Enhance template structure and sequence validation #2
Conversation
…emplate structure with sequence definitions
…code blocks, and lists
…r improved error handling
…r reporting and compliance with content types
|
@CodeRabbit review |
✅ Actions performedReview triggered.
|
|
Warning Rate limit exceeded@hawkeyexl has exceeded the limit for the number of commits or files that can be reviewed per hour. Please wait 11 minutes and 24 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. WalkthroughThe changes introduced in this pull request enhance the markdown parsing and validation processes. A new function Changes
Sequence Diagram(s)sequenceDiagram
participant User
participant MarkdownParser
participant Validator
participant Schema
User->>MarkdownParser: Parse Markdown
MarkdownParser->>MarkdownParser: addToSequence()
MarkdownParser->>Validator: Validate Section
Validator->>Schema: Check Sequence
Schema-->>Validator: Return Validation Result
Validator-->>MarkdownParser: Return Errors
MarkdownParser-->>User: Return Parsed Document
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 6 out of 6 changed files in this pull request and generated no suggestions.
Comments skipped due to low confidence (3)
src/rules/sequenceValidator.js:35
- [nitpick] The error message could be more descriptive. Consider changing it to:
Expected sequence: ${JSON.stringify(templateItemTypes)}, but found: ${JSON.stringify(structureItemTypes)}.
message: `Expected ${JSON.stringify(templateItemTypes)} but found ${JSON.stringify(structureItemTypes)}`,
src/markdownParser.js:47
- Ensure that the addToSequence function is covered by tests to verify that it correctly adds nodes to the sequence and updates positions as expected.
const addToSequence = (section, type, node) => {
src/structureValidator.js:36
- The validateSection function should handle the case where templateSection.sequence is defined but structureSection.content is not to prevent potential errors.
errors = errors.concat(validateSequence(structureSection, templateSection));
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 3
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (1)
src/rules/sequenceValidator.js (1)
51-63: Add a default case to handle unexpected sequence item typesTo ensure all sequence item types are properly handled, add a
defaultcase in theswitchstatement to catch any unrecognized types.Apply this diff to implement the change:
switch (type) { case "paragraphs": errors.push(...validateParagraphs(structureItem, templateItem)); break; case "code_blocks": errors.push(...validateCodeBlocks(structureItem, templateItem)); break; case "lists": errors.push(...validateLists(structureItem, templateItem)); break; + + default: + errors.push({ + type: "unknown_sequence_item", + head: structure.heading.content, + message: `Unknown sequence item type: ${type}`, + position: structureItem.position, + }); }
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (6)
src/markdownParser.js(4 hunks)src/rules/sequenceValidator.js(1 hunks)src/schema.js(2 hunks)src/structureValidator.js(2 hunks)templates.yaml(3 hunks)test/artifacts/sample_markdown.json(1 hunks)
✅ Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (1)
- templates.yaml
🧰 Additional context used
🪛 Biome (1.9.4)
src/rules/sequenceValidator.js
[error] 23-23: Do not access Object.prototype method 'hasOwnProperty' from target object.
It's recommended using Object.hasOwn() instead of using Object.hasOwnProperty().
See MDN web docs for more details.
(lint/suspicious/noPrototypeBuiltins)
[error] 25-25: Do not access Object.prototype method 'hasOwnProperty' from target object.
It's recommended using Object.hasOwn() instead of using Object.hasOwnProperty().
See MDN web docs for more details.
(lint/suspicious/noPrototypeBuiltins)
[error] 27-27: Do not access Object.prototype method 'hasOwnProperty' from target object.
It's recommended using Object.hasOwn() instead of using Object.hasOwnProperty().
See MDN web docs for more details.
(lint/suspicious/noPrototypeBuiltins)
src/markdownParser.js
[error] 50-50: Do not access Object.prototype method 'hasOwnProperty' from target object.
It's recommended using Object.hasOwn() instead of using Object.hasOwnProperty().
See MDN web docs for more details.
(lint/suspicious/noPrototypeBuiltins)
🔇 Additional comments (3)
src/structureValidator.js (2)
5-5: Import statement added correctly
The validateSequence function is properly imported from ./rules/sequenceValidator.js.
34-38: Sequence validation integrated into validateSection
The sequence validation is correctly integrated into the validateSection function, ensuring that sequences are validated when defined in the template.
test/artifacts/sample_markdown.json (1)
14-2175: Sample markdown JSON updated appropriately
The sample markdown JSON reflects the updated content and structure accurately.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (2)
src/rules/sequenceValidator.js (2)
22-30: Handle unknown item types instructureItemTypesmappingIf an item in
structure.contentdoes not have any of the expected properties (paragraphs,code_blocks,lists), thestructureItemTypesarray will containundefined, which may cause issues when checking the sequence order.Consider adding a default return value to handle unexpected item types:
const structureItemTypes = structure.content.map(item => { if (Object.hasOwn(item, "paragraphs")) { return "paragraphs"; } else if (Object.hasOwn(item, "code_blocks")) { return "code_blocks"; } else if (Object.hasOwn(item, "lists")) { return "lists"; + } else { + return "unknown"; } });This will make it explicit when an unexpected item type is encountered, allowing for better error handling.
🧰 Tools
🪛 Biome (1.9.4)
[error] 23-23: Do not access Object.prototype method 'hasOwnProperty' from target object.
It's recommended using Object.hasOwn() instead of using Object.hasOwnProperty().
See MDN web docs for more details.(lint/suspicious/noPrototypeBuiltins)
[error] 25-25: Do not access Object.prototype method 'hasOwnProperty' from target object.
It's recommended using Object.hasOwn() instead of using Object.hasOwnProperty().
See MDN web docs for more details.(lint/suspicious/noPrototypeBuiltins)
[error] 27-27: Do not access Object.prototype method 'hasOwnProperty' from target object.
It's recommended using Object.hasOwn() instead of using Object.hasOwnProperty().
See MDN web docs for more details.(lint/suspicious/noPrototypeBuiltins)
51-63: Add a default case to handle unexpected sequence item typesThe
switchstatement currently does not handle unexpectedtypevalues. Adding adefaultcase will improve robustness by catching any unhandled types and providing appropriate error messages.Apply this diff to add a default case:
switch (type) { case "paragraphs": errors.push(...validateParagraphs(structureItem, templateItem)); break; case "code_blocks": errors.push(...validateCodeBlocks(structureItem, templateItem)); break; case "lists": errors.push(...validateLists(structureItem, templateItem)); break; + default: + errors.push({ + type: "unknown_sequence_item_type", + head: structure.heading.content, + message: `Unknown sequence item type: ${type}`, + position: structureItem.position, + }); }This ensures that any unexpected
typevalues are properly handled and reported.
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
src/rules/sequenceValidator.js(1 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
🪛 Biome (1.9.4)
src/rules/sequenceValidator.js
[error] 23-23: Do not access Object.prototype method 'hasOwnProperty' from target object.
It's recommended using Object.hasOwn() instead of using Object.hasOwnProperty().
See MDN web docs for more details.
(lint/suspicious/noPrototypeBuiltins)
[error] 25-25: Do not access Object.prototype method 'hasOwnProperty' from target object.
It's recommended using Object.hasOwn() instead of using Object.hasOwnProperty().
See MDN web docs for more details.
(lint/suspicious/noPrototypeBuiltins)
[error] 27-27: Do not access Object.prototype method 'hasOwnProperty' from target object.
It's recommended using Object.hasOwn() instead of using Object.hasOwnProperty().
See MDN web docs for more details.
(lint/suspicious/noPrototypeBuiltins)
🔇 Additional comments (1)
src/rules/sequenceValidator.js (1)
23-28: Use Object.hasOwn() instead of hasOwnProperty
Using Object.hasOwn() is recommended over hasOwnProperty() to prevent issues with objects that do not inherit from Object.prototype or when hasOwnProperty is overridden.
Apply this diff to fix the issue:
const structureItemTypes = structure.content.map(item => {
- if (item.hasOwnProperty("paragraphs")) {
+ if (Object.hasOwn(item, "paragraphs")) {
return "paragraphs";
} else if (item.hasOwnProperty("code_blocks")) {
+ } else if (Object.hasOwn(item, "code_blocks")) {
return "code_blocks";
} else if (item.hasOwnProperty("lists")) {
+ } else if (Object.hasOwn(item, "lists")) {
return "lists";
}
});🧰 Tools
🪛 Biome (1.9.4)
[error] 23-23: Do not access Object.prototype method 'hasOwnProperty' from target object.
It's recommended using Object.hasOwn() instead of using Object.hasOwnProperty().
See MDN web docs for more details.
(lint/suspicious/noPrototypeBuiltins)
[error] 25-25: Do not access Object.prototype method 'hasOwnProperty' from target object.
It's recommended using Object.hasOwn() instead of using Object.hasOwnProperty().
See MDN web docs for more details.
(lint/suspicious/noPrototypeBuiltins)
[error] 27-27: Do not access Object.prototype method 'hasOwnProperty' from target object.
It's recommended using Object.hasOwn() instead of using Object.hasOwnProperty().
See MDN web docs for more details.
(lint/suspicious/noPrototypeBuiltins)
… order mismatches
Refactor the schema to support multiple sequence item types and improve the markdown parser for better content structure. Add sequence validation to ensure compliance with defined templates, enhancing error handling and reporting. Update content samples accordingly.
Summary by CodeRabbit
Release Notes
New Features
Bug Fixes
Documentation
templates.yamlwith inline comments for better readability and understanding.