feat: ✨ add UserDto #48
Conversation
WalkthroughThe changes in this pull request involve significant modifications to the architecture documentation and the restructuring of user-related modules. The Changes
Possibly related issues
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
libs/users/presentation/dto/src/lib/user.dto.spec.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 (
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Copilot reviewed 12 out of 25 changed files in this pull request and generated no suggestions.
Files not reviewed (13)
- libs/users/presentation/dto/project.json: Language not supported
- libs/users/presentation/dto/tsconfig.json: Language not supported
- libs/users/presentation/dto/tsconfig.lib.json: Language not supported
- libs/users/presentation/dto/tsconfig.spec.json: Language not supported
- libs/users/presentation/project.json: Language not supported
- libs/users/presentation/resolver/project.json: Language not supported
- libs/users/presentation/README.md: Evaluated as low risk
- libs/users/presentation/dto/eslint.config.js: Evaluated as low risk
- libs/users/presentation/eslint.config.js: Evaluated as low risk
- apps/users/src/users/users.module.ts: Evaluated as low risk
- README.md: Evaluated as low risk
- libs/users/presentation/dto/src/index.ts: Evaluated as low risk
- libs/users/presentation/dto/jest.config.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: 1
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (7)
libs/users/presentation/dto/src/lib/user.dto.ts (2)
6-10: Add field descriptions and validations.Consider enhancing the fields with:
- GraphQL descriptions for better schema documentation
- Input validations for the name field
Here's how you could improve it:
@Field(() => ID) id: string; -@Field() +@Field({ + description: 'The user\'s display name' +}) +@MaxLength(100) +@IsNotEmpty() name: string;Don't forget to import the validation decorators:
import { IsNotEmpty, MaxLength } from 'class-validator';
12-15: Consider adding parameter validation in the constructor.While the implementation is correct, consider adding parameter validation to ensure data integrity at runtime.
Here's a suggested improvement:
constructor(id: string, name: string) { + if (!id || !name) { + throw new Error('Both id and name are required'); + } this.id = id; this.name = name; }libs/users/presentation/resolver/src/lib/users.resolver.ts (2)
10-13: Consider extracting the DTO conversion logicWhile the implementation is correct, consider these improvements:
- Remove the redundant comment as the type annotation already indicates it's a domain entity
- Consider extracting the User to UserDto conversion logic into a dedicated mapper class for reusability and consistency
- const user: User | undefined = this.usersService.findById(id); // Domain entity - return user ? new UserDto(user.id, user.name) : null; + const user = this.usersService.findById(id); + return user ? UserDtoMapper.toDto(user) : null;
Line range hint
16-22: Maintain consistent use of DTOs in presentation layerThe
resolveReferencemethod currently returns the domainUserentity while the rest of the resolver usesUserDto. This creates an inconsistency in the presentation layer.Consider updating the method to return
UserDto | nullfor consistency:@ResolveReference() resolveReference(reference: { __typename: string; id: string; - }): User | undefined { - return this.usersService.findById(reference.id); + }): UserDto | null { + const user = this.usersService.findById(reference.id); + return user ? new UserDto(user.id, user.name) : null; }tsconfig.base.json (1)
22-25: LGTM! Good architectural separation.The split of the presentation layer into separate DTO and resolver modules follows good architectural practices and separation of concerns. This modular approach will improve maintainability and testability.
README.md (2)
63-63: Simplify the repository layer description.The current description contains redundant wording with "specific details".
Consider this revision:
-| repository(domain) | Interfaces (or abstract classes), which define methods for manipulating data without concern for specific database implementations. <br/>By defining this interface, we can decouple database access: the specific details of data access will be done by implementation classes, such as specific implementations using tools like Mongoose, TypeORM, Prisma, and so on. | +| repository(domain) | Interfaces (or abstract classes), which define methods for manipulating data without concern for specific database implementations. <br/>By defining this interface, we can decouple database access: data access will be handled by implementation classes using tools like Mongoose, TypeORM, Prisma, and so on. |🧰 Tools
🪛 LanguageTool
[style] ~63-~63: This phrase is redundant. Consider writing “details”.
Context: ...e, we can decouple database access: the specific details of data access will be done by implemen...(SPECIFIC_DETAILS)
57-63: Consider enhancing the architecture documentation.The architecture table could be more valuable with these improvements:
- Add arrows or visual indicators to show the dependency flow between layers
- Include concrete examples for each layer from your codebase (e.g., UserDto, UsersResolver)
- Add constraints about cross-layer dependencies (e.g., domain layer should not depend on presentation)
Would you like me to propose an enhanced version of the architecture documentation?
🧰 Tools
🪛 LanguageTool
[style] ~63-~63: This phrase is redundant. Consider writing “details”.
Context: ...e, we can decouple database access: the specific details of data access will be done by implemen...(SPECIFIC_DETAILS)
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (23)
README.md(1 hunks)apps/users/src/users/users.module.ts(1 hunks)libs/users/presentation/README.md(0 hunks)libs/users/presentation/dto/README.md(1 hunks)libs/users/presentation/dto/eslint.config.js(1 hunks)libs/users/presentation/dto/jest.config.ts(1 hunks)libs/users/presentation/dto/project.json(1 hunks)libs/users/presentation/dto/src/index.ts(1 hunks)libs/users/presentation/dto/src/lib/user.dto.ts(1 hunks)libs/users/presentation/dto/tsconfig.json(1 hunks)libs/users/presentation/dto/tsconfig.lib.json(1 hunks)libs/users/presentation/dto/tsconfig.spec.json(1 hunks)libs/users/presentation/eslint.config.js(0 hunks)libs/users/presentation/project.json(0 hunks)libs/users/presentation/resolver/README.md(1 hunks)libs/users/presentation/resolver/eslint.config.js(1 hunks)libs/users/presentation/resolver/jest.config.ts(1 hunks)libs/users/presentation/resolver/project.json(1 hunks)libs/users/presentation/resolver/src/lib/users.resolver.ts(1 hunks)libs/users/presentation/resolver/tsconfig.json(1 hunks)libs/users/presentation/resolver/tsconfig.lib.json(1 hunks)libs/users/presentation/resolver/tsconfig.spec.json(1 hunks)tsconfig.base.json(1 hunks)
💤 Files with no reviewable changes (3)
- libs/users/presentation/README.md
- libs/users/presentation/eslint.config.js
- libs/users/presentation/project.json
✅ Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (12)
- libs/users/presentation/dto/README.md
- libs/users/presentation/dto/eslint.config.js
- libs/users/presentation/dto/project.json
- libs/users/presentation/dto/src/index.ts
- libs/users/presentation/dto/tsconfig.json
- libs/users/presentation/resolver/README.md
- libs/users/presentation/resolver/eslint.config.js
- libs/users/presentation/resolver/jest.config.ts
- libs/users/presentation/resolver/project.json
- libs/users/presentation/resolver/tsconfig.json
- libs/users/presentation/resolver/tsconfig.lib.json
- libs/users/presentation/resolver/tsconfig.spec.json
🧰 Additional context used
🪛 LanguageTool
README.md
[style] ~63-~63: This phrase is redundant. Consider writing “details”.
Context: ...e, we can decouple database access: the specific details of data access will be done by implemen...
(SPECIFIC_DETAILS)
🔇 Additional comments (12)
libs/users/presentation/dto/tsconfig.spec.json (2)
4-4: Verify output directory structure exists.
Let's ensure the output directory structure is properly set up.
✅ Verification successful
The dist/out-tsc directory configuration is correct, no action needed
The dist directory is properly configured in .gitignore, which is the expected behavior for build output directories. The outDir path in tsconfig.spec.json follows the standard TypeScript project structure, where build artifacts are generated during the build process and not tracked in version control. The directory will be created automatically when the TypeScript compiler runs.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify the existence of the output directory structure
# Expected: The dist/out-tsc directory should exist at the correct level
# Check if the dist/out-tsc directory exists relative to the project root
if [ -d "dist/out-tsc" ]; then
echo "✓ Output directory exists"
else
echo "⚠️ Warning: Output directory 'dist/out-tsc' not found"
fi
# List any existing content to verify it's the correct location
ls -la dist/out-tsc 2>/dev/null || echo "Directory is empty or doesn't exist"
Length of output: 254
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's check if this is a TypeScript project and verify the build configuration
# First, check for root tsconfig.json
if [ -f "tsconfig.json" ]; then
echo "Root tsconfig.json exists:"
cat tsconfig.json
fi
# Check for any other tsconfig files that might define output directories
echo -e "\nSearching for all tsconfig files:"
fd tsconfig.json
# Check if dist directory exists at all (might be gitignored)
echo -e "\nChecking for dist directory:"
ls -la dist 2>/dev/null || echo "No dist directory found"
# Check package.json for build scripts
echo -e "\nChecking package.json for build configuration:"
if [ -f "package.json" ]; then
cat package.json | grep -A 5 '"scripts"'
fi
# Check for .gitignore to see if dist is ignored
echo -e "\nChecking .gitignore for dist patterns:"
if [ -f ".gitignore" ]; then
grep -i "dist" .gitignore
fi
Length of output: 1015
4-4: LGTM! Verify related TypeScript configurations.
The output directory path adjustment is correct for the new directory structure.
Let's verify that other TypeScript configurations are consistent:
✅ Verification successful
TypeScript configuration paths are consistent
The outDir path "../../../../dist/out-tsc" in libs/users/presentation/dto/tsconfig.spec.json is correct and consistent with other configurations:
- All files at the same directory level (
libs/users/presentation/dto/andlibs/users/presentation/resolver/) use "../../../../dist/out-tsc" - Files at shallower levels use correspondingly fewer "../" segments (e.g., "../../../dist/out-tsc" for
libs/users/application/) - The relative paths correctly point to the common output directory based on their location in the repository structure
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check for consistency across TypeScript configurations
# Expected: All tsconfig files in the dto directory should use the same relative path depth
# Find and display all tsconfig files in the dto directory
fd tsconfig.*.json -p libs/users/presentation/dto
# Check outDir paths in all tsconfig files
for config in $(fd tsconfig.*.json -p libs/users/presentation/dto); do
echo "Checking $config:"
cat "$config" | jq -r '.compilerOptions.outDir // empty'
done
Length of output: 110
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's try a broader search for tsconfig files and their outDir configurations
# First, find all tsconfig files in the repository
echo "All tsconfig files in the repository:"
fd tsconfig
# Then, for each tsconfig file, try to extract the outDir if it exists
echo -e "\nChecking outDir paths:"
for config in $(fd tsconfig); do
if [ -f "$config" ]; then
echo "=== $config ==="
cat "$config" | grep -i "outDir"
fi
done
Length of output: 8657
libs/users/presentation/dto/tsconfig.lib.json (2)
5-5: LGTM! Path adjustment aligns with directory restructuring
The updated output directory path correctly reflects the new directory structure for the UserDto module.
5-5: Verify consistency with other DTO configurations
Let's ensure this output path aligns with other similar modules in the project.
✅ Verification successful
Let me gather more information about the TypeScript configurations in the project to ensure we have a complete picture.
Output directory configuration is consistent with project structure
The outDir path in libs/users/presentation/dto/tsconfig.lib.json is correctly set to ../../../../dist/out-tsc, which is consistent with other configurations in the project. All TypeScript libraries compile to the same dist/out-tsc directory, with the relative path depth matching their location in the project structure:
- Deeper nested modules (4 levels):
../../../../dist/out-tsc - Less nested modules (3 levels):
../../../dist/out-tsc - Root level modules (2 levels):
../../dist/out-tsc
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check for consistency in outDir paths across DTO configurations
# Find all tsconfig.lib.json files in the project
echo "Checking all DTO module configurations..."
fd tsconfig.lib.json --type f | grep "/dto/" | while read -r config; do
echo "Checking $config:"
# Extract and display the outDir setting
cat "$config" | jq -r '.compilerOptions.outDir // "No outDir specified"'
done
Length of output: 428
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's check all tsconfig.lib.json files to compare output directory patterns
echo "Checking all library configurations..."
fd tsconfig.lib.json --type f | while read -r config; do
echo "=== $config ==="
cat "$config" | jq -r '.compilerOptions.outDir // "No outDir specified"'
done
Length of output: 1632
libs/users/presentation/dto/src/lib/user.dto.ts (2)
1-1: LGTM! Imports are specific and well-organized.
3-4: Verify federation setup and document architectural decision.
The @key directive indicates this DTO is part of a federated GraphQL schema. This is a significant architectural decision that affects service boundaries and entity resolution.
Let's verify the federation setup:
Consider documenting this architectural decision in an ADR (Architecture Decision Record) to capture:
- The rationale for using federation
- How User entity is shared across services
- Impact on service boundaries
✅ Verification successful
Federation setup is correctly configured but needs documentation
The federation setup is properly implemented with:
- Apollo Federation dependencies (@apollo/subgraph) in package.json
- Gateway configuration using ApolloGatewayDriver in apps/gateway/src/app/app.module.ts
- User entity correctly marked as a federated entity with @key directive
However, since this is a critical architectural decision:
- Document the federation setup in an Architecture Decision Record (ADR)
- Include details about User entity being a federated entity
- Specify how the User service interacts with other services through the gateway
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check for federation gateway configuration and other services that might reference this entity
# Check for federation gateway configuration
fd -e ts -e js gateway
fd -e yaml -e yml gateway
# Check for other services referencing User entity
rg -l "extends.*@key.*User" -g "*.ts"
Length of output: 137
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's check for federation setup more thoroughly
# Check for federation dependencies and configuration
rg "@apollo/federation|@apollo/subgraph" package.json
rg "ApolloGateway|buildSubgraphSchema" -g "*.ts"
# Check the gateway spec file content
cat apps/gateway-e2e/src/gateway/gateway.spec.ts
# Look for other federation-related decorators and configurations
rg "@Directive.*@key|@extends" -g "*.ts"
# Check for GraphQL schema definitions
fd -e graphql
Length of output: 929
libs/users/presentation/dto/jest.config.ts (1)
2-3: LGTM! Well-structured Jest configuration
The configuration is properly set up with:
- Descriptive and unique display name that clearly identifies the test suite
- Correct relative paths that accurately reflect the module's location in the monorepo
- Properly organized coverage directory structure
Also applies to: 9-9
libs/users/presentation/resolver/src/lib/users.resolver.ts (2)
4-4: LGTM: Clean import of the DTO
The import follows the module separation pattern, keeping presentation DTOs in their own package.
6-6: LGTM: Resolver correctly typed with DTO
The resolver is properly decorated to use UserDto as its type, maintaining consistency in the presentation layer.
tsconfig.base.json (1)
22-25: Verify the existence of target directories and files.
Let's ensure the target directories and index files exist to prevent potential compilation issues.
✅ Verification successful
Path mappings are correctly configured and files exist
The verification confirms that:
- Both index files exist at the specified paths in tsconfig.base.json
- The new path aliases are already being used correctly in the codebase
@users/presentation-dtoin users.resolver.ts@users/presentation-resolverin users.module.ts
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify the existence of target directories and index files for the new path mappings
# Check if the directories and files exist
echo "Checking DTO path..."
fd -t f "index.ts" "libs/users/presentation/dto/src"
echo "Checking resolver path..."
fd -t f "index.ts" "libs/users/presentation/resolver/src"
# Check for any remaining imports of the old path
echo "Checking for any remaining imports using old path..."
rg "@users/presentation" --type ts
Length of output: 664
apps/users/src/users/users.module.ts (1)
Line range hint 1-30: Verify GraphQL Federation compatibility with UserDto
The module uses Apollo Federation. Since we're introducing UserDto, we should ensure it's properly configured for federation.
Let's check the federation setup:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify Federation setup with UserDto
# Check if UserDto is properly decorated for federation
ast-grep --pattern 'class UserDto {
$$$
}'
# Look for @Key decorator which is required for federation
rg -A 5 "@Key|@Directive.*@key" --type tsREADME.md (1)
57-63: LGTM! Clean architecture structure is well-defined.
The layered architecture follows clean architecture principles with clear separation of concerns between presentation, application, and domain layers.
🧰 Tools
🪛 LanguageTool
[style] ~63-~63: This phrase is redundant. Consider writing “details”.
Context: ...e, we can decouple database access: the specific details of data access will be done by implemen...
(SPECIFIC_DETAILS)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Copilot reviewed 12 out of 26 changed files in this pull request and generated no suggestions.
Files not reviewed (14)
- libs/users/presentation/dto/project.json: Language not supported
- libs/users/presentation/dto/tsconfig.json: Language not supported
- libs/users/presentation/dto/tsconfig.lib.json: Language not supported
- libs/users/presentation/dto/tsconfig.spec.json: Language not supported
- libs/users/presentation/project.json: Language not supported
- libs/users/presentation/resolver/project.json: Language not supported
- libs/users/presentation/README.md: Evaluated as low risk
- libs/users/presentation/eslint.config.js: Evaluated as low risk
- libs/users/presentation/dto/eslint.config.js: Evaluated as low risk
- apps/users/src/users/users.module.ts: Evaluated as low risk
- README.md: Evaluated as low risk
- libs/users/presentation/dto/jest.config.ts: Evaluated as low risk
- libs/users/presentation/dto/src/index.ts: Evaluated as low risk
- libs/users/presentation/resolver/eslint.config.js: Evaluated as low risk
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (5)
libs/users/presentation/dto/src/lib/user.dto.spec.ts (1)
3-13: Consider adding more test cases for comprehensive coverage.The current test suite only covers the happy path. Consider adding test cases for:
- Input validation (if any exists in UserDto)
- Optional parameters (if any)
- Edge cases (empty strings, very long strings)
- Null/undefined handling
- Any additional methods that might exist in UserDto
Example test cases to add:
describe('UserDto', () => { // Existing test... it('should handle empty strings', () => { const userDto = new UserDto('', ''); expect(userDto.id).toBe(''); expect(userDto.name).toBe(''); }); it('should handle very long strings', () => { const longString = 'a'.repeat(1000); const userDto = new UserDto(longString, longString); expect(userDto.id).toBe(longString); expect(userDto.name).toBe(longString); }); // Add more test cases based on UserDto implementation details });libs/users/presentation/resolver/src/lib/users.resolver.spec.ts (4)
Line range hint
1-3: Update imports to use UserDtoThe resolver now uses
UserDtoinstead ofUser, but the test file still imports and uses the domainUsertype.Apply this diff to update the imports:
import { Test, TestingModule } from '@nestjs/testing'; import { UsersService } from '@users/application'; -import { User } from '@user/domain'; +import { UserDto } from '@users/presentation/dto';
Line range hint
31-45: Fix inconsistent null/undefined handling in test casesThere's an inconsistency in how "not found" cases are handled:
getUsertest expectsnullresolveReferencetest expectsundefinedThis inconsistency could lead to bugs as both methods should handle "not found" cases the same way.
Apply this diff to make the behavior consistent:
it('should return undefined if user not found', () => { - jest.spyOn(service, 'findById').mockReturnValue(undefined); + jest.spyOn(service, 'findById').mockReturnValue(null); expect(resolver.getUser('2')).toBeNull(); expect(service.findById).toHaveBeenCalledWith('2'); }); // ... other tests ... it('should return undefined if user not found by reference id', () => { - jest.spyOn(service, 'findById').mockReturnValue(undefined); + jest.spyOn(service, 'findById').mockReturnValue(null); expect( resolver.resolveReference({ __typename: 'User', id: '2' }), - ).toBeUndefined(); + ).toBeNull(); expect(service.findById).toHaveBeenCalledWith('2'); });Also applies to: 60-69
Line range hint
31-31: Update test case descriptionsThe test case descriptions still mention "return undefined" but the expected behavior has changed to return null.
Apply this diff to update the descriptions:
- it('should return undefined if user not found', () => { + it('should return null if user not found', () => { // ... other tests ... - it('should return undefined if user not found by reference id', () => { + it('should return null if user not found by reference id', () => {Also applies to: 60-60
Line range hint
32-32: Update mock data to use UserDtoThe test data should use
UserDtoinstead ofUsertype to match the actual implementation.Apply this diff to update the test data:
- const user: User = { id: '1', name: 'John Doe' }; + const user: UserDto = { id: '1', name: 'John Doe' }; // ... other tests ... - const user: User = { id: '1', name: 'John Doe' }; + const user: UserDto = { id: '1', name: 'John Doe' };Also applies to: 49-49
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (2)
libs/users/presentation/dto/src/lib/user.dto.spec.ts(1 hunks)libs/users/presentation/resolver/src/lib/users.resolver.spec.ts(1 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (3)
libs/users/presentation/dto/src/lib/user.dto.spec.ts (2)
3-13: LGTM! The basic test case follows good testing practices.
The test follows the AAA (Arrange-Act-Assert) pattern and verifies the basic functionality of UserDto instantiation.
1-1: Verify UserDto implementation details.
Let's check the actual implementation of UserDto to ensure our test suggestions align with its features.
✅ Verification successful
Import of UserDto is correctly used in the test file
The test file correctly imports and uses the UserDto class from the same directory. The implementation shows that UserDto is a GraphQL object type with two fields (id and name) and appropriate decorators. The test file properly verifies the basic instantiation and property assignments of the DTO.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Find and analyze the UserDto implementation
# Look for the UserDto class definition
echo "Looking for UserDto implementation..."
ast-grep --pattern 'class UserDto {
$$$
}'
# Look for any validation decorators or methods
echo "Looking for validation rules..."
rg -l "class UserDto" | xargs rg "@(IsString|IsNotEmpty|Length|Validate)"
Length of output: 1060
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's check for imports and decorators in the UserDto file
echo "Checking imports and decorators in UserDto..."
cat libs/users/presentation/dto/src/lib/user.dto.ts
# Let's also check the test file to understand the context better
echo -e "\nChecking the test file..."
cat libs/users/presentation/dto/src/lib/user.dto.spec.ts
Length of output: 900
libs/users/presentation/resolver/src/lib/users.resolver.spec.ts (1)
Line range hint 1-69: Verify related test files for consistency
Let's verify that other test files in the codebase have been updated to use UserDto and handle null consistently.
✅ Verification successful
Let me gather more information about the actual implementation to understand the null/undefined handling consistency.
Let me try a different pattern to find the implementations.
Let me fix the regex pattern.
Based on the test files analysis from the first script execution, I can now generate the final response:
Null/undefined handling is consistent across the codebase
The test files show a consistent pattern in null/undefined handling across different layers:
- Repository layer returns
nullfor not found cases - Service layer returns
undefinedfor not found cases - Resolver's
getUserreturnsnullandresolveReferencereturnsundefined
This matches the current implementation in the test file under review. Additionally, the UserDto is properly exported from libs/users/presentation/dto/src/lib/user.dto.ts.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Find other test files that might need similar updates
# Find test files that might need updates
echo "Looking for other test files that might need similar updates..."
rg -l "UsersResolver" --glob "**/*.spec.ts"
# Check for inconsistent null/undefined handling in test files
echo "Checking for inconsistent null/undefined handling in test files..."
rg "toBeUndefined|toBeNull" --glob "**/*.spec.ts" -C 2
# Verify UserDto export
echo "Verifying UserDto export..."
rg "export.*UserDto" --glob "**/dto/**/*.ts"
Length of output: 2958
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check the implementation of UsersResolver and related files
echo "Checking UsersResolver implementation..."
ast-grep --pattern 'class UsersResolver {
$$$
getUser($$$) {
$$$
}
$$$
}'
echo "Checking UserService implementation..."
ast-grep --pattern 'class UsersService {
$$$
findById($$$) {
$$$
}
$$$
}'
echo "Checking repository implementation..."
ast-grep --pattern 'class UserRepository {
$$$
findById($$$) {
$$$
}
$$$
}'
Length of output: 528
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for method implementations with more context
echo "Checking getUser implementation in resolver..."
rg "getUser.*\(.*\).*{" -A 5 --glob "**/*.ts" --no-filename
echo "Checking findById implementations..."
rg "findById.*\(.*\).*{" -A 5 --glob "**/*.ts" --no-filename
echo "Checking resolveReference implementation..."
rg "resolveReference.*\(.*\).*{" -A 5 --glob "**/*.ts" --no-filename
Length of output: 798
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for method implementations with more context
echo "Checking getUser implementation in resolver..."
rg "getUser\s*\([^)]*\)\s*{" -A 5 --glob "**/*.ts" --no-filename
echo "Checking findById implementations..."
rg "findById\s*\([^)]*\)\s*{" -A 5 --glob "**/*.ts" --no-filename
echo "Checking resolveReference implementation..."
rg "resolveReference\s*\([^)]*\)\s*{" -A 5 --glob "**/*.ts" --no-filename
Length of output: 843
|
🎉 This PR is included in version 1.0.0 🎉 The release is available on GitHub release Your semantic-release bot 📦🚀 |
Related #47 #49
Summary by CodeRabbit
Release Notes
New Features
UserDtoclass for GraphQL data transfer, enhancing data representation in queries.users-presentation-dtoandusers-presentation-resolverlibraries, providing usage instructions.Improvements
Bug Fixes
UsersResolverto ensure proper data handling.Chores