fix(service-portal): fix defender info and alert #16275
Conversation
WalkthroughThe pull request introduces several modifications across three components: Changes
Possibly related PRs
Suggested labels
Suggested reviewers
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
Documentation and Community
|
![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 (3)
libs/api/domains/law-and-order/src/lib/law-and-order.service.ts (1)
Line range hint
129-134: Approved: Improved null safety and conditional logicThe changes enhance the code's robustness by using optional chaining and conditional assignment. This aligns well with TypeScript best practices.
For consistency, consider using optional chaining for
subpoena?.defenderInfo.defenderChoicein themessageassignment as well:const message = defenderChoice ? formatMessage( DefenseChoices[subpoena?.defenderInfo?.defenderChoice]?.message, ) : ''This ensures consistent null safety throughout the code.
libs/service-portal/documents/src/components/DocumentLine/DocumentLineV3.tsx (2)
109-109: LGTM! Consider adding JSDoc comment for the new parameter.The addition of the
alertMessageDataparameter enhances the flexibility of thedisplayPdffunction. This change aligns well with the component's purpose and adheres to TypeScript usage guidelines.Consider adding a JSDoc comment to describe the purpose and expected type of the
alertMessageDataparameter. This would improve code documentation and maintainability.
159-161: LGTM! Consider adding error handling for missing alert data.The extraction and passing of the
alertdata from the query response to thedisplayPdffunction is well-implemented. This change enhances the component's ability to handle and display document-related alerts.Consider adding a console warning or error logging if the expected
alertdata is missing from the query response. This would help in debugging potential issues with the API or data structure changes.
📜 Review details
Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (3)
- libs/api/domains/law-and-order/src/lib/law-and-order.service.ts (1 hunks)
- libs/service-portal/documents/src/components/DocumentLine/DocumentLineV3.tsx (3 hunks)
- libs/service-portal/law-and-order/src/screens/Subpoena/Subpoena.tsx (2 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
📓 Path-based instructions (3)
libs/api/domains/law-and-order/src/lib/law-and-order.service.ts (1)
Pattern
libs/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- Reusability of components and hooks across different NextJS apps.
- TypeScript usage for defining props and exporting types.
- Effective tree-shaking and bundling practices."
libs/service-portal/documents/src/components/DocumentLine/DocumentLineV3.tsx (1)
Pattern
libs/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- Reusability of components and hooks across different NextJS apps.
- TypeScript usage for defining props and exporting types.
- Effective tree-shaking and bundling practices."
libs/service-portal/law-and-order/src/screens/Subpoena/Subpoena.tsx (1)
Pattern
libs/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- Reusability of components and hooks across different NextJS apps.
- TypeScript usage for defining props and exporting types.
- Effective tree-shaking and bundling practices."
🔇 Additional comments (5)
libs/service-portal/law-and-order/src/screens/Subpoena/Subpoena.tsx (2)
123-123: Improved type safety for defender choice button conditionThe change from
!subpoena.data.canEditDefenderChoicetosubpoena.data.canEditDefenderChoice === falseenhances type safety and clarity. This explicit comparison ensures the button is only disabled whencanEditDefenderChoiceis strictlyfalse, preventing potential issues with falsy values likenullorundefined. This aligns well with TypeScript best practices and improves the overall robustness of the component.
140-142: Clarify the intent behind changing the DefenderChoices rendering conditionThe condition for rendering the DefenderChoices component has been significantly altered. Previously, it was rendered when no defender choice was made (
!subpoena?.data.defenderChoice). Now, it's rendered when the ability to edit the defender choice is null (subpoena.data.canEditDefenderChoice === null).This change could have substantial impacts on the component's behavior and user experience. Could you please clarify:
- What is the reasoning behind this change?
- How does this new condition align with the expected user flow?
- Are there any scenarios where this change might unexpectedly prevent users from seeing or interacting with the DefenderChoices component?
Ensuring we understand the intent will help maintain the component's consistency across different NextJS apps that might use it.
To help verify the impact of this change, consider running the following script:
This will help us understand if this change affects other parts of the codebase.
✅ Verification successful
To accurately search for usages of the
DefenderChoicescomponent in TypeScript files, please run the following script:
DefenderChoices rendering condition change verified
The
DefenderChoicescomponent is only used inSubpoena.tsx, and the change in the rendering condition does not affect other parts of the codebase. Therefore, the verification is successful, and no unintended impacts are detected.🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Search for other usages of DefenderChoices component rg "DefenderChoices" --type typescriptLength of output: 73
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Search for other usages of DefenderChoices component in .ts and .tsx files rg "DefenderChoices" --glob "*.ts" --glob "*.tsx"Length of output: 685
libs/api/domains/law-and-order/src/lib/law-and-order.service.ts (1)
Line range hint
1-214: Compliance with coding guidelines confirmedThe changes in this file adhere to the coding guidelines for the
libs/**/*pattern:
- The modifications don't affect the reusability of the service across different NextJS apps.
- TypeScript is consistently used for type definitions throughout the file.
- The changes don't introduce any issues that would impact effective tree-shaking or bundling practices.
libs/service-portal/documents/src/components/DocumentLine/DocumentLineV3.tsx (2)
125-125: LGTM! Proper integration of the new parameter.The integration of
alertMessageDatainto thesetActiveDocumentcall is well-implemented. The use of the nullish coalescing operator ensures backwards compatibility, which is crucial for maintaining the component's reusability across different NextJS apps.
Line range hint
109-161: Overall assessment: Well-implemented changes that enhance functionality.The modifications to the
DocumentLineV3component effectively improve its ability to handle and display document-related alerts. The changes adhere to TypeScript usage guidelines and maintain the component's reusability across different NextJS apps. The code structure and implementation promote effective tree-shaking and bundling practices.Some minor suggestions for improvement:
- Add JSDoc comments for the new
alertMessageDataparameter in thedisplayPdffunction.- Consider adding error logging for missing alert data in the query response.
These enhancements would further improve code documentation and maintainability.
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #16275 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 36.92% 36.92%
=======================================
Files 6781 6781
Lines 140031 140031
Branches 39816 39817 +1
=======================================
Hits 51705 51705
Misses 88326 88326 Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. Continue to review full report in Codecov by Sentry.
|
Datadog ReportAll test runs ✅ 34 Total Test Services: 0 Failed, 33 Passed Test ServicesThis report shows up to 10 services
|
...
Attach a link to issue if relevant
What
Specify what you're trying to achieve
Why
Specify why you need to achieve this
Screenshots / Gifs
Attach Screenshots / Gifs to help reviewers understand the scope of the pull request
Checklist:
Summary by CodeRabbit
New Features
Bug Fixes
Refactor