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

Refactor dev_checks method to reduce complexity #182

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jan 6, 2025

Conversation

DefinetlyNotAI
Copy link
Owner

@DefinetlyNotAI DefinetlyNotAI commented Jan 6, 2025

Fixes #181

Refactor the dev_checks() method in CODE/_dev.py to reduce its complexity.

  • Extract User Prompts: Move the user prompts into a separate method _perform_checks().
  • Handle File Operations: Create a new method _handle_file_operations() to manage file operations and logging.
  • Update Main Method: Modify the dev_checks() method to call _perform_checks() and _handle_file_operations().

For more details, open the Copilot Workspace session.

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • Refactor
    • Improved code structure by separating project guideline checks and file operations into dedicated functions
    • Enhanced modularity and maintainability of development-related processes

Fixes #181

Refactor the `dev_checks()` method in `CODE/_dev.py` to reduce its complexity.

* **Extract User Prompts**: Move the user prompts into a separate method `_perform_checks()`.
* **Handle File Operations**: Create a new method `_handle_file_operations()` to manage file operations and logging.
* **Update Main Method**: Modify the `dev_checks()` method to call `_perform_checks()` and `_handle_file_operations()`.

---

For more details, open the [Copilot Workspace session](https://copilot-workspace.githubnext.com/DefinetlyNotAI/Logicytics/issues/181?shareId=XXXX-XXXX-XXXX-XXXX).
@pull-request-size pull-request-size bot added the size/L Large size pr label Jan 6, 2025
Copy link
Contributor

coderabbitai bot commented Jan 6, 2025

Walkthrough

The pull request refactors the dev_checks() function in CODE/_dev.py by extracting two new helper functions: _perform_checks() and _handle_file_operations(). This restructuring breaks down the complex method into more modular and manageable pieces. The new functions separate the user interaction and file management logic, making the code more readable and easier to maintain while preserving the original functionality.

Changes

File Change Summary
CODE/_dev.py - Added _perform_checks() function to handle user guideline checks
- Added _handle_file_operations() function to manage file categorization and configuration updates
- Refactored dev_checks() to use these new helper functions

Assessment against linked issues

Objective Addressed Explanation
Reduce Code Complexity [#181]

Suggested Labels

type/Code, type/Development

Poem

Code refactored, complexity tamed 🧩
Functions split, modularity proclaimed 🚀
From tangled web to clear design
Readability now starts to shine ✨
Dev checks dance with newfound grace 💃


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>, please review it.
    • Generate unit testing code for this file.
    • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
  • 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 testing code 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 gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
    • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
    • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
    • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

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)

  • @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
  • @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
  • @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
  • @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
  • @coderabbitai generate docstrings to generate docstrings for this PR. (Beta)
  • @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
  • @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

  • Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
  • Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
  • Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

CodeRabbit Configuration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

  • You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
  • Please see the configuration documentation for more information.
  • 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/schema.v2.json

Documentation and Community

  • Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
  • Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
  • Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

Copy link

codeclimate bot commented Jan 6, 2025

Code Climate has analyzed commit 61ebdb8 and detected 0 issues on this pull request.

View more on Code Climate.

@DefinetlyNotAI DefinetlyNotAI requested review from ski-sketch and removed request for ski-sketch January 6, 2025 06:53
Copy link
Contributor

@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.

Actionable comments posted: 0

🧹 Nitpick comments (1)
CODE/_dev.py (1)

83-95: Consider externalizing the checklist for maximum flexibility.
I dig the for-loop with predefined checks, but if your app gets more checks down the road, you might want to store these prompts in a config file or a constants file. That way you don’t need to jump back into your code each time you add or tweak a prompt.

📜 Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between d93a542 and 61ebdb8.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • CODE/_dev.py (2 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (3)
CODE/_dev.py (3)

76-82: Docstring looks sweet.
Dude, this docstring is totally clear about what _perform_checks() does! It's super helpful for anyone jumping into the code.


163-165: Sweet finishing touch on dev_checks().
Calling _perform_checks() first and _handle_file_operations() next keeps it all nice and tidy. If you find you need to bail out for any reason, you can do so early. Thumbs up!


98-130: Nice separation of concerns, but watch out for sneaky input issues.
This _handle_file_operations() function is super structured and easy to look at. Just watch out for any user inputs or file paths that might break your code. Maybe sanitize or verify them if you suspect folks could feed weird stuff in.

Would you like me to check references to _handle_file_operations across the repo to ensure they handle user-provided paths safely?

✅ Verification successful

Yo, your code's actually pretty secure! Just one tiny suggestion tho 🔒

The way you handle files is super safe (nice job with those path checks!), but maybe add a quick check on that version number input? Like, make sure it follows your version format before saving it.

🏁 Scripts executed

The following scripts were executed for the analysis:

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Searching references to _handle_file_operations to confirm usage and potential user inputs
rg -A 4 "_handle_file_operations"

Length of output: 465


Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Check implementations of helper functions
ast-grep --pattern 'def Get.list_of_files'
ast-grep --pattern 'def _prompt_user'
ast-grep --pattern 'def _update_ini_file'

# Also search with rg for better context
rg -A 5 "def Get.list_of_files|def _prompt_user|def _update_ini_file"

Length of output: 953


Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Search for Get class/module definition and imports
rg -A 5 "class Get|from.*import Get"

# Also check if Get might be in a separate file
fd -e py -x grep -l "class Get"

Length of output: 843


Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Get the full implementation of list_of_files method
cat CODE/logicytics/Get.py

Length of output: 4722

@DefinetlyNotAI DefinetlyNotAI added request/Minor New feature or request, not important, may not do type/Code Related to the Code part type/Development Related to Development issues labels Jan 6, 2025
@DefinetlyNotAI DefinetlyNotAI self-assigned this Jan 6, 2025
@DefinetlyNotAI DefinetlyNotAI merged commit a604eed into main Jan 6, 2025
9 checks passed
@DefinetlyNotAI DefinetlyNotAI deleted the refactor-dev-checks branch January 6, 2025 16:09
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
request/Minor New feature or request, not important, may not do size/L Large size pr type/Code Related to the Code part type/Development Related to Development issues
Projects
Status: Done
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Complex Method for _dev.py
1 participant