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

Re-export ObjectOf, TupleOf and UniformTupleOf types #58

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

Re-export ObjectOf, TupleOf and UniformTupleOf types #58

wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

kyoh86
Copy link

@kyoh86 kyoh86 commented Feb 12, 2024

Some types are no longer exported in #57.
I don't know if this is what was intended, but I tried exporting them again because they were incompatible with earlier ones.

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • Documentation
    • Added detailed documentation for specific data types to improve developer understanding.
  • New Features
    • Made specific data types publicly available for broader use.
  • Refactor
    • Enhanced the logic and control flow for certain data types to optimize performance.

Copy link

coderabbitai bot commented Feb 12, 2024

Walkthrough

This update enhances the TypeScript codebase by refining and documenting key utility types: TupleOf, UniformTupleOf, and ObjectOf. It not only expands the code's usability by exporting these types for external use but also improves the internal logic for better performance and reliability. This comprehensive enhancement underscores a commitment to code quality and developer experience.

Changes

File(s) Change Summary
.../is/factory.ts - Added documentation comments for types
- Exported key utility types
- Updated logic within types

Poem

🎉 🐰
In the land of code and byte,
A rabbit hopped with sheer delight.
Types refined, with docs so bright,
Exported out into the night.
Logic tweaked, without a fight,
A coder's joy, pure and light.

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-tests for this file.
  • 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 tests 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 from git and render them as a table.
    • @coderabbitai show all the console.log statements in this repository.
    • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit tests.
    • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.

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 a review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
  • @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.
  • The JSON schema for the configuration file is available here.
  • 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/coderabbit-overrides.v2.json

CodeRabbit Discord Community

Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.

Copy link

@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.

Review Status

Actionable comments generated: 0

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI

Commits Files that changed from the base of the PR and between 5b4795c and 54ad885.
Files selected for processing (1)
  • is/factory.ts (3 hunks)
Additional comments: 9
is/factory.ts (9)
  • 182-192: The documentation comment for TupleOf is clear and provides a good example of its usage. However, ensure that the example code is tested to verify its correctness.
  • 328-338: The documentation comment for UniformTupleOf is well-written, providing a clear explanation and example. This should help users understand how to use this type effectively.
  • 561-571: The documentation comment for ObjectOf is clear and informative, offering a straightforward example of its application. This enhances the usability of the type for developers.
  • 193-193: The export statement for TupleOf correctly reinstates its availability for external use, aligning with the PR objectives.
  • 340-340: The export statement for UniformTupleOf is correctly implemented, ensuring the type is accessible for external modules as intended.
  • 572-572: The export statement for ObjectOf is properly placed, making the type available for external use and addressing the compatibility issue.
  • 182-193: The logic within isTupleOf function appears to be correctly updated to handle both single and extended tuple types, enhancing its flexibility and utility.
  • 328-340: The logic in isUniformTupleOf function is correctly implemented to validate uniform tuples of a specified length and type, if provided. This ensures accurate type checking.
  • 561-584: The logic in isObjectOf function correctly handles the validation of object types based on provided predicates, including handling optional properties. This improves the robustness of type checking.

* // Above is equivalent to the following type
* // type A = [string, number];
* ```
*/
Copy link
Author

@kyoh86 kyoh86 Feb 12, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I read the previous is.ts in passing and then copied and pasted it, so my comments may not be in line with the new implementation. 🙇

Copy link

codecov bot commented Feb 12, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Comparison is base (5b4795c) 97.79% compared to head (54ad885) 97.79%.

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main      #58   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   97.79%   97.79%           
=======================================
  Files           8        8           
  Lines         635      635           
  Branches       68       68           
=======================================
  Hits          621      621           
  Misses         14       14           

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

@lambdalisue
Copy link
Member

34d2a04

It was a deliberate change, but did it do any real harm? It is an incompatibility change, but I couldn't think of any actual use case for it, so I had to keep it minor as niche, but if there is a use case, I'll delete it via Deprecated.

@kyoh86
Copy link
Author

kyoh86 commented Feb 12, 2024

@lambdalisue thanks.I see.
It must be a niche, so I will follow that decision of yours.

@kyoh86 kyoh86 closed this Feb 12, 2024
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.

2 participants