Add model-did-update modifier and debounce for course tester version updates. #2321
Conversation
WalkthroughThe changes introduce a new asynchronous method, Changes
Suggested labels
Poem
📜 Recent review detailsConfiguration used: CodeRabbit UI 📒 Files selected for processing (3)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (3)
🪧 TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
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 using PR comments)
Other keywords and placeholders
CodeRabbit Configuration File (
|
Test Results 1 files ±0 1 suites ±0 6m 30s ⏱️ - 1m 26s Results for commit a240bce. ± Comparison against base commit 9425064. This pull request removes 2 and adds 2 tests. Note that renamed tests count towards both.♻️ This comment has been updated with latest results. |
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is ✅ All tests successful. No failed tests found.
Additional details and impacted files📢 Thoughts on this report? Let us know! |
Bundle ReportChanges will increase total bundle size by 35.76MB (100.0%) ⬆️
|
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 7
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (1)
app/modifiers/model-did-update.ts (1)
33-41: Replaceconsole.logstatements with a logging serviceMultiple
console.logstatements are used within the subscription callbacks and destructor. For consistency and better control over logging levels, consider replacing these with a dedicated logging service or removing them if they are not necessary.Apply this diff to replace
console.logwith a logging service:import Modifier from 'ember-modifier'; +import { inject as service } from '@ember/service'; export default class ModelDidUpdateModifier extends Modifier<Signature> { actionCableSubscription?: ActionCableSubscription; callback?: () => void; model?: Model; + @service declare logger: any; // Replace `any` with the appropriate type if available. @service declare actionCableConsumer: ActionCableConsumerService; modify(_element: HTMLElement, [callback, model]: [() => void, Model]) { // ... this.actionCableSubscription = this.actionCableConsumer.subscribe( 'CourseTesterVersionChannel', { course_tester_version_id: this.model.id }, { onData: () => { this.callback?.(); - console.log('CourseTesterVersionChannel data'); + this.logger.info('CourseTesterVersionChannel data'); }, onConnect: () => { this.callback?.(); - console.log('CourseTesterVersionChannel connected'); + this.logger.info('CourseTesterVersionChannel connected'); }, onDisconnect: () => { - console.log('CourseTesterVersionChannel disconnected'); + this.logger.info('CourseTesterVersionChannel disconnected'); }, }, ); registerDestructor(this, () => { - console.log('unsubscribing from CourseTesterVersionChannel'); + this.logger.info('Unsubscribing from CourseTesterVersionChannel'); this.actionCableSubscription?.unsubscribe(); }); } }Also applies to: 47-47
🧰 Tools
🪛 GitHub Check: codecov/patch
[warning] 33-34: app/modifiers/model-did-update.ts#L33-L34
Added lines #L33 - L34 were not covered by tests
[warning] 37-38: app/modifiers/model-did-update.ts#L37-L38
Added lines #L37 - L38 were not covered by tests
[warning] 41-41: app/modifiers/model-did-update.ts#L41
Added line #L41 was not covered by tests
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (4)
- app/controllers/course-admin/tester-versions.ts (1 hunks)
- app/modifiers/model-did-update.ts (1 hunks)
- app/services/action-cable-consumer.ts (1 hunks)
- app/templates/course-admin/tester-versions.hbs (1 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
🪛 GitHub Check: codecov/patch
app/controllers/course-admin/tester-versions.ts
[warning] 30-30: app/controllers/course-admin/tester-versions.ts#L30
Added line #L30 was not covered by testsapp/modifiers/model-did-update.ts
[warning] 33-34: app/modifiers/model-did-update.ts#L33-L34
Added lines #L33 - L34 were not covered by tests
[warning] 37-38: app/modifiers/model-did-update.ts#L37-L38
Added lines #L37 - L38 were not covered by tests
[warning] 41-41: app/modifiers/model-did-update.ts#L41
Added line #L41 was not covered by tests
🔇 Additional comments (2)
app/controllers/course-admin/tester-versions.ts (1)
27-34: LGTM with suggested improvementsThe implementation of
handleCourseTesterVersionDidUpdatelooks good overall. It correctly uses the@actiondecorator and asynchronously queries the store with the necessary related entities.While the core functionality is sound, implementing the suggested improvements (debounce, refactoring, and test coverage) will significantly enhance the robustness and maintainability of this feature.
🧰 Tools
🪛 GitHub Check: codecov/patch
[warning] 30-30: app/controllers/course-admin/tester-versions.ts#L30
Added line #L30 was not covered by testsapp/templates/course-admin/tester-versions.hbs (1)
44-47: Approve with suggestions: Reactive update mechanism implementationThe implementation of a reactive update mechanism for individual tester versions is a good addition. It allows for more granular updates and potentially improves the user experience.
However, I have a few suggestions and questions:
Performance consideration: For a large number of tester versions, creating an additional empty
<div>for each version might have a performance impact. Consider testing with a significant number of versions to ensure it scales well.Documentation request: The
model-did-updatemodifier seems to be a custom implementation. Could you please provide documentation or comments explaining how this modifier works? This will help future maintainers understand the code better.Alternative consideration: Is it possible to achieve the same functionality using Ember's built-in features like
{{did-update}}helper or by leveraging Ember's data layer? This might lead to a more idiomatic Ember.js implementation.To verify the potential performance impact, you can run the following script:
This script will help assess the scale of tester versions and check for inline documentation of the custom modifier.
| // TODO: Add debounce to prevent hammering | ||
| @action | ||
| async handleCourseTesterVersionDidUpdate() { | ||
| await this.store.query('course-tester-version', { | ||
| course_id: this.model.course.id, | ||
| include: ['course', 'activator'].join(','), | ||
| }); | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Implement debounce as suggested in the TODO comment
The TODO comment correctly identifies the need for a debounce mechanism. Implementing debounce is crucial to prevent excessive API calls, especially if this method is triggered frequently (e.g., in response to real-time updates).
Consider using a debounce utility, such as ember-concurrency or a custom debounce function, to limit the frequency of calls to handleCourseTesterVersionDidUpdate.
Example implementation using ember-concurrency:
import { task, timeout } from 'ember-concurrency';
// ...
@task
*debouncedHandleCourseTesterVersionDidUpdate() {
yield timeout(300); // 300ms debounce time
yield this.handleCourseTesterVersionDidUpdate();
}
@action
triggerUpdate() {
this.debouncedHandleCourseTesterVersionDidUpdate.perform();
}This implementation will ensure that the update is only performed once, even if triggered multiple times within the debounce period.
🧰 Tools
🪛 GitHub Check: codecov/patch
[warning] 30-30: app/controllers/course-admin/tester-versions.ts#L30
Added line #L30 was not covered by tests
| async handleCourseTesterVersionDidUpdate() { | ||
| await this.store.query('course-tester-version', { | ||
| course_id: this.model.course.id, | ||
| include: ['course', 'activator'].join(','), | ||
| }); | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Consider refactoring to reduce code duplication
The new handleCourseTesterVersionDidUpdate method contains logic similar to a part of the existing handleSyncWithGitHubButtonClick method. This duplication could lead to maintenance issues in the future.
Consider extracting the common query logic into a separate method:
private async fetchCourseTesterVersions() {
return this.store.query('course-tester-version', {
course_id: this.model.course.id,
include: ['course', 'activator'].join(','),
});
}
@action
async handleCourseTesterVersionDidUpdate() {
await this.fetchCourseTesterVersions();
}
@action
async handleSyncWithGitHubButtonClick() {
this.isSyncingWithGitHub = true;
await this.model.course.syncCourseTesterVersions();
await this.fetchCourseTesterVersions();
this.isSyncingWithGitHub = false;
}This refactoring will improve code maintainability and reduce the risk of inconsistencies between the two methods.
🧰 Tools
🪛 GitHub Check: codecov/patch
[warning] 30-30: app/controllers/course-admin/tester-versions.ts#L30
Added line #L30 was not covered by tests
| // TODO: Add debounce to prevent hammering | ||
| @action | ||
| async handleCourseTesterVersionDidUpdate() { | ||
| await this.store.query('course-tester-version', { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Add test coverage for the new method
The static analysis tool indicates that line 30 (part of the new method) is not covered by tests. It's important to ensure that new functionality is properly tested.
Please add unit tests for the handleCourseTesterVersionDidUpdate method. Consider testing the following scenarios:
- Successful update with valid course ID
- Error handling for invalid course ID or network issues
- Correct inclusion of related entities in the query
Would you like assistance in generating test cases for this new method?
🧰 Tools
🪛 GitHub Check: codecov/patch
[warning] 30-30: app/controllers/course-admin/tester-versions.ts#L30
Added line #L30 was not covered by tests
| console.log(`subscribing to ${channel}`); | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Consider improving the logging implementation
While adding logging for debugging is beneficial, there are a few improvements we could make:
- Use the configured logger instead of
console.logdirectly. This ensures consistency with the rest of the application's logging. - Add a condition to only log when debugging is enabled, similar to the
logger.enabledflag at the top of the file.
Here's a suggested implementation:
- console.log(`subscribing to ${channel}`);
+ if (logger.enabled) {
+ logger.log(`Subscribing to channel: ${channel}`);
+ }This change will make the logging consistent with the rest of the application and respect the global logging configuration.
📝 Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| console.log(`subscribing to ${channel}`); | |
| if (logger.enabled) { | |
| logger.log(`Subscribing to channel: ${channel}`); | |
| } | |
app/modifiers/model-did-update.ts
Outdated
| onData: () => { | ||
| this.callback?.(); | ||
| console.log('CourseTesterVersionChannel data'); | ||
| }, | ||
| onConnect: () => { | ||
| this.callback?.(); | ||
| console.log('CourseTesterVersionChannel connected'); | ||
| }, | ||
| onDisconnect: () => { | ||
| console.log('CourseTesterVersionChannel disconnected'); | ||
| }, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Add tests to cover Action Cable subscription callbacks
The onData, onConnect, and onDisconnect handlers contain important logic, but they are not currently covered by tests according to the static analysis report. To ensure these callbacks function correctly and to prevent future regressions, please consider adding tests that cover these scenarios.
Would you like assistance in generating test cases for these subscription callbacks?
🧰 Tools
🪛 GitHub Check: codecov/patch
[warning] 33-34: app/modifiers/model-did-update.ts#L33-L34
Added lines #L33 - L34 were not covered by tests
[warning] 37-38: app/modifiers/model-did-update.ts#L37-L38
Added lines #L37 - L38 were not covered by tests
[warning] 41-41: app/modifiers/model-did-update.ts#L41
Added line #L41 was not covered by tests
| interface Signature { | ||
| Args: { | ||
| Positional: [(transition: Transition) => void, Model]; | ||
| }; | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Align callback type in Signature interface with implementation
The Signature interface defines the callback as (transition: Transition) => void, but in the modify method, the callback is typed as () => void and is invoked without any arguments. This inconsistency may lead to type errors. Please update the callback type in the Signature interface to match the implementation.
Apply this diff to fix the inconsistency:
interface Signature {
Args: {
- Positional: [(transition: Transition) => void, Model];
+ Positional: [() => void, Model];
};
}📝 Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| interface Signature { | |
| Args: { | |
| Positional: [(transition: Transition) => void, Model]; | |
| }; | |
| } | |
| interface Signature { | |
| Args: { | |
| Positional: [() => void, Model]; | |
| }; | |
| } |
app/modifiers/model-did-update.ts
Outdated
| this.actionCableSubscription = this.actionCableConsumer.subscribe( | ||
| 'CourseTesterVersionChannel', | ||
| { course_tester_version_id: this.model.id }, | ||
| { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ensure this.model is defined before accessing this.model.id
At line 30, this.model.id is accessed, but this.model is typed as optional (model?: Model). This could potentially lead to a runtime error if this.model is undefined. Please ensure that this.model is defined before accessing its id, or adjust the type to indicate that model is required.
Apply this diff to fix the potential null reference:
this.model = model;
+ if (!this.model) {
+ throw new Error('Model is required for ModelDidUpdateModifier');
+ }
this.actionCableSubscription = this.actionCableConsumer.subscribe(
'CourseTesterVersionChannel',
{ course_tester_version_id: this.model.id },Alternatively, you might adjust the type declaration to indicate that model is required:
- model?: Model;
+ model: Model;Committable suggestion was skipped due to low confidence.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 2
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (4)
tests/support/fake-action-cable-consumer.ts (2)
7-8: LGTM! Consider documenting the new callbacks.The addition of
onRejectandonInitializecallbacks to theSubscriptionCallbackstype enhances its flexibility and allows for better error handling and initialization logic in subscriptions. These changes are backwards compatible as they are optional.Consider adding brief comments to explain the purpose of these new callbacks:
type SubscriptionCallbacks = { onConnect?: () => void; onDisconnect?: () => void; onData?: (data: string) => void; // Called when the subscription is rejected onReject?: (error: Error) => void; // Called when the subscription is initialized onInitialize?: () => void; };
Line range hint
31-40: Consider utilizing new callbacks in FakeActionCableConsumerThe
subscribemethod accepts theSubscriptionCallbackstype, which now includesonRejectandonInitializecallbacks. However, these new callbacks are not utilized in the current implementation. This might be a missed opportunity to enhance the testing capabilities of theFakeActionCableConsumerclass.Consider updating the
subscribemethod to utilize these new callbacks:subscribe(channel: string, _args: Record<string, string> = {}, callbacks: SubscriptionCallbacks): ActionCableSubscription { this.#subscriptions[channel] = callbacks; // Call onInitialize if provided callbacks.onInitialize?.(); return { send: () => {}, unsubscribe: () => { delete this.#subscriptions[channel]; }, }; }Additionally, you might want to add a method to simulate rejection:
rejectSubscription(channel: string, error: Error): void { const callbacks = this.#subscriptions[channel]; if (callbacks?.onReject) { callbacks.onReject(error); } }These changes would allow for more comprehensive testing of subscription behavior, including initialization and error handling.
app/controllers/course-admin/tester-version.ts (1)
56-62: LGTM! Consider adding error handling.The new
handleCourseTesterVersionDidUpdatemethod is well-structured and follows Ember.js best practices. It appropriately uses the@actiondecorator and async/await syntax. The store query is correctly implemented, using the course ID from the current model and including related entities, which can help optimize data fetching.Consider adding error handling to make the method more robust:
@action async handleCourseTesterVersionDidUpdate() { try { await this.store.query('course-tester-version', { course_id: this.model.course.id, include: ['course', 'activator'].join(','), }); } catch (error) { console.error('Failed to update course tester versions:', error); // Optionally, you could set an error state or show a notification to the user } }This change would prevent unhandled promise rejections and provide a way to inform the user if the update fails.
app/modifiers/model-did-update.ts (1)
1-65: Overall implementation review: ModelDidUpdateModifierThe
ModelDidUpdateModifieris well-implemented and provides a useful abstraction for handling real-time model updates in Ember templates. It effectively utilizes Action Cable for subscriptions and includes proper error handling and cleanup.Some suggestions for further improvement:
- Address the type mismatch in the
Signatureinterface (as mentioned in a previous comment).- Consider making the
modelproperty non-optional to improve type safety.- Improve test coverage, especially for the Action Cable subscription handlers.
- Consider adding JSDoc comments to the class and its methods for better documentation.
These improvements will enhance the robustness and maintainability of the modifier.
Would you like assistance in implementing any of these suggestions?
🧰 Tools
🪛 GitHub Check: codecov/patch
[warning] 37-38: app/modifiers/model-did-update.ts#L37-L38
Added lines #L37 - L38 were not covered by tests
[warning] 45-45: app/modifiers/model-did-update.ts#L45
Added line #L45 was not covered by tests
[warning] 48-49: app/modifiers/model-did-update.ts#L48-L49
Added lines #L48 - L49 were not covered by tests
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (5)
- app/controllers/course-admin/tester-version.ts (1 hunks)
- app/modifiers/model-did-update.ts (1 hunks)
- app/services/action-cable-consumer.ts (1 hunks)
- app/templates/course-admin/tester-version.hbs (1 hunks)
- tests/support/fake-action-cable-consumer.ts (1 hunks)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)
- app/services/action-cable-consumer.ts
🧰 Additional context used
🪛 GitHub Check: codecov/patch
app/modifiers/model-did-update.ts
[warning] 37-38: app/modifiers/model-did-update.ts#L37-L38
Added lines #L37 - L38 were not covered by tests
[warning] 45-45: app/modifiers/model-did-update.ts#L45
Added line #L45 was not covered by tests
[warning] 48-49: app/modifiers/model-did-update.ts#L48-L49
Added lines #L48 - L49 were not covered by tests
🔇 Additional comments (4)
app/controllers/course-admin/tester-version.ts (1)
56-62: Consider adding documentation and verify usage.The new
handleCourseTesterVersionDidUpdatemethod is well-implemented, but its purpose and usage context could be clearer.Consider adding a brief comment explaining the method's purpose and when it's expected to be called. For example:
/** * Updates the local store with the latest course tester versions. * This method is triggered when a course tester version is updated, * likely through a real-time update mechanism. */ @action async handleCourseTesterVersionDidUpdate() { // ... existing implementation ... }To ensure this method is properly integrated, let's verify its usage:
This will help ensure the method is properly connected to the UI and any real-time update mechanisms.
app/modifiers/model-did-update.ts (3)
61-65: LGTM: Glint registry declarationThe Glint registry declaration is correctly implemented, ensuring proper TypeScript integration for the
model-did-updatemodifier in templates. This is a good practice for maintaining type safety across your Ember application.
13-17:⚠️ Potential issueAlign callback type in
Signatureinterface with implementationThe
Signatureinterface defines the callback as(transition: Transition) => void, but in themodifymethod (line 26), the callback is typed as() => voidand is invoked without any arguments. This inconsistency may lead to type errors.Apply this diff to fix the inconsistency:
interface Signature { Args: { - Positional: [(transition: Transition) => void, Model]; + Positional: [() => void, Model]; }; }Likely invalid or redundant comment.
26-58:⚠️ Potential issueImprove test coverage for Action Cable subscription handlers
The static analysis report indicates that some parts of the
modifymethod, particularly the subscription handlers, are not covered by tests. To ensure the reliability of these critical parts of the modifier, it's important to add test coverage.Consider adding tests for the following scenarios:
- Successful subscription and data reception (
onDatahandler)- Subscription initialization (
onInitializehandler)- Disconnection handling (
onDisconnecthandler)- Subscription rejection (
onRejecthandler)- Proper unsubscription when the modifier is destroyed
Here's a script to verify the current test coverage:
This script will help identify existing test coverage and highlight areas that need additional tests.
🧰 Tools
🪛 GitHub Check: codecov/patch
[warning] 37-38: app/modifiers/model-did-update.ts#L37-L38
Added lines #L37 - L38 were not covered by tests
[warning] 45-45: app/modifiers/model-did-update.ts#L45
Added line #L45 was not covered by tests
[warning] 48-49: app/modifiers/model-did-update.ts#L48-L49
Added lines #L48 - L49 were not covered by tests
| export default class ModelDidUpdateModifier extends Modifier<Signature> { | ||
| actionCableSubscription?: ActionCableSubscription; | ||
| callback?: () => void; | ||
| model?: Model; | ||
|
|
||
| @service declare actionCableConsumer: ActionCableConsumerService; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Consider making the model property non-optional
The model property is currently typed as optional (model?: Model), but it seems to be a required parameter for this modifier. Making it non-optional would prevent potential runtime errors and improve type safety.
Consider updating the property declaration:
- model?: Model;
+ model!: Model;This change ensures that TypeScript treats model as always defined after initialization, aligning with how it's used in the modify method.
📝 Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| export default class ModelDidUpdateModifier extends Modifier<Signature> { | |
| actionCableSubscription?: ActionCableSubscription; | |
| callback?: () => void; | |
| model?: Model; | |
| @service declare actionCableConsumer: ActionCableConsumerService; | |
| export default class ModelDidUpdateModifier extends Modifier<Signature> { | |
| actionCableSubscription?: ActionCableSubscription; | |
| callback?: () => void; | |
| model!: Model; | |
| @service declare actionCableConsumer: ActionCableConsumerService; |
| @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@ | |||
| <div class="bg-white min-h-screen"> | |||
| <div class="bg-white min-h-screen" {{model-did-update this.handleCourseTesterVersionDidUpdate @model.testerVersion}}> | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codebase verification
Missing Implementation: handleCourseTesterVersionDidUpdate
The handleCourseTesterVersionDidUpdate method is referenced in the tester-version.hbs template but does not appear to be implemented in any component or controller files.
- Action Required: Implement the
handleCourseTesterVersionDidUpdatemethod in the appropriate component or controller to handle updates to thetesterVersionmodel.
🔗 Analysis chain
LGTM! Verify the corresponding method implementation.
The addition of the model-did-update modifier is a good practice for handling reactive updates to the testerVersion model. This approach can help optimize performance by avoiding unnecessary re-renders and allowing for specific logic to be executed when the model changes.
To ensure the complete functionality, please verify the implementation of the handleCourseTesterVersionDidUpdate method in the corresponding component or controller. Run the following script to locate and review its implementation:
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Locate and display the implementation of handleCourseTesterVersionDidUpdate method
# Search for the method implementation in component files
echo "Searching in component files:"
ast-grep --lang javascript --pattern $'class $_Component extends Component {
$$$
handleCourseTesterVersionDidUpdate($_) {
$$$
}
$$$
}'
# Search for the method implementation in controller files
echo "Searching in controller files:"
ast-grep --lang javascript --pattern $'class $_Controller extends Controller {
$$$
handleCourseTesterVersionDidUpdate($_) {
$$$
}
$$$
}'
Length of output: 437
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (3)
app/controllers/course-admin/tester-version.ts (3)
56-62: LGTM! Consider adding error handling.The new
handleCourseTesterVersionDidUpdatemethod looks good. It correctly queries the store to update course tester versions when changes occur.Consider adding error handling to make the method more robust:
@action async handleCourseTesterVersionDidUpdate() { try { await this.store.query('course-tester-version', { course_id: this.model.course.id, include: ['course', 'activator'].join(','), }); } catch (error) { console.error('Failed to update course tester versions:', error); // Optionally, you could set an error state or show a notification to the user } }This will help catch and log any potential issues that might occur during the query operation.
74-79: LGTM! Consider adding a comment explaining the method's purpose.The new
handleWillDestroyContainermethod is a good addition for cleaning up the controller's state when the container is destroyed.Consider adding a brief comment explaining the method's purpose:
@action handleWillDestroyContainer() { // Reset controller state when the container is destroyed to prevent stale state issues this.isDeprovisioningTestRunners = false; this.shouldShowDeprovisioningNotice = false; this.isActivating = false; }This will help other developers understand the method's role in the component's lifecycle.
Line range hint
56-79: Overall, these changes enhance the controller's functionality.The two new methods,
handleCourseTesterVersionDidUpdateandhandleWillDestroyContainer, are valuable additions to theCourseAdminTesterVersionController. They improve the controller's ability to manage course tester version updates and clean up state, respectively.These changes:
- Enhance real-time synchronization of course tester versions.
- Improve state management during component lifecycle events.
- Maintain the existing structure and patterns of the controller.
To further improve the controller, consider:
- Implementing a more comprehensive error handling strategy across all async methods.
- Documenting the expected lifecycle and usage of these new methods in the class-level comments.
- Ensuring that these new methods are properly bound to relevant UI events or lifecycle hooks in the corresponding template.
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (2)
- app/controllers/course-admin/tester-version.ts (2 hunks)
- app/templates/course-admin/tester-version.hbs (1 hunks)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)
- app/templates/course-admin/tester-version.hbs
🧰 Additional context used
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (1)
tests/pages/course-admin/tester-version-page.js (1)
8-9: LGTM: New clickable property added correctly.The new
clickOnBackToTesterVersionsListButtonproperty is a good addition to the page object. It follows the existing structure and uses a data-test attribute for the selector, which is a good practice for test stability.Consider adjusting the property name to match the convention used in Ember.js components more closely. A suggestion would be
backToTesterVersionsListButton. This would make it consistent with how actions are typically named in Ember components (e.g.,<button {{on "click" this.backToTesterVersionsList}}>Back</button>).Here's the suggested change:
- clickOnBackToTesterVersionsListButton: clickable('[data-test-back-to-tester-versions-list-button]'), + backToTesterVersionsListButton: clickable('[data-test-back-to-tester-versions-list-button]'),This naming would still clearly indicate its purpose while aligning more closely with Ember conventions.
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (4)
- app/templates/course-admin/tester-version.hbs (1 hunks)
- tests/acceptance/course-admin/tester-versions-page/activate-test.js (1 hunks)
- tests/acceptance/course-admin/tester-versions-page/deprovision-test-runners-test.js (2 hunks)
- tests/pages/course-admin/tester-version-page.js (1 hunks)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)
- app/templates/course-admin/tester-version.hbs
🧰 Additional context used
🔇 Additional comments (6)
tests/pages/course-admin/tester-version-page.js (1)
1-1: LGTM: Import statement updated correctly.The import statement has been properly updated to include the
clickablefunction from 'ember-cli-page-object'. This change is necessary and consistent with the new clickable property added to the page object.tests/acceptance/course-admin/tester-versions-page/deprovision-test-runners-test.js (3)
8-8: Improved module naming for better organization.The updated module name provides a more specific and hierarchical structure, enhancing the clarity and organization of the test suite. This change makes it easier to locate and understand the purpose of the test.
43-44: Enhanced test coverage with navigation steps.The addition of these navigation steps is crucial for testing the behavior of the deprovisioning notice in different scenarios. By navigating back to the tester versions list and selecting a different version, the test now covers a more realistic user flow, ensuring the notice behaves correctly after navigation.
45-45: Crucial assertion added to verify UI state after navigation.This new assertion is a valuable addition to the test. It verifies that the deprovisioning notice is correctly hidden after navigating to a different tester version, which is essential for maintaining a consistent and accurate UI state. This check helps prevent potential bugs where the notice might incorrectly persist across different views, enhancing the overall reliability of the feature.
tests/acceptance/course-admin/tester-versions-page/activate-test.js (2)
9-9: Improved test organization with updated module name.The change in the module name from 'Acceptance | course-admin | activate-tester-version' to 'Acceptance | course-admin | tester-versions-page | activate' is a positive improvement. It provides a more specific and hierarchical structure for the test, making it easier to understand its context and purpose within the test suite.
This change enhances the overall organization and readability of the test suite without affecting the test's functionality. It will likely make it easier for developers to navigate and maintain the test structure in the future.
Line range hint
1-71: Test logic remains unchanged and appropriate.I've reviewed the entire file, and I can confirm that apart from the module name change, the test logic, setup, and assertions remain unchanged. This suggests that the existing test coverage is still valid and appropriate for the functionality being tested.
The test continues to cover important scenarios such as:
- Activating different versions of tester versions
- Handling confirmation messages for activating non-latest versions
- Verifying behavior when the latest version status changes
This comprehensive coverage ensures that the core functionality of activating tester versions is thoroughly tested.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (6)
tests/support/fake-action-cable-consumer.ts (3)
7-8: LGTM! Consider adding JSDoc comments for new callbacks.The addition of
onRejectandonInitializecallbacks enhances the flexibility of the subscription system. This is a good improvement for error handling and initialization operations.Consider adding JSDoc comments to describe the purpose and usage of these new callbacks:
/** * Called when the subscription is rejected. * @param error The error that caused the rejection. */ onReject?: (error: Error) => void; /** * Called when the subscription is initialized. */ onInitialize?: () => void;
14-20: LGTM! Consider a small optimization forhasSubscription.The new
hasSubscriptionmethod is a valuable addition to the class API, allowing for easy checking of subscription existence. The implementation correctly handles cases with and withoutargs.Consider a small optimization to avoid unnecessary stringification when
argsis not provided:hasSubscription(channel: string, args?: Record<string, string>): boolean { if (!this.#subscriptions[channel]) { return false; } if (args) { return this.#subscriptions[channel].some((subscription) => JSON.stringify(subscription.args) === JSON.stringify(args) ); } return true; }This change avoids the unnecessary array creation and
someoperation whenargsis not provided, potentially improving performance for the common case.
32-43: LGTM! Consider adding a type for the subscription object.The changes to the
subscribemethod and the correspondingunsubscribelogic are well-implemented. The use ofcrypto.randomUUID()ensures unique ids for subscriptions, and the new structure allows for more flexible subscription management.Consider defining a type for the subscription object to improve code readability and maintainability:
type Subscription = { id: string; args: Record<string, string>; callbacks: SubscriptionCallbacks; }; class FakeActionCableConsumer { #subscriptions: Record<string, Subscription[]> = {}; // ... rest of the class implementation }This will make the code more self-documenting and easier to maintain in the future.
tests/acceptance/course-page/autofix-test.js (3)
48-48: LGTM! Consider using a constant for the channel name.The change from
hasSubscriptionForChanneltohasSubscriptionis correct and aligns with the standardization of the method used to check for subscriptions.For improved maintainability, consider defining a constant for the 'LogstreamChannel' string, as it's used multiple times in this file. This would make future updates easier and reduce the risk of typos. For example:
const LOGSTREAM_CHANNEL = 'LogstreamChannel'; // Then use it like this: await waitUntil(() => fakeActionCableConsumer.hasSubscription(LOGSTREAM_CHANNEL));
136-136: LGTM! Consider refactoring to reduce duplication.These changes correctly update the method name from
hasSubscriptionForChanneltohasSubscription, maintaining consistency with the earlier modifications.To reduce code duplication and improve maintainability, consider refactoring these repeated checks into a helper function. For example:
const LOGSTREAM_CHANNEL = 'LogstreamChannel'; async function waitForSubscriptionState(consumer, channel, desiredState) { await waitUntil(() => consumer.hasSubscription(channel) === desiredState); } // Usage: await waitForSubscriptionState(fakeActionCableConsumer, LOGSTREAM_CHANNEL, true); // ... later in the test await waitForSubscriptionState(fakeActionCableConsumer, LOGSTREAM_CHANNEL, false);This refactoring would make the tests more readable and easier to maintain, especially if you need to add similar checks in other test cases.
Also applies to: 149-149
Line range hint
1-280: Overall assessment: Changes are correct but there's room for improvement.The modifications in this file consistently update the method name from
hasSubscriptionForChanneltohasSubscriptionfor checking ActionCable subscriptions. These changes are correct and maintain the existing logic of the tests.To further improve the code quality and maintainability of these tests, consider the following suggestions:
- Define a constant for the 'LogstreamChannel' string to avoid repetition and potential typos.
- Refactor the repeated subscription checks into a helper function to reduce code duplication.
- Review the entire file for any other instances of
hasSubscriptionForChannelthat might have been missed in this update.These improvements will make the tests more robust, easier to maintain, and less prone to errors in future updates.
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (5)
- app/templates/course-admin/tester-version.hbs (2 hunks)
- tests/acceptance/course-admin/tester-versions-page/deprovision-test-runners-test.js (1 hunks)
- tests/acceptance/course-page/autofix-test.js (4 hunks)
- tests/pages/course-admin/tester-version-page.js (1 hunks)
- tests/support/fake-action-cable-consumer.ts (2 hunks)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (2)
- app/templates/course-admin/tester-version.hbs
- tests/pages/course-admin/tester-version-page.js
🧰 Additional context used
🔇 Additional comments (3)
tests/support/fake-action-cable-consumer.ts (2)
12-13: LGTM! Improved subscription management structure.The modification of the
#subscriptionsproperty to support multiple subscriptions per channel is a good improvement. It allows for more flexible and granular subscription management, which is consistent with the changes in other parts of the class.
27-28: LGTM! Correctly updated to handle multiple subscriptions.The
sendDatamethod has been appropriately updated to iterate over all subscriptions for a channel, which is consistent with the new structure of#subscriptions. The use of optional chaining in the loop is a good practice to avoid potential errors.tests/acceptance/course-page/autofix-test.js (1)
102-102: LGTM! Consistent with previous change.This change correctly updates the method name from
hasSubscriptionForChanneltohasSubscription, maintaining consistency with the earlier modification.As mentioned in the previous comment, consider using a constant for the 'LogstreamChannel' string to improve maintainability.
| }); | ||
|
|
||
| await testerVersionsPage.visit({ course_slug: 'redis' }); | ||
| await testerVersionsPage.testerVersionListItem[1].viewTesterVersionButton.click(); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Avoid Reliance on Array Indices When Selecting Tester Versions
Using hardcoded array indices like testerVersionListItem[1] can lead to flaky tests if the order of tester versions changes. It's more robust to select the tester version based on a unique attribute such as tagName or id.
You can refactor the code to find the tester version list item matching oldTesterVersion:
// Locate the tester version list item with the matching tagName
const oldTesterVersionItem = testerVersionsPage.testerVersionListItem.find(
(item) => item.tagName === oldTesterVersion.tagName
);
await oldTesterVersionItem.viewTesterVersionButton.click();This approach ensures that the test remains reliable even if the order of tester versions changes.
Summary by CodeRabbit
New Features
Improvements