feat: ✨ add users/presentation lib #46
Conversation
WalkthroughThe pull request introduces several changes across multiple files, primarily focusing on modifying import paths for the Changes
Possibly related PRs
Warning Rate limit exceeded@zhumeisongsong has exceeded the limit for the number of commits or files that can be reviewed per hour. Please wait 0 minutes and 59 seconds before requesting another review. ⌛ How to resolve this issue?After the wait time has elapsed, a review can be triggered using the We recommend that you space out your commits to avoid hitting the rate limit. 🚦 How do rate limits work?CodeRabbit enforces hourly rate limits for each developer per organization. Our paid plans have higher rate limits than the trial, open-source and free plans. In all cases, we re-allow further reviews after a brief timeout. Please see our FAQ for further information. Warning There were issues while running some tools. Please review the errors and either fix the tool’s configuration or disable the tool if it’s a critical failure. 🔧 eslint
apps/users/src/users/users.module.tsOops! Something went wrong! :( ESLint: 9.15.0 TypeError: Error while loading rule '@typescript-eslint/no-unused-expressions': Cannot read properties of undefined (reading 'allowShortCircuit') 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? 🪧 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 (
|
Copilot
AI
left a comment
Copilot
AI
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Copilot reviewed 7 out of 16 changed files in this pull request and generated 1 suggestion.
Files not reviewed (9)
- libs/users/application/tsconfig.json: Language not supported
- libs/users/presentation/project.json: Language not supported
- libs/users/presentation/tsconfig.json: Language not supported
- libs/users/presentation/tsconfig.lib.json: Language not supported
- libs/users/presentation/tsconfig.spec.json: Language not supported
- tsconfig.base.json: Language not supported
- apps/users/src/users/users.module.ts: Evaluated as low risk
- libs/users/presentation/src/lib/users.resolver.ts: Evaluated as low risk
- libs/users/presentation/src/lib/users.resolver.spec.ts: Evaluated as low risk
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (6)
libs/users/application/src/index.ts (1)
3-4: Consider removing the redundant comment.The comment "// service" is redundant since the exported file name already indicates it's a service. Consider grouping related exports together without the comment for cleaner code.
export * from './lib/use-case/get-user.use-case'; -// service export * from './lib/users.service';libs/users/presentation/src/lib/users.resolver.ts (1)
Line range hint
5-22: Well-structured resolver implementation!The implementation follows clean architecture principles with proper separation of concerns. The resolver acts as a thin presentation layer, delegating business logic to the application layer (UsersService).
Some architectural points worth noting:
- The resolver correctly implements GraphQL federation capabilities through
@ResolveReference- The use of dependency injection allows for better testability
- The presentation layer doesn't contain business logic, maintaining clean architecture boundaries
libs/users/application/src/lib/users.service.spec.ts (2)
22-23: LGTM! Consider adding more test cases.The explicit type annotation
User | undefinedimproves type safety and correctly reflects the service method's return type.Consider adding more test cases to cover different scenarios:
it('should handle various user ID formats', () => { expect(service.findById('user-123')).toBeDefined(); expect(service.findById('UUID-FORMAT')).toBeDefined(); }); it('should return consistent user data', () => { const user = service.findById('1'); expect(user).toMatchObject({ id: expect.any(String), name: expect.any(String), }); });
27-28: LGTM! Consider adding error scenario tests.The test case properly verifies the undefined return for non-existent users.
Consider adding tests for error scenarios:
it('should handle invalid user IDs gracefully', () => { expect(service.findById('')).toBeUndefined(); expect(service.findById(null as unknown as string)).toBeUndefined(); }); it('should not throw errors for edge cases', () => { expect(() => service.findById('invalid-id')).not.toThrow(); });apps/users/src/users/users.module.ts (1)
Line range hint
16-27: Consider documenting federation version requirementThe inline comment about federation version is helpful, but consider moving this important configuration detail to a more visible location like README.md or CONTRIBUTING.md.
Would you like me to help draft documentation for the federation version requirement?
libs/users/presentation/src/lib/users.resolver.spec.ts (1)
Line range hint
33-65: Consider adding edge case tests.While the current test coverage is good, consider adding tests for these scenarios:
- Invalid user ID formats
- Empty string IDs
- Non-string ID types (if TypeScript allows)
Example addition:
it('should handle invalid user id formats', () => { expect(resolver.getUser('')).toBeUndefined(); expect(service.findById).not.toHaveBeenCalled(); });
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (15)
apps/users/src/users/users.module.ts(1 hunks)libs/users/application/src/index.ts(1 hunks)libs/users/application/src/lib/users.service.spec.ts(1 hunks)libs/users/application/tsconfig.json(1 hunks)libs/users/presentation/README.md(1 hunks)libs/users/presentation/eslint.config.js(1 hunks)libs/users/presentation/jest.config.ts(1 hunks)libs/users/presentation/project.json(1 hunks)libs/users/presentation/src/index.ts(1 hunks)libs/users/presentation/src/lib/users.resolver.spec.ts(1 hunks)libs/users/presentation/src/lib/users.resolver.ts(1 hunks)libs/users/presentation/tsconfig.json(1 hunks)libs/users/presentation/tsconfig.lib.json(1 hunks)libs/users/presentation/tsconfig.spec.json(1 hunks)tsconfig.base.json(1 hunks)
✅ Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (8)
- libs/users/presentation/README.md
- libs/users/presentation/eslint.config.js
- libs/users/presentation/jest.config.ts
- libs/users/presentation/project.json
- libs/users/presentation/src/index.ts
- libs/users/presentation/tsconfig.json
- libs/users/presentation/tsconfig.lib.json
- libs/users/presentation/tsconfig.spec.json
🔇 Additional comments (9)
libs/users/application/src/index.ts (1)
4-4: Verify the service import usage across the codebase.
The addition of this export aligns with the PR's objective of restructuring user-related modules. Let's verify that all imports are updated to use this new path.
✅ Verification successful
All imports of UsersService are correctly using the barrel file
The verification shows that all external imports of UsersService are properly using the @users/application path:
libs/users/presentation/src/lib/users.resolver.tslibs/users/presentation/src/lib/users.resolver.spec.tsapps/users/src/users/users.module.ts
The only relative import found is in the service's own test file (users.service.spec.ts), which is the correct pattern for testing the service in its own directory.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check if there are any relative imports of users.service that should be using the barrel file
# Expected: No relative imports of users.service, all imports should use @users/application
# Search for any relative imports of users.service
rg -g '*.ts' "from ['\"]\.\..*users\.service['\"]"
# Search for the correct absolute imports for comparison
rg -g '*.ts' "from ['\"]@users/application['\"].*UsersService"
Length of output: 125
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's try a broader search to find any imports related to users.service
# First, let's find all TypeScript files that mention UsersService
rg -l "UsersService" --type ts
# Then, let's look for any import statements containing 'users.service'
rg "import.*users\.service" --type ts
# Also search for any exports containing UsersService
rg "export.*UsersService" --type ts
# And check for any path containing users/application
rg "from.*@users/application" --type ts
Length of output: 865
libs/users/application/tsconfig.json (2)
5-10: LGTM! Enhanced type safety configuration looks good.
The added TypeScript compiler options significantly improve type safety and code quality:
strict: trueenables comprehensive type checkingnoImplicitOverrideprevents accidental method overridesnoImplicitReturnsensures all code paths return valuesnoFallthroughCasesInSwitchprevents switch case fallthrough bugsnoPropertyAccessFromIndexSignatureenforces explicit property access
4-10: Verify consistent TypeScript configuration across related packages.
Let's ensure these compiler options are consistently applied across related packages, particularly in the users-presentation library.
✅ Verification successful
TypeScript configurations are consistent across users domain packages
The verification shows that the TypeScript compiler options are identical between the application and presentation layers in the users domain. Both configurations have the same strict type-checking flags and module settings enabled.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check for consistency in TypeScript configurations across related packages
# Find all tsconfig.json files in the users domain
echo "Checking TypeScript configurations in users domain:"
fd tsconfig.json libs/users/ --exec cat {} \; | grep -A 10 "compilerOptions"
# Specifically compare with the presentation layer
echo "\nComparing with presentation layer config:"
diff libs/users/application/tsconfig.json libs/users/presentation/tsconfig.json
Length of output: 978
libs/users/presentation/src/lib/users.resolver.ts (1)
1-3: Verify module alias consistency
There's an inconsistency in the module aliases: @users/application vs @user/domain. This could indicate a configuration issue or naming inconsistency across the monorepo.
✅ Verification successful
Let me gather more information about the module structure to understand if this is a deliberate design choice or an inconsistency.
Let me check the contents of these directories to understand the module structure better.
Module aliases are correctly structured and consistent
The apparent inconsistency in module aliases (@users vs @user) is actually a deliberate and correct design choice reflecting the module structure:
@user/domain: Contains the core domain entities and repository interfaces (singular, as it represents the domain model)@users/applicationand@users/presentation: Contains the application services and presentation layer (plural, as they represent features/use-cases)
This follows a common DDD (Domain-Driven Design) pattern where the domain model is singular while its implementations and features are plural.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check for module alias consistency across the workspace
# Check TypeScript paths configuration
echo "Checking tsconfig paths..."
fd tsconfig.json --exec cat {} | jq -r '.compilerOptions.paths | select(. != null)'
# Check for all imports using these aliases
echo "Checking usage of module aliases..."
rg -g '*.ts' '@users?/' --context 1
Length of output: 2358
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check the actual directory structure and package.json files
echo "Directory structure for user/users modules:"
fd -t d -d 1 user libs/
fd -t d -d 1 users libs/
echo -e "\nChecking package.json files in these directories:"
fd -t f package.json -p libs/user libs/users --exec cat {}
Length of output: 362
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# List contents of user and users directories
echo "Contents of libs/user directory:"
fd . libs/user/ -t f
echo -e "\nContents of libs/users directory:"
fd . libs/users/ -t f
# Check for any exports or barrel files
echo -e "\nChecking index files and exports:"
rg -g '*.ts' "export \*" libs/user libs/users
Length of output: 2083
tsconfig.base.json (2)
21-22: LGTM! Clean separation of concerns
The path mappings follow a clean architecture pattern by properly separating the presentation layer from the application layer. The consistent naming convention and structure make the codebase more maintainable.
22-22: Verify the presentation module structure
Let's ensure the new presentation module path exists and follows the expected structure.
✅ Verification successful
The users presentation module structure is properly organized and exports are correctly configured
The verification confirms that:
- The module directory exists at the correct path
- The module follows the standard structure with necessary configuration files
- The index.ts file properly exports the users resolver
- All expected files are present including tests, configs and source files
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify the existence and structure of the users presentation module
# Check if the presentation module directory exists
if ! [ -d "libs/users/presentation" ]; then
echo "Error: Presentation module directory not found"
exit 1
fi
# Verify the index.ts file exists
if ! [ -f "libs/users/presentation/src/index.ts" ]; then
echo "Error: index.ts not found in presentation module"
exit 1
fi
# Check the module structure
echo "Module structure:"
fd . libs/users/presentation --type f
# Show exports from index.ts
echo -e "\nModule exports:"
cat libs/users/presentation/src/index.ts
Length of output: 715
apps/users/src/users/users.module.ts (1)
7-8: LGTM! Good architectural separation.
The change from relative to absolute imports improves the code organization by clearly separating presentation and application layers. This follows good domain-driven design principles.
Let's verify the module exports are properly configured:
✅ Verification successful
Let me gather more information about the tsconfig paths configuration since the previous command didn't show the complete picture.
Import paths and module exports are correctly configured ✅
The verification confirms:
- Both
UsersResolverandUsersServiceare properly exported from their respective libraries - Path aliases
@users/presentationand@users/applicationare correctly configured in tsconfig.base.json - Library index files export the required components:
- presentation: exports
users.resolver.ts - application: exports
users.service.ts
- presentation: exports
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify the module exports and tsconfig paths
# Check if the modules are properly exported
echo "Checking module exports..."
rg -l "export.*UsersResolver" "libs/users/presentation"
rg -l "export.*UsersService" "libs/users/application"
# Verify tsconfig paths configuration
echo "Checking tsconfig paths..."
fd tsconfig.json -x cat {} | jq '.compilerOptions.paths | select(."@users/presentation" or ."@users/application")'
Length of output: 452
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check the base tsconfig and workspace tsconfig files
echo "Checking base tsconfig.json..."
cat tsconfig.base.json | jq '.compilerOptions.paths'
echo -e "\nChecking workspace tsconfig files..."
fd tsconfig.json -x sh -c 'echo "=== {} ==="; cat {} | jq ".compilerOptions.paths"'
# Also verify the exports from the library's index files
echo -e "\nChecking library exports..."
echo "=== Presentation library ==="
cat libs/users/presentation/src/index.ts || true
echo -e "\n=== Application library ==="
cat libs/users/application/src/index.ts || true
Length of output: 1474
libs/users/presentation/src/lib/users.resolver.spec.ts (2)
2-2: LGTM! Import organization looks good.
The switch to absolute imports and the logical ordering of imports (external → internal → local) improves maintainability and follows best practices.
Also applies to: 5-5
Line range hint 7-27: Well-structured test setup with comprehensive coverage.
The test organization follows best practices with:
- Clean TestingModule setup
- Proper dependency injection and mocking
- Clear separation of concerns
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Copilot reviewed 6 out of 16 changed files in this pull request and generated no suggestions.
Files not reviewed (10)
- libs/users/application/tsconfig.json: Language not supported
- libs/users/presentation/project.json: Language not supported
- libs/users/presentation/tsconfig.json: Language not supported
- libs/users/presentation/tsconfig.lib.json: Language not supported
- libs/users/presentation/tsconfig.spec.json: Language not supported
- tsconfig.base.json: Language not supported
- apps/users/src/users/users.module.ts: Evaluated as low risk
- libs/users/presentation/src/lib/users.resolver.ts: Evaluated as low risk
- libs/users/application/src/lib/users.service.spec.ts: Evaluated as low risk
- libs/users/presentation/src/lib/users.resolver.spec.ts: Evaluated as low risk
|
🎉 This PR is included in version 1.0.0 🎉 The release is available on GitHub release Your semantic-release bot 📦🚀 |
Related #47
Summary by CodeRabbit
Release Notes
New Features
Improvements
UsersResolverandUsersServiceto improve module structure.Bug Fixes
UsersServiceto account for potential undefined values when a user is not found.