396 kml model #397
396 kml model #397
Conversation
…ypothesis tests for KML model
…to include Model in KML geometry types
…iles without namespace declaration
… Model, and allow parsing KML files without namespace declarations
|
Review changes with Changed Files
|
Reviewer's Guide by SourceryThis PR adds support for KML Model elements by implementing new model-related classes and updating the registry to handle empty namespace IDs. The Model element allows attaching 3D models to Placemarks in KML documents. Class diagram for new KML Model supportclassDiagram
class Model {
+Optional~AltitudeMode~ altitude_mode
+Optional~Location~ location
+Optional~Orientation~ orientation
+Optional~Scale~ scale
+Optional~Link~ link
+Optional~ResourceMap~ resource_map
+geometry() Optional~Point~
}
class Location {
+Optional~float~ latitude
+Optional~float~ longitude
+Optional~float~ altitude
+geometry() Optional~Point~
}
class Orientation {
+Optional~float~ heading
+Optional~float~ tilt
+Optional~float~ roll
}
class Scale {
+Optional~float~ x
+Optional~float~ y
+Optional~float~ z
}
class Alias {
+Optional~str~ target_href
+Optional~str~ source_href
}
class ResourceMap {
+List~Alias~ aliases
}
Model --> Location
Model --> Orientation
Model --> Scale
Model --> Link
Model --> ResourceMap
ResourceMap --> Alias
File-Level Changes
Tips and commandsInteracting with Sourcery
Customizing Your ExperienceAccess your dashboard to:
Getting Help
|
WalkthroughThe pull request introduces several modifications across multiple files in the Changes
Possibly related PRs
📜 Recent review detailsConfiguration used: .coderabbit.yaml 📒 Files selected for processing (1)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)
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
|
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## develop #397 +/- ##
==========================================
Coverage 100.00% 100.00%
==========================================
Files 68 71 +3
Lines 5769 6005 +236
Branches 149 150 +1
==========================================
+ Hits 5769 6005 +236 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
PR Reviewer Guide 🔍Here are some key observations to aid the review process:
|
CI Failure Feedback 🧐(Checks updated until commit abcc0d9)
✨ CI feedback usage guide:The CI feedback tool (
In addition to being automatically triggered, the tool can also be invoked manually by commenting on a PR: where Configuration options
See more information about the |
|
Preparing review... |
1 similar comment
|
Preparing review... |
![sourcery-ai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/48477?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hey @cleder - I've reviewed your changes and they look great!
Here's what I looked at during the review
- 🟢 General issues: all looks good
- 🟢 Security: all looks good
- 🟢 Testing: all looks good
- 🟡 Complexity: 1 issue found
- 🟢 Documentation: all looks good
Help me be more useful! Please click 👍 or 👎 on each comment and I'll use the feedback to improve your reviews.
| return Point(self.longitude, self.latitude, self.altitude) | ||
|
|
||
|
|
||
| registry.register( |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
issue (complexity): Consider introducing helper functions to streamline the repetitive registry.register() calls.
The repetitive registry.register() calls can be simplified without losing functionality by introducing a helper function. This would reduce boilerplate while maintaining explicit registration:
def register_float_element(cls, attr_name, node_name):
registry.register(
cls,
RegistryItem(
ns_ids=("kml", ""),
attr_name=attr_name,
node_name=node_name,
classes=(float,),
get_kwarg=subelement_float_kwarg,
set_element=float_subelement,
),
)
# Usage example for Location class:
register_float_element(Location, "longitude", "longitude")
register_float_element(Location, "latitude", "latitude")
register_float_element(Location, "altitude", "altitude")This approach:
- Reduces duplicate code while keeping registrations explicit
- Makes registration intent clearer
- Centralizes registration logic for easier maintenance
- Maintains all existing functionality
Similar helpers could be created for other registration patterns (text, enum, etc).
| import fastkml.enums | ||
| import fastkml.links | ||
| import fastkml.model | ||
| from tests.base import Lxml |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
issue (code-quality): Don't import test modules. (dont-import-test-modules)
Explanation
Don't import test modules.Tests should be self-contained and don't depend on each other.
If a helper function is used by multiple tests,
define it in a helper module,
instead of importing one test from the other.
| import fastkml.links | ||
| import fastkml.model | ||
| from tests.base import Lxml | ||
| from tests.hypothesis.common import assert_repr_roundtrip |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
issue (code-quality): Don't import test modules. (dont-import-test-modules)
Explanation
Don't import test modules.Tests should be self-contained and don't depend on each other.
If a helper function is used by multiple tests,
define it in a helper module,
instead of importing one test from the other.
| import fastkml.model | ||
| from tests.base import Lxml | ||
| from tests.hypothesis.common import assert_repr_roundtrip | ||
| from tests.hypothesis.common import assert_str_roundtrip |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
issue (code-quality): Don't import test modules. (dont-import-test-modules)
Explanation
Don't import test modules.Tests should be self-contained and don't depend on each other.
If a helper function is used by multiple tests,
define it in a helper module,
instead of importing one test from the other.
| from tests.base import Lxml | ||
| from tests.hypothesis.common import assert_repr_roundtrip | ||
| from tests.hypothesis.common import assert_str_roundtrip | ||
| from tests.hypothesis.common import assert_str_roundtrip_terse |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
issue (code-quality): Don't import test modules. (dont-import-test-modules)
Explanation
Don't import test modules.Tests should be self-contained and don't depend on each other.
If a helper function is used by multiple tests,
define it in a helper module,
instead of importing one test from the other.
| from tests.hypothesis.common import assert_repr_roundtrip | ||
| from tests.hypothesis.common import assert_str_roundtrip | ||
| from tests.hypothesis.common import assert_str_roundtrip_terse | ||
| from tests.hypothesis.common import assert_str_roundtrip_verbose |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
issue (code-quality): Don't import test modules. (dont-import-test-modules)
Explanation
Don't import test modules.Tests should be self-contained and don't depend on each other.
If a helper function is used by multiple tests,
define it in a helper module,
instead of importing one test from the other.
| from tests.hypothesis.common import assert_str_roundtrip | ||
| from tests.hypothesis.common import assert_str_roundtrip_terse | ||
| from tests.hypothesis.common import assert_str_roundtrip_verbose | ||
| from tests.hypothesis.strategies import nc_name |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
issue (code-quality): Don't import test modules. (dont-import-test-modules)
Explanation
Don't import test modules.Tests should be self-contained and don't depend on each other.
If a helper function is used by multiple tests,
define it in a helper module,
instead of importing one test from the other.
PR Code Suggestions ✨Explore these optional code suggestions:
|
|
Failed to generate code suggestions for PR |
![ellipsis-dev[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/64358?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
👍 Looks good to me! Reviewed everything up to e7e781e in 1 minute and 25 seconds
More details
- Looked at
2069lines of code in16files - Skipped
0files when reviewing. - Skipped posting
1drafted comments based on config settings.
1. fastkml/model.py:447
- Draft comment:
The__bool__method's docstring should mention that it returnsTrueif bothlinkandlocationare set, not justlink. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Confidence changes required:50%
The__bool__method in theModelclass checks if bothlinkandlocationare set, but the docstring only mentionslink. This could be misleading.
Workflow ID: wflow_TAvSkXlQnhfsSvJP
You can customize Ellipsis with 👍 / 👎 feedback, review rules, user-specific overrides, quiet mode, and more.
![llamapreview[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/1023541?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Auto Pull Request Review from LlamaPReview
Large PR Notification
Dear contributor,
Thank you for your substantial contribution to this project. LlamaPReview has detected that this Pull Request contains a large volume of changes, which exceeds our current processing capacity.
Details:
- PR and related contents total size: Approximately 94,512 characters
- Current limit: 50,000 characters
Next steps:
- Consider breaking this PR into smaller, more focused changes if possible.
- For manual review, please reach out to your team members or maintainers.
We appreciate your understanding and commitment to improving this project. Your contributions are valuable, and we want to ensure they receive the attention they deserve.
LlamaPReview is continuously evolving to better serve the community. Share your thoughts on handling large PRs in our GitHub Discussions - your feedback helps us improve and expand our capabilities.
If you have any questions or need assistance, our community and support team are here to help.
Best regards,
LlamaPReview Team
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)
- docs/HISTORY.rst: Language not supported
- docs/fastkml.rst: Language not supported
- docs/working_with_kml.rst: Language not supported
- fastkml/containers.py: Evaluated as low risk
- fastkml/data.py: Evaluated as low risk
- fastkml/overlays.py: Evaluated as low risk
- fastkml/views.py: Evaluated as low risk
- fastkml/kml.py: Evaluated as low risk
- fastkml/geometry.py: Evaluated as low risk
- tests/hypothesis/feature_test.py: 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: 3
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (6)
fastkml/model.py (2)
447-448: Clarify docstring inModel.__bool__methodThe docstring says "Return True if link is set," but the implementation checks both
linkandlocation. Update the docstring to accurately reflect the condition being checked.Apply this diff to update the docstring:
def __bool__(self) -> bool: - """Return True if link is set.""" + """Return True if both link and location are set.""" return all((self.link, self.location))
381-381: Optimize boolean evaluation inResourceMap.__bool__The method
__bool__can be simplified by directly returningbool(self.aliases)without the conditional.Apply this diff for simplification:
def __bool__(self) -> bool: - """Return True if aliases are set.""" - return bool(self.aliases) + """Return True if there are any aliases.""" + return bool(self.aliases)docs/HISTORY.rst (1)
4-8: Set the release date for version 1.1.0 or mark as developmentThe version
1.1.0is marked as(unreleased), but changes have been documented. If the release is imminent, consider setting a release date. Otherwise, indicate that this is a development version.Apply this diff to update the version heading:
-1.1.0 (unreleased) +1.1.0.dev0 (unreleased)Alternatively, set a release date if appropriate.
docs/fastkml.rst (1)
160-167: Maintain alphabetical order of modules in documentationTo improve readability and consistency, consider ordering the modules alphabetically in the reference guide.
Apply this diff to reposition the
fastkml.modelsection:fastkml.mixins --------------------- .. automodule:: fastkml.mixins :members: :undoc-members: :show-inheritance: +fastkml.model +-------------------- + +.. automodule:: fastkml.model + :members: + :undoc-members: + :show-inheritance: + fastkml.overlays ----------------------- .. automodule:: fastkml.overlays :members: :undoc-members: :show-inheritance:tests/hypothesis/model_test.py (1)
38-62: Consider adding edge cases for altitude testingWhile the current test strategy is good, consider adding specific edge cases for altitude testing:
- Very large positive/negative values
- Values close to zero (both positive and negative)
@given( altitude=st.one_of( st.none(), st.just(0.0), - st.floats(allow_nan=False, allow_infinity=False).filter(lambda x: x != 0), + st.one_of( + st.floats(allow_nan=False, allow_infinity=False).filter(lambda x: x != 0), + st.floats(min_value=-1e-10, max_value=1e-10).filter(lambda x: x != 0), + st.floats(min_value=1e6, max_value=1e7), + st.floats(min_value=-1e7, max_value=-1e6) + ) ),tests/hypothesis/feature_test.py (1)
423-459: Well-structured property-based test for Model integrationThe test effectively validates:
- Model integration with Placemark
- Coordinate range constraints
- Non-zero value requirements
- Serialization consistency
Consider adding edge cases:
- Model with minimal required attributes
- Model with all optional attributes
📜 Review details
Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (16)
_typos.toml(1 hunks)docs/HISTORY.rst(1 hunks)docs/fastkml.rst(1 hunks)docs/working_with_kml.rst(2 hunks)fastkml/containers.py(2 hunks)fastkml/data.py(3 hunks)fastkml/features.py(20 hunks)fastkml/geometry.py(15 hunks)fastkml/kml.py(1 hunks)fastkml/links.py(8 hunks)fastkml/model.py(1 hunks)fastkml/overlays.py(29 hunks)fastkml/styles.py(19 hunks)fastkml/views.py(19 hunks)tests/hypothesis/feature_test.py(2 hunks)tests/hypothesis/model_test.py(1 hunks)
✅ Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (3)
- _typos.toml
- fastkml/views.py
- fastkml/overlays.py
🔇 Additional comments (14)
fastkml/model.py (1)
471-471: Consider handling the absence of location.geometry appropriately
In Model.geometry, if self.location is None or self.location.geometry is None, the method returns None. Ensure this is the desired behavior, or consider raising an exception if geometry is expected to be always present.
Verify if any usage assumes Model.geometry is not None.
fastkml/geometry.py (1)
303-303: Verify the inclusion of the empty string in ns_ids
The change to include the empty string "" in ns_ids may have unintended consequences. Ensure that this modification is consistent across the codebase and that it doesn't affect namespace resolution adversely.
Run the following script to check for consistency:
✅ Verification successful
Based on the search results, I can see that the inclusion of an empty string "" in ns_ids is a consistent pattern throughout the codebase. The search shows numerous RegistryItem definitions across different files (views.py, overlays.py, styles.py, geometry.py, etc.) where ns_ids includes both "kml" and "" in various combinations:
- Most common pattern:
ns_ids=("kml", "") - Alternative pattern:
ns_ids=("", "kml") - Extended pattern:
ns_ids=("kml", "gx", "")
This indicates that the empty string in ns_ids is part of the standard namespace handling in the codebase and is not an unintended modification.
The empty string in ns_ids is a valid and consistent pattern
The inclusion of "" in ns_ids is a deliberate design choice used throughout the codebase for namespace handling in KML elements.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify that all RegistryItem instances include the empty string in ns_ids where appropriate.
# Find all occurrences of RegistryItem definitions and check ns_ids
rg --multiline 'RegistryItem\(\n\s*ns_ids=\([^\)]*\)\)' fastkml/ | grep -C 3 'ns_ids='
Length of output: 86
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's try a different approach to find RegistryItem definitions and their ns_ids
# First, let's search for any line containing ns_ids with context
rg -C 5 'ns_ids=' fastkml/
# Also search for RegistryItem class usage patterns
rg -C 5 'RegistryItem\(' fastkml/
Length of output: 65598
fastkml/links.py (1)
Line range hint 129-212: Consistent use of ns_ids in RegistryItem registrations
The inclusion of the empty string "" in ns_ids across multiple RegistryItem registrations may affect how namespaces are handled. Verify that this change is intentional and doesn't introduce conflicts with default namespaces.
Ensure that the namespace handling logic accommodates the empty string and that it aligns with changes in other parts of the codebase.
docs/working_with_kml.rst (2)
130-130: LGTM: Namespace handling improvement
The addition of an empty string to ns_ids=("kml", "") improves flexibility in namespace handling, allowing for both prefixed and unprefixed KML elements.
239-239: Verify the Placemark ID change
The Placemark ID has been changed from "04SAFE6060F147CE66FBD" to "04AFE6060F147CE66FBD". Please confirm if this is an intentional change.
fastkml/kml.py (1)
288-288: LGTM: Consistent namespace handling
The update to include both "kml" and empty string in ns_ids maintains consistency with the namespace handling approach used throughout the codebase.
tests/hypothesis/model_test.py (1)
183-288: LGTM: Comprehensive Model testing
The test_fuzz_model implementation is thorough and well-structured:
- Covers all Model attributes
- Uses appropriate value ranges
- Includes proper null handling
- Validates serialization roundtrips
fastkml/containers.py (1)
332-332: LGTM: Namespace standardization
The namespace updates align with the library-wide standardization of namespace handling, allowing for both explicit "kml" namespace and empty string namespace identifiers.
Also applies to: 354-354
fastkml/data.py (2)
314-314: LGTM: Consistent namespace handling
The namespace updates in Schema, SchemaData, and ExtendedData registrations maintain consistency with the library-wide standardization effort.
Also applies to: 647-647, 728-728
314-314: Verify namespace compatibility with existing KML files
The namespace changes across multiple components should be tested against real-world KML files to ensure backward compatibility.
Also applies to: 332-332, 354-354, 647-647, 728-728
✅ Verification successful
Let me analyze the test files further to verify the namespace changes.
Based on the gathered evidence, I can now generate the final response:
Namespace changes are safe and properly handled
The namespace changes are consistent with the KML 2.2 specification and well-tested:
- Test files contain proper KML 2.2 namespace declarations (
xmlns="http://www.opengis.net/kml/2.2") - Schema files (ogckml22.xsd, kml22gx.xsd) correctly define the namespaces
- Extensive test coverage for namespace-aware XML serialization in
tests/styles_test.py - The dual namespace approach (
ns_ids=("kml", "")) allows for both prefixed and default namespace handling, maintaining backward compatibility
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check for KML files in tests and verify they can be parsed with new namespace handling
# Find and analyze test KML files
fd -e kml -x cat {} \; | rg -A 5 'xmlns.*kml' || echo "No explicit KML namespace declarations found"
# Check for potential namespace-related issues in tests
rg -A 5 'ns_ids.*kml' tests/
Length of output: 6652
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check for KML namespace handling in the main code
rg -A 5 'xmlns.*kml.*2\.2' fastkml/
rg -A 5 'ns_map.*kml' fastkml/
# Check for namespace-related test assertions
rg -A 5 'assert.*xmlns.*kml' tests/
rg -A 5 'ns_map.*kml.*2\.2' tests/
Length of output: 4592
fastkml/features.py (3)
61-61: LGTM: Model integration is complete and consistent.
The Model class is properly imported and integrated into the KmlGeometry Union type, enabling KML model support in features.
Also applies to: 82-82
Line range hint 314-479: Consistent namespace handling improvement.
The standardization of namespace IDs to include both "kml" and "" (empty string) across all registry items improves XML parsing flexibility and maintains consistency throughout the codebase.
Also applies to: 667-684, 897-929
Line range hint 667-684: Verify Model geometry handling in Placemarks.
The Model geometry type is properly integrated into the Placemark's geometry handling. However, we should verify that the Model geometry is correctly processed when used in Placemarks.
✅ Verification successful
Based on the search results, I can now generate the final response:
Model geometry handling in Placemarks is properly implemented and tested.
The verification shows:
- Model class is properly implemented in
fastkml/model.pywith all required attributes (location, orientation, scale, etc.) - Model geometry is correctly integrated into Placemarks through property-based testing in
tests/hypothesis/feature_test.pywith thefuzz_placemark_modeltest - The Model class correctly implements the geometry interface by providing a
geometryproperty that returns a Point representation - The registration in Placemark's geometry handling is consistent with other geometry types
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify Model geometry usage in Placemarks
# Test: Search for test cases that validate Model geometry in Placemarks
# Look for test files that might contain Model geometry tests
rg -l "Model.*Placemark|Placemark.*Model" --type python
# Search for actual test implementations
ast-grep --pattern 'def test_$_($$$):
$$$
Model($$$)
$$$
Placemark($$$)
$$$'
Length of output: 177
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's try a different approach to verify Model geometry handling
# First, let's check for test files
fd "test.*\.py$"
# Then search for Model usage in tests
rg "Model" --type-add "python:*.py" --type python -C 2
# Look for Placemark tests
rg "Placemark" --type-add "python:*.py" --type python -C 2
# Check Model implementation
ast-grep --pattern 'class Model($$$):
$$$'
Length of output: 44012
fastkml/styles.py (1)
Line range hint 159-1407: Consistent namespace handling across styles.
The standardization of namespace IDs to include both "kml" and "" (empty string) has been consistently applied across all style-related registry items, maintaining alignment with the changes in features.py.
| return any((self.target_href is not None, self.source_href is not None)) | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Fix inconsistency between docstring and implementation in Alias.__bool__
The docstring states "Return True if target_href and source_href are set," but the implementation uses any(...), which returns True if either is set. If both attributes need to be set to return True, consider using all(...) instead.
Apply this diff to fix the inconsistency:
def __bool__(self) -> bool:
"""Return True if target_href and source_href are set."""
- return any((self.target_href is not None, self.source_href is not None))
+ return all((self.target_href is not None, self.source_href is not None))📝 Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| return any((self.target_href is not None, self.source_href is not None)) | |
| return all((self.target_href is not None, self.source_href is not None)) |
fastkml/model.py
Outdated
| """Return True if heading, tilt, and roll are set.""" | ||
| return any( | ||
| (self.heading is not None, self.tilt is not None, self.roll is not None), | ||
| ) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Fix inconsistency between docstring and implementation in Orientation.__bool__
The docstring states "Return True if heading, tilt, and roll are set," but the implementation uses any(...), which returns True if any of them is set. If the intention is to return True only when all attributes are set, consider using all(...) instead.
Apply this diff to correct the inconsistency:
def __bool__(self) -> bool:
"""Return True if heading, tilt, and roll are set."""
- return any(
+ return all(
(self.heading is not None, self.tilt is not None, self.roll is not None),
)📝 Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| """Return True if heading, tilt, and roll are set.""" | |
| return any( | |
| (self.heading is not None, self.tilt is not None, self.roll is not None), | |
| ) | |
| """Return True if heading, tilt, and roll are set.""" | |
| return all( | |
| (self.heading is not None, self.tilt is not None, self.roll is not None), | |
| ) |
| assert self.latitude is not None # noqa: S101 | ||
| return Point(self.longitude, self.latitude, self.altitude) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Avoid using assertion for runtime checks
The use of assert statements is intended for debugging purposes and may be removed when optimization is requested. Consider raising a ValueError or handling the None case explicitly.
Apply this diff to replace assert statements with explicit checks:
def geometry(self) -> Optional[Point]:
if not self:
return None
- assert self.longitude is not None # noqa: S101
- assert self.latitude is not None # noqa: S101
+ if self.longitude is None or self.latitude is None:
+ return None # or consider raising an exception
return Point(self.longitude, self.latitude, self.altitude)Committable suggestion skipped: line range outside the PR's diff.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
👍 Looks good to me! Incremental review on 31aa4dc in 27 seconds
More details
- Looked at
82lines of code in2files - Skipped
0files when reviewing. - Skipped posting
1drafted comments based on config settings.
1. tests/hypothesis/feature_test.py:448
- Draft comment:
The function nametest_fuzz_placemark_modelshould be updated to match the naming convention used in the file. Consider renaming it tofuzz_placemark_model. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Confidence changes required:50%
The test function name should be updated to match the naming convention used in the file.
Workflow ID: wflow_XsBaNJzt44m9G4MY
You can customize Ellipsis with 👍 / 👎 feedback, review rules, user-specific overrides, quiet mode, and more.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (5)
tests/hypothesis/feature_test.py (1)
423-459: Consider enhancing test coverage with optional attributes.The test could be more comprehensive by:
- Including optional Model attributes (orientation, scale)
- Testing edge cases for altitude values
- Verifying the content of serialized output
Here's how you could enhance the test:
@given( model=st.builds( fastkml.model.Model, altitude_mode=st.sampled_from(fastkml.enums.AltitudeMode), location=st.builds( fastkml.model.Location, latitude=st.floats( allow_nan=False, allow_infinity=False, min_value=-90, max_value=90, ).filter(lambda x: x != 0), longitude=st.floats( allow_nan=False, allow_infinity=False, min_value=-180, max_value=180, ).filter(lambda x: x != 0), altitude=st.floats(allow_nan=False, allow_infinity=False).filter( lambda x: x != 0, ), ), link=st.builds(fastkml.Link, href=urls()), + orientation=st.one_of( + st.none(), + st.builds( + fastkml.model.Orientation, + heading=st.floats(min_value=0, max_value=360), + tilt=st.floats(min_value=0, max_value=90), + roll=st.floats(min_value=0, max_value=360), + ), + ), + scale=st.one_of( + st.none(), + st.builds( + fastkml.model.Scale, + x=st.floats(min_value=0, exclude_min=True), + y=st.floats(min_value=0, exclude_min=True), + z=st.floats(min_value=0, exclude_min=True), + ), + ), ), ) def test_fuzz_placemark_model( self, model: fastkml.model.Model, ) -> None: placemark = fastkml.Placemark( kml_geometry=model, ) assert_repr_roundtrip(placemark) assert_str_roundtrip(placemark) assert_str_roundtrip_terse(placemark) assert_str_roundtrip_verbose(placemark) + # Verify serialized output contains model elements + serialized = str(placemark) + assert "<Model>" in serialized + assert "<Location>" in serialized + assert "<latitude>" in serialized + assert "<longitude>" in serialized + assert "<altitude>" in serialized + if model.orientation is not None: + assert "<Orientation>" in serialized + if model.scale is not None: + assert "<Scale>" in serializedfastkml/model.py (4)
238-240: Align default values inScale.__init__with registry defaultsIn the
__init__method ofScale, the default values forx,y, andzare set toNone, but in the registry, their defaults are set to1.0. To ensure consistency, consider initializingx,y, andzto1.0in the__init__method.Apply this diff to set the default values:
def __init__( self, ns: Optional[str] = None, name_spaces: Optional[Dict[str, str]] = None, - x: Optional[float] = None, - y: Optional[float] = None, - z: Optional[float] = None, + x: Optional[float] = 1.0, + y: Optional[float] = 1.0, + z: Optional[float] = 1.0, **kwargs: Any, ) -> None: """Create a new Scale.""" super().__init__(ns=ns, name_spaces=name_spaces, **kwargs) self.x = x self.y = y self.z = z
157-159: Align default values inOrientation.__init__with registry defaultsIn the
__init__method ofOrientation, the default values forheading,tilt, androllare set toNone, but in the registry, their defaults are set to0.0. To ensure consistency, consider initializing these attributes to0.0in the__init__method.Apply this diff to set the default values:
def __init__( self, ns: Optional[str] = None, name_spaces: Optional[Dict[str, str]] = None, - heading: Optional[float] = None, - tilt: Optional[float] = None, - roll: Optional[float] = None, + heading: Optional[float] = 0.0, + tilt: Optional[float] = 0.0, + roll: Optional[float] = 0.0, **kwargs: Any, ) -> None: """Create a new Orientation.""" super().__init__(ns=ns, name_spaces=name_spaces, **kwargs) self.heading = heading self.tilt = tilt self.roll = roll
69-71: Align default value foraltitudeinLocation.__init__with registry defaultIn the
__init__method ofLocation, the default value foraltitudeis set toNone, but in the registry, its default is0.0. To ensure consistency, consider initializingaltitudeto0.0in the__init__method.Apply this diff to set the default value:
def __init__( self, ns: Optional[str] = None, name_spaces: Optional[Dict[str, str]] = None, - altitude: Optional[float] = None, + altitude: Optional[float] = 0.0, latitude: Optional[float] = None, longitude: Optional[float] = None, **kwargs: Any, ) -> None: """Create a new Location.""" super().__init__(ns=ns, name_spaces=name_spaces, **kwargs) self.altitude = altitude self.latitude = latitude self.longitude = longitude
430-430: Align default value foraltitude_modeinModel.__init__with registry defaultIn the
__init__method ofModel, the default value foraltitude_modeis set toNone, but in the registry, it defaults toAltitudeMode.clamp_to_ground. To ensure consistency, consider setting the default value in__init__toAltitudeMode.clamp_to_ground.Apply this diff to set the default value:
def __init__( self, ns: Optional[str] = None, name_spaces: Optional[Dict[str, str]] = None, id: Optional[str] = None, target_id: Optional[str] = None, - altitude_mode: Optional[AltitudeMode] = None, + altitude_mode: Optional[AltitudeMode] = AltitudeMode.clamp_to_ground, location: Optional[Location] = None, orientation: Optional[Orientation] = None, scale: Optional[Scale] = None, link: Optional[Link] = None, resource_map: Optional[ResourceMap] = None, **kwargs: Any, ) -> None: """Create a new Model.""" super().__init__( ns=ns, name_spaces=name_spaces, id=id, target_id=target_id, **kwargs, ) self.altitude_mode = altitude_mode self.location = location self.orientation = orientation self.scale = scale self.link = link self.resource_map = resource_map
📜 Review details
Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (2)
fastkml/model.py(1 hunks)tests/hypothesis/feature_test.py(2 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (6)
tests/hypothesis/feature_test.py (2)
32-32: LGTM!
The import statement follows the existing style and is correctly placed with other fastkml imports.
423-459: LGTM! The test implementation is solid and well-structured.
The test method effectively validates the Model class integration with Placemark using property-based testing. The implementation:
- Correctly generates valid test data with appropriate bounds
- Ensures comprehensive serialization testing
- Follows the established testing patterns in the file
fastkml/model.py (4)
102-103:
Avoid using assert statements for runtime checks
The use of assert statements in production code is discouraged because they can be disabled with optimization flags (e.g., running Python with the -O option). Consider replacing them with explicit checks and raising exceptions if necessary.
Apply this diff to replace the assert statements:
def geometry(self) -> Optional[Point]:
if not self:
return None
- assert self.longitude is not None # noqa: S101
- assert self.latitude is not None # noqa: S101
+ if self.longitude is None or self.latitude is None:
+ return None # or consider raising an exception
return Point(self.longitude, self.latitude, self.altitude)168-171:
Fix inconsistency between docstring and implementation in Orientation.__bool__
The docstring states "Return True if heading, tilt, and roll are set," but the implementation uses any(...), which returns True if any of them is set. To resolve this inconsistency, either modify the implementation to use all(...) or update the docstring to reflect the actual behavior.
Option 1: Change the implementation to match the docstring
def __bool__(self) -> bool:
"""Return True if heading, tilt, and roll are set."""
- return any(
+ return all(
(self.heading is not None, self.tilt is not None, self.roll is not None),
)Option 2: Update the docstring to match the implementation
- """Return True if heading, tilt, and roll are set."""
+ """Return True if any of heading, tilt, or roll is set."""328-329:
Fix inconsistency between docstring and implementation in Alias.__bool__
The docstring states "Return True if target_href and source_href are set," but the implementation uses any(...), which returns True if either is set. To resolve this inconsistency, either modify the implementation to use all(...) or update the docstring to match the behavior.
Option 1: Change the implementation to match the docstring
def __bool__(self) -> bool:
"""Return True if target_href and source_href are set."""
- return any((self.target_href is not None, self.source_href is not None))
+ return all((self.target_href is not None, self.source_href is not None))Option 2: Update the docstring to match the implementation
- """Return True if target_href and source_href are set."""
+ """Return True if either target_href or source_href is set."""107-139: 🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Consider refactoring repetitive registry.register() calls
The repetitive registry.register() calls for classes like Location, Orientation, and Scale can be streamlined by introducing helper functions. This will reduce code duplication and improve maintainability.
Here's an example of how you can create a helper function:
def register_float_element(cls, attr_name, node_name, default=None):
registry.register(
cls,
RegistryItem(
ns_ids=("kml", ""),
attr_name=attr_name,
node_name=node_name,
classes=(float,),
get_kwarg=subelement_float_kwarg,
set_element=float_subelement,
default=default,
),
)
# Usage for the Location class:
register_float_element(Location, "longitude", "longitude")
register_float_element(Location, "latitude", "latitude")
register_float_element(Location, "altitude", "altitude", default=0.0)Applying this pattern to other classes will help reduce boilerplate and centralize registration logic.
Also applies to: 187-222, 267-302
fastkml/model.py
Outdated
| def __bool__(self) -> bool: | ||
| """Return True if link is set.""" | ||
| return all((self.link, self.location)) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Fix inconsistency between docstring and implementation in Model.__bool__
The docstring states "Return True if link is set," but the implementation uses all((self.link, self.location)), which returns True only if both link and location are set. To resolve this inconsistency, either modify the implementation to check only self.link or update the docstring to reflect that both link and location are required.
Option 1: Change the implementation to match the docstring
def __bool__(self) -> bool:
"""Return True if link is set."""
- return all((self.link, self.location))
+ return self.link is not NoneOption 2: Update the docstring to match the implementation
- """Return True if link is set."""
+ """Return True if both link and location are set."""Committable suggestion skipped: line range outside the PR's diff.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
👍 Looks good to me! Incremental review on 8b5da4a in 34 seconds
More details
- Looked at
31lines of code in1files - Skipped
0files when reviewing. - Skipped posting
1drafted comments based on config settings.
1. fastkml/model.py:453
- Draft comment:
The docstring for the__bool__method is incorrect. It should state "Return True if both link and location are set." - Reason this comment was not posted:
Comment looked like it was already resolved.
Workflow ID: wflow_EzFsqIFnKNr5emD8
You can customize Ellipsis with 👍 / 👎 feedback, review rules, user-specific overrides, quiet mode, and more.
|
Hello @cleder! Thanks for updating this PR. We checked the lines you've touched for PEP 8 issues, and found:
Comment last updated at 2024-12-01 20:38:52 UTC |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
👍 Looks good to me! Incremental review on a85ea4c in 21 seconds
More details
- Looked at
104lines of code in2files - Skipped
0files when reviewing. - Skipped posting
1drafted comments based on config settings.
1. tests/model_test.py:17
- Draft comment:
The docstring is incorrect. It should describe the test for 'kml model classes' instead of 'kml overlay classes'. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Confidence changes required:50%
The docstring on line 17 intests/model_test.pyis incorrect. It mentions 'kml overlay classes', but this file is testing the 'kml model classes'. This should be corrected for clarity.
Workflow ID: wflow_szUwyPAljKcjRoBE
You can customize Ellipsis with 👍 / 👎 feedback, review rules, user-specific overrides, quiet mode, and more.
|
Preparing review... |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (2)
tests/model_test.py (2)
17-17: Enhance the module docstring with more details.The current docstring is quite brief. Consider expanding it to include:
- The purpose of these tests
- What aspects of the Model class are being tested
- The relationship between TestModel and TestModelLxml
-"""Test the kml overlay classes.""" +"""Test the KML Model implementation and its components. + +This module contains test cases for the Model class and its associated elements +including Location, Scale, ResourceMap, and Alias. Tests are implemented for both +standard library (TestModel) and lxml (TestModelLxml) parsers. +"""
39-40: Replace hardcoded URLs with test constants.The test uses environment-specific URLs that might not be accessible. Consider using placeholder URLs or moving these to test constants.
-"<Link><href>http://barcelona.galdos.local/files/PublicLibrary.dae</href></Link>" +"<Link><href>http://example.com/files/model.dae</href></Link>"Also applies to: 70-71
📜 Review details
Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (2)
tests/model_test.py(1 hunks)tests/overlays_test.py(1 hunks)
✅ Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (1)
- tests/overlays_test.py
🔇 Additional comments (3)
tests/model_test.py (3)
83-84: LGTM! Good use of inheritance for parser variants.
The class correctly inherits from both TestModel and Lxml, following the project's pattern for testing with different XML parsers.
28-81: 🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Consider adding property-based tests using hypothesis.
While the current test covers the basic functionality, consider adding property-based tests using hypothesis to:
- Test with various combinations of optional elements
- Verify handling of different coordinate ranges
- Ensure robustness with different scale values
Example structure:
@given(
longitude=st.floats(min_value=-180, max_value=180),
latitude=st.floats(min_value=-90, max_value=90),
altitude=st.floats(),
scale=st.floats(min_value=0, max_value=100)
)
def test_model_properties(self, longitude, latitude, altitude, scale):
# Test implementation29-81: Consider splitting the test into smaller, focused test cases.
The current test verifies multiple aspects in a single test case. Consider splitting it into separate test methods:
- Test for altitude mode parsing
- Test for location parsing and geometry conversion
- Test for scale parsing
- Test for resource map and alias parsing
Also consider adding test cases for:
- Error conditions (malformed XML, missing required elements)
- Edge cases (empty or whitespace values)
- Different altitude modes
✅ Verification successful
Based on the analysis of test patterns across the codebase, I can now provide a final response:
Consider splitting the test into focused test cases following the project's established patterns
Looking at the codebase's testing patterns, particularly in tests/geometries/point_test.py and other test files, tests are typically split into focused cases that:
- Test specific aspects individually (e.g.,
test_from_string_2d,test_from_string_3d) - Handle error cases separately (e.g.,
test_from_string_invalid_coordinates) - Test edge cases in isolation (e.g.,
test_empty_from_string)
Suggested split for test_from_string in model_test.py:
test_model_altitude_mode_parsingtest_model_location_parsingtest_model_scale_parsingtest_model_resource_map_parsing
Additional test cases to consider:
test_model_from_string_emptytest_model_from_string_invalid_altitude_modetest_model_from_string_missing_required_elements
This follows the established testing patterns in the project and improves test maintainability and readability.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check if there are any other test files with similar patterns we can learn from
fd -e py -x grep -l "def test.*from_string" tests/
Length of output: 2758
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's check the test patterns in other files to understand the testing style
rg "def test.*from_string" tests/ -A 5 -B 1
Length of output: 25264
There was a problem hiding this comment.
👍 Looks good to me! Incremental review on 7286d09 in 24 seconds
More details
- Looked at
17lines of code in1files - Skipped
0files when reviewing. - Skipped posting
1drafted comments based on config settings.
1. docs/working_with_kml.rst:161
- Draft comment:
Consider emphasizing the importance of skipping validation when parsing documents with unsupported elements likegx:CascadingStyle. This can prevent potential parsing errors. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Confidence changes required:50%
The note about skipping validation when parsing the document is important and should be highlighted for clarity.
Workflow ID: wflow_anXyPv4ohJpwPDtS
You can customize Ellipsis with 👍 / 👎 feedback, review rules, user-specific overrides, quiet mode, and more.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
❌ Changes requested. Incremental review on cfd9994 in 43 seconds
More details
- Looked at
31lines of code in1files - Skipped
0files when reviewing. - Skipped posting
0drafted comments based on config settings.
Workflow ID: wflow_M7S8Lc4iMKjR2Hfv
Want Ellipsis to fix these issues? Tag @ellipsis-dev in a comment. You can customize Ellipsis with 👍 / 👎 feedback, review rules, user-specific overrides, quiet mode, and more.
| model = fastkml.model.Model.from_string(doc) | ||
| assert model.altitude_mode == AltitudeMode.absolute | ||
| assert model.geometry is None | ||
| assert not model |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Consider adding an assertion to check the scale attribute of the Model object to ensure it is correctly set. For example:
| assert not model | |
| assert model.scale == fastkml.model.Scale(x=1.0, y=1.0, z=1.0) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (6)
tests/model_test.py (6)
17-17: Enhance module docstring to be more descriptive.The current docstring is quite brief. Consider expanding it to describe the specific KML model features being tested and the test coverage strategy.
-"""Test the kml overlay classes.""" +"""Test the KML Model class and its components (Location, Scale, ResourceMap, etc.). + +This module contains tests for parsing and validating KML Model elements using both +standard library XML parser and lxml parser implementations."""
39-40: Consider using placeholder URLs in test data.The test uses specific URLs (
barcelona.galdos.local) which might cause issues if the domain changes or if tests are run in an environment with DNS resolution. Consider using standard placeholder domains (e.g.,example.com) as recommended by RFC 2606.-"<Link><href>http://barcelona.galdos.local/files/PublicLibrary.dae</href></Link>" +"<Link><href>http://example.com/files/PublicLibrary.dae</href></Link>"Also applies to: 70-71
49-80: Enhance test coverage with more granular assertions.While the current test is comprehensive, consider breaking down the assertions to:
- Test individual components before full equality
- Add edge cases for scale values (negative, zero, very large)
- Validate coordinate ranges (longitude: -180 to 180, latitude: -90 to 90)
Here's a suggested structure:
def test_from_string(self) -> None: model = fastkml.model.Model.from_string(doc) # Test individual components assert model.altitude_mode == AltitudeMode.absolute # Test location components separately assert model.location.longitude == -123.115776547816 assert model.location.latitude == 49.279804095564 assert model.location.altitude == 21.614010375743 # Test scale components separately assert model.scale.x == 1.0 assert model.scale.y == 1.0 assert model.scale.z == 1.0 # Test resource map assert len(model.resource_map.aliases) == 1 alias = model.resource_map.aliases[0] assert alias.target_href == "http://example.com/images/Concrete2.jpg" # Finally test full equality assert model == fastkml.model.Model(...)
82-101: Add docstring and consider additional edge cases.The test would benefit from:
- A docstring explaining the purpose and expectations
- Additional edge cases for partial/invalid data
Consider adding:
def test_from_string_no_location(self) -> None: """Test Model parsing behavior when Location element is missing. The Model should: - Parse successfully but evaluate to False - Have None geometry - Maintain other valid elements (Scale, Link, etc.) """ # Existing test code... def test_from_string_partial_location(self) -> None: """Test Model parsing with incomplete Location data.""" doc = ''' <Model xmlns="http://www.opengis.net/kml/2.2"> <Location> <longitude>-123.115776547816</longitude> <!-- Missing latitude and altitude --> </Location> </Model> ''' model = fastkml.model.Model.from_string(doc) assert not model # Should be invalid without complete coordinates
103-104: Add docstring to explain the purpose of the Lxml test class.class TestModelLxml(TestModel, Lxml): + """Test Model parsing using lxml parser. + + This class inherits all test methods from TestModel but uses lxml + for XML parsing instead of the standard library parser.""" pass
28-28: Consider adding property-based tests using hypothesis.While the current tests cover the basic functionality, consider adding property-based tests using hypothesis to:
- Test with randomly generated coordinate values
- Test with various scale combinations
- Test with different URL patterns
- Test with malformed XML
Example:
from hypothesis import given, strategies as st @given( longitude=st.floats(min_value=-180, max_value=180), latitude=st.floats(min_value=-90, max_value=90), altitude=st.floats() ) def test_model_coordinates_property(self, longitude, latitude, altitude): """Test Model with various valid coordinate combinations.""" doc = f''' <Model xmlns="http://www.opengis.net/kml/2.2"> <Location> <longitude>{longitude}</longitude> <latitude>{latitude}</latitude> <altitude>{altitude}</altitude> </Location> </Model> ''' model = fastkml.model.Model.from_string(doc) assert model.geometry.x == longitude assert model.geometry.y == latitude assert model.geometry.z == altitude
There was a problem hiding this comment.
👍 Looks good to me! Incremental review on d38b096 in 21 seconds
More details
- Looked at
43lines of code in1files - Skipped
0files when reviewing. - Skipped posting
1drafted comments based on config settings.
1. README.rst:6
- Draft comment:
Consider removing the line break for better readability:
KML is an XML geospatial data format and an OGC_ standard that deserves a canonical python implementation.
- Reason this comment was not posted:
Confidence changes required:10%
The README file has a minor formatting issue with the line break in the introduction section. It can be improved for better readability.
Workflow ID: wflow_2898YoHD2wIwFkzC
You can customize Ellipsis with 👍 / 👎 feedback, review rules, user-specific overrides, quiet mode, and more.
|
Preparing review... |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (1)
README.rst (1)
23-24: LGTM! Clear explanation of geometry compatibility.The added clarification about
__geo_interface__protocol compatibility is valuable for users.Consider adding a link to the
__geo_interface__protocol documentation for users who want to implement their own compatible geometries.
📜 Review details
Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
README.rst(4 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (4)
README.rst (4)
6-7: LGTM! Improved readability.
The split of the KML description into two lines enhances readability while maintaining accuracy.
56-56: LGTM! Consistent capitalization.
The capitalization fix improves documentation consistency.
141-141: LGTM! Added relevant reference.
The shapely documentation link is a valuable addition that complements the geometry compatibility information.
26-28: LGTM! Clear Python compatibility information.
The Python implementation and version requirements are clearly stated.
Let's verify the Python version requirement:
✅ Verification successful
Python version requirement in README matches pyproject.toml
The Python version requirement of >=3.8 stated in the README matches the requires-python = ">=3.8" specification in pyproject.toml, confirming the accuracy of the documentation.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify Python version requirement in setup.py or pyproject.toml
# Check setup.py if it exists
if [ -f "setup.py" ]; then
echo "Checking setup.py for Python version requirement:"
rg "python_requires" setup.py
fi
# Check pyproject.toml if it exists
if [ -f "pyproject.toml" ]; then
echo "Checking pyproject.toml for Python version requirement:"
rg "python =" pyproject.toml
fi
Length of output: 227
There was a problem hiding this comment.
👍 Looks good to me! Incremental review on 9177191 in 29 seconds
More details
- Looked at
36lines of code in1files - Skipped
0files when reviewing. - Skipped posting
1drafted comments based on config settings.
1. tests/model_test.py:102
- Draft comment:
Consider adding exception handling to verify that the function handles invalid input gracefully. This will ensure robustness against malformed KML data. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Comment did not seem useful.
Workflow ID: wflow_CN3rvXfgbJochFnC
You can customize Ellipsis with 👍 / 👎 feedback, review rules, user-specific overrides, quiet mode, and more.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (1)
tests/model_test.py (1)
82-101: Enhance test assertions for invalid model case.Consider adding more specific assertions to clarify why the model is invalid. For example, check if the location attribute is None.
assert model.altitude_mode == AltitudeMode.absolute assert model.geometry is None +assert model.location is None # Explicitly verify location is None assert not model
📜 Review details
Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
tests/model_test.py(1 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (4)
tests/model_test.py (4)
1-26: LGTM: File header and imports are well-structured.
The copyright notice, license information, and imports are properly organized and up-to-date.
29-81: Add missing scale assertion and consider using example.com domain.
- Add the missing scale assertion as suggested in the previous review.
- Consider using example.com instead of .local domain in test URLs for better adherence to standards.
assert model.geometry == Point(
-123.115776547816,
49.279804095564,
21.614010375743,
)
+assert model.scale == fastkml.model.Scale(x=1.0, y=1.0, z=1.0)
assert model == fastkml.model.Model(102-126: LGTM: Good negative test case.
The test properly verifies the handling of invalid location data (empty longitude). The assertions correctly verify that:
- altitude_mode is preserved
- geometry is None
- model evaluates to False
128-129: LGTM: Proper test class inheritance.
The class correctly inherits from both TestModel and Lxml to run the same test suite with the lxml parser.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
❌ Changes requested. Incremental review on abcc0d9 in 35 seconds
More details
- Looked at
48lines of code in1files - Skipped
0files when reviewing. - Skipped posting
0drafted comments based on config settings.
Workflow ID: wflow_G1rt7YXd2Hefa8yI
Want Ellipsis to fix these issues? Tag @ellipsis-dev in a comment. You can customize Ellipsis with 👍 / 👎 feedback, review rules, user-specific overrides, quiet mode, and more.
| assert location.altitude == 21.614010375743 | ||
| assert location.latitude == 49.279804095564 | ||
| assert location.geometry is None | ||
| assert not location |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Consider adding an assertion for the longitude value to ensure it is handled correctly when invalid. For example:
| assert not location | |
| assert location.longitude is None |
User description
PR Type
Enhancement, Tests, Documentation
Description
Modelclass and associated classes (Location,Orientation,Scale,Alias,ResourceMap) for handling KML 3D models.fastkml.modelmodule and integratedModelinto existing tests.fastkml.modelmodule and its components.Changes walkthrough 📝
9 files
model.py
Add KML Model and associated classesfastkml/model.py
Modelclass for KML 3D models.Location,Orientation,Scale,Alias, andResourceMap.containers.py
Allow empty string in KML namespace identifiersfastkml/containers.py
data.py
Allow empty string in KML namespace identifiersfastkml/data.py
features.py
Update KML namespace and geometry typesfastkml/features.py
ModeltoKmlGeometryunion.geometry.py
Allow empty string in KML namespace identifiersfastkml/geometry.py
kml.py
Allow empty string in KML namespace identifiersfastkml/kml.py
links.py
Allow empty string in KML namespace identifiersfastkml/links.py
overlays.py
Allow empty string in KML namespace identifiersfastkml/overlays.py
styles.py
Allow empty string in KML namespace identifiersfastkml/styles.py
2 files
model_test.py
Add hypothesis tests for KML Model moduletests/hypothesis/model_test.py
fastkml.modelmodule.Location,Orientation,Scale,Alias,ResourceMap, andModelclasses.
feature_test.py
Add hypothesis test for Placemark with Modeltests/hypothesis/feature_test.py
PlacemarkwithModelgeometry.3 files
HISTORY.rst
Update changelog for version 1.1.0docs/HISTORY.rst
fastkml.rst
Document fastkml.model moduledocs/fastkml.rst
fastkml.modelmodule.working_with_kml.rst
Update namespace identifiers in examplesdocs/working_with_kml.rst
1 files
_typos.toml
Add ignore identifiers for KML namespace typos_typos.toml
Summary by CodeRabbit
New Features
ScreenOverlayandModelin KML.Location,Orientation,Scale,Alias,ResourceMap, andModel.Documentation
1.1.0.fastkml.modelin the documentation.Bug Fixes
Tests
fastkml.modelcomponents using Hypothesis for property-based testing.fastkml.Placemarkfocusing on thekml_geometryattribute.Important
Introduces
Modelclass for KML 3D models, updates namespace parsing, and adds tests and documentation.Modelclass and related classes (Location,Orientation,Scale,Alias,ResourceMap) inmodel.pyfor KML 3D models.containers.py,data.py, andfeatures.py.fastkml.modelinmodel_test.py.PlacemarkwithModelgeometry infeature_test.py.HISTORY.rstfor version 1.1.0.fastkml.modelmodule infastkml.rst.working_with_kml.rst._typos.toml.This description was created by
for abcc0d9. It will automatically update as commits are pushed.