more concise and readable.

def process_data(data):
    return [item * 2 if item % 2 == 0 else item * 3 for item in data]

55-55:
Handle edge cases and potential exceptions.

The calculate_average function does not handle the case where the input list is empty, which can lead to a ZeroDivisionError. Consider adding a check for the empty list case or raising an appropriate exception.

def calculate_average(numbers):
    if not numbers:
        return 0  # or raise an exception
    total = sum(numbers)
    count = len(numbers)
    average = total / count
    return average

83-83:
Avoid unnecessary delays.

The time.sleep(5) statement introduces an unnecessary delay of 5 seconds, which can negatively impact the performance and responsiveness of the application. Consider removing this delay or replacing it with a more appropriate mechanism if needed.

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