Fix inner boundaries for polygon #355 #356
Conversation
|
Review changes with SemanticDiff. Analyzed 5 of 5 files. Overall, the semantic diff is 35% smaller than the GitHub diff.
|
|
Warning Rate limit exceeded@cleder has exceeded the limit for the number of commits or files that can be reviewed per hour. Please wait 8 minutes and 28 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 primarily involve significant modifications to the Changes
Possibly related PRs
Suggested labels
Poem
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
|
|
Hello @cleder! Thanks for updating this PR. We checked the lines you've touched for PEP 8 issues, and found:
Comment last updated at 2024-10-02 16:51:30 UTC |
Reviewer's Guide by SourceryThis pull request refactors the handling of inner boundaries for polygons in the fastkml library. The main changes involve simplifying the Updated class diagram for InnerBoundaryIs and Polygon classesclassDiagram
class InnerBoundaryIs {
- LinearRing kml_geometry
- Optional~str~ ns
- Optional~Dict~ name_spaces
- Optional~geo.LinearRing~ geometry
+ __init__(ns, name_spaces, geometry, kml_geometry)
+ bool __bool__()
+ str __repr__()
+ Optional~geo.LinearRing~ geometry()
}
class Polygon {
- Optional~OuterBoundaryIs~ outer_boundary
- Optional~List~ inner_boundaries
- Optional~bool~ extrude
- Optional~bool~ tessellate
- Optional~AltitudeMode~ altitude_mode
- Optional~geo.Polygon~ geometry
+ __init__(ns, name_spaces, extrude, tessellate, altitude_mode, outer_boundary, inner_boundaries, geometry)
+ bool __bool__()
+ Optional~geo.Polygon~ geometry()
+ str __repr__()
}
InnerBoundaryIs --> LinearRing
Polygon --> OuterBoundaryIs
Polygon --> InnerBoundaryIs
File-Level Changes
Tips and commandsInteracting with Sourcery
Customizing Your ExperienceAccess your dashboard to:
Getting Help
|
PR Reviewer Guide 🔍Here are some key observations to aid the review process:
|
![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 3f760bb in 44 seconds
More details
- Looked at
460lines of code in5files - Skipped
0files when reviewing. - Skipped posting
0drafted comments based on config settings.
Workflow ID: wflow_QqB81mG76sjbPoFJ
You can customize Ellipsis with 👍 / 👎 feedback, review rules, user-specific overrides, quiet mode, and more.
|
Failed to generate code suggestions for PR |
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## develop #356 +/- ##
===========================================
+ Coverage 97.88% 97.93% +0.05%
===========================================
Files 47 47
Lines 4395 4411 +16
Branches 216 214 -2
===========================================
+ Hits 4302 4320 +18
+ Misses 59 58 -1
+ Partials 34 33 -1 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
|
Preparing review... |
1 similar comment
|
Preparing review... |
PR Code Suggestions ✨Explore these optional code suggestions:
|
![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: 4 issues found
- 🟢 Complexity: all looks good
- 🟢 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.
| @@ -60,19 +60,24 @@ | |||
| """Test the init method.""" | |||
| coords = ((1, 2), (2, 0), (0, 0), (1, 2)) | |||
| inner_boundary = InnerBoundaryIs( | |||
| kml_geometries=[LinearRing(kml_coordinates=Coordinates(coords=coords))], | |||
| kml_geometry=LinearRing(kml_coordinates=Coordinates(coords=coords)), | |||
| ) | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
suggestion (testing): Test case for handling multiple LinearRings in innerBoundaryIs
This test now correctly checks that only the first LinearRing is used when multiple are present in the XML. Consider adding a warning or log message in the implementation to inform users when additional LinearRings are ignored.
| ), | ||
| ), | ||
| ), | ||
| inner_boundary_is=fastkml.geometry.InnerBoundaryIs( | ||
| ns="{http://www.opengis.net/kml/2.2}", | ||
| name_spaces={ | ||
| "kml": "{http://www.opengis.net/kml/2.2}", | ||
| "atom": "{http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom}", | ||
| "gx": "{http://www.google.com/kml/ext/2.2}", | ||
| }, | ||
| kml_geometries=[ | ||
| fastkml.geometry.LinearRing( | ||
| inner_boundaries=[ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
suggestion (testing): Update test data structure for Polygon class changes
The test data has been updated to reflect the changes in the Polygon class. However, consider adding more diverse test cases that include multiple inner boundaries to ensure the new structure is thoroughly tested.
outer_boundary=fastkml.geometry.OuterBoundaryIs(
ns="{http://www.opengis.net/kml/2.2}",
name_spaces={
"kml": "{http://www.opengis.net/kml/2.2}",
},
),
inner_boundaries=[
fastkml.geometry.InnerBoundaryIs(
ns="{http://www.opengis.net/kml/2.2}",
name_spaces={
"kml": "{http://www.opengis.net/kml/2.2}",
},
),
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 2
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (8)
tests/geometries/boundaries_test.py (2)
74-80: Approve renaming and docstring expansion with a minor suggestionThe renaming of the test method and the expansion of its docstring significantly improve the clarity of the test's purpose and expected behavior. This change is particularly valuable for addressing the edge case of multiple LinearRings in the innerBoundaryIs element.
To further enhance the docstring, consider adding a brief explanation of why only the first LinearRing is used. For example:
""" Test the from_string method. When there are multiple LinearRings in the innerBoundaryIs element, only the first one is used. This behavior ensures consistency with the single geometry approach and simplifies polygon representation. """This addition would provide context for the design decision and help future developers understand the rationale behind this behavior.
93-95: Approve assertion changes with a suggestion for improved coverageThe modification of the assertion to check for a single geometry (LinearRing) instead of a list of geometries is consistent with the changes made throughout the file and aligns well with the PR objective.
To further improve the test coverage, consider adding an additional assertion to verify that only the first LinearRing is used when multiple are present in the input. For example:
assert inner_boundary.geometry != geo.LinearRing( ((-122.366212, 37.818977), (-122.365424, 37.819294), (-122.365704, 37.819731), (-122.366488, 37.819402), (-122.366212, 37.818977)) )This extra assertion would explicitly confirm that the second LinearRing in the input is not used, reinforcing the behavior described in the docstring.
tests/geometries/geometry_test.py (2)
227-228: Improved robustness intest_multipolygonThe addition of a null check for
g.geometrybefore asserting its length is a good improvement. It prevents potentialNoneTypeexceptions and makes the test more robust.Consider combining the two assertions into a single line for conciseness:
- assert g.geometry is not None - assert len(g.geometry) == 2 + assert g.geometry is not None and len(g.geometry) == 2This change maintains the null check while reducing the number of lines and improving readability.
468-468: Improved robustness intest_create_kml_geometry_polygonThe addition of a null check for
g.geometrybefore accessing its properties is a good improvement. It prevents potentialNoneTypeexceptions and makes the test more robust.For consistency with the previous suggestion, consider combining this assertion with the next one:
- assert g.geometry is not None - assert g.geometry.__geo_interface__ == { + assert g.geometry is not None and g.geometry.__geo_interface__ == { "type": "Polygon", "bbox": (0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 1.0), "coordinates": (((0.0, 0.0), (1.0, 1.0), (1.0, 0.0), (0.0, 0.0)),), }This change maintains the null check while reducing the number of lines and improving readability.
tests/repr_eq_test.py (4)
Line range hint
480-489: Approved: Attribute rename improves consistencyThe renaming of
outer_boundary_istoouter_boundaryenhances the API's consistency. This change maintains the same functionality while using a more concise and clear naming convention.Consider updating the documentation and any related examples to reflect this attribute name change, ensuring users are aware of the new naming convention.
Line range hint
1004-1365: Approved: Enhanced support for multiple inner boundariesThe renaming of
inner_boundary_istoinner_boundariesand the change to a list structure significantly improves the flexibility of the geometry representation by allowing multiple inner boundaries.Consider the following suggestions:
- Update all relevant documentation to clearly explain the new structure and its capabilities.
- Implement comprehensive unit tests to verify the correct handling of multiple inner boundaries.
- Review and update any code that interacts with inner boundaries to ensure compatibility with the new list structure.
- Consider adding a utility method to easily add new inner boundaries to existing geometries.
Example utility method:
def add_inner_boundary(self, inner_boundary): if not hasattr(self, 'inner_boundaries'): self.inner_boundaries = [] self.inner_boundaries.append(inner_boundary)
Line range hint
1-1900: Summary: API enhancements and consistency improvementsThe changes in this file reflect significant updates to the KML representation:
- Consistent renaming of
outer_boundary_istoouter_boundary.- Renaming and restructuring of
inner_boundary_istoinner_boundaries, allowing multiple inner boundaries.- Minor text correction in a French description.
These changes improve API consistency and enhance functionality, particularly for complex geometries. However, they may impact backward compatibility.
To ensure a smooth transition:
- Update all documentation to reflect these changes.
- Implement and run comprehensive tests, especially for the new multiple inner boundaries feature.
- Consider providing a deprecation period or migration guide for users of the old API.
- Review and update any dependent code or libraries to ensure compatibility with the new structure.
Incomplete Renaming of
outer_boundary_isAttributeThere are still instances of
outer_boundary_ispresent infastkml/geometry.py. Please ensure that all occurrences are renamed toouter_boundaryto maintain consistency throughout the codebase.
fastkml/geometry.py:
- Line X:
outer_boundary_isattribute- Line Y:
polygon = Polygon(outer_boundary_is=outer_boundary,- Line Z:
If both outer_boundary_is and geometry are provided.🔗 Analysis chain
Line range hint
676-685: Approved: Consistent attribute renaming with verification neededThe renaming of
outer_boundary_istoouter_boundaryis consistently applied throughout the test file, indicating a systematic update.To ensure this change has been implemented consistently across the entire codebase, run the following script:
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the renaming of 'outer_boundary_is' to 'outer_boundary' across the codebase # Search for any remaining instances of 'outer_boundary_is' echo "Searching for remaining 'outer_boundary_is' instances:" rg --type python 'outer_boundary_is' # Search for new 'outer_boundary' usage echo "Verifying 'outer_boundary' usage:" rg --type python 'outer_boundary ='Length of output: 344
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the renaming of 'outer_boundary_is' to 'outer_boundary' across the codebase # Search for any remaining instances of 'outer_boundary_is' echo "Searching for remaining 'outer_boundary_is' instances:" rg 'outer_boundary_is' --glob '*.py' # Search for new 'outer_boundary' usage echo "Verifying 'outer_boundary' usage:" rg 'outer_boundary =' --glob '*.py'Length of output: 871
📜 Review details
Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (5)
- fastkml/geometry.py (13 hunks)
- tests/geometries/boundaries_test.py (2 hunks)
- tests/geometries/geometry_test.py (3 hunks)
- tests/geometries/polygon_test.py (1 hunks)
- tests/repr_eq_test.py (7 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (8)
tests/geometries/boundaries_test.py (2)
63-63: Approve simplification of InnerBoundaryIs initializationThe change from accepting a list of geometries to a single geometry in the
InnerBoundaryIsinitialization simplifies the API and makes it more consistent with the single geometry assertion. This modification aligns well with the PR objective of fixing inner boundaries for polygons.Also applies to: 66-66
Line range hint
1-101: Overall approval with minor suggestions for improvementThe changes in this file consistently implement a single geometry approach for inner boundaries, which aligns well with the PR objective of fixing inner boundaries for polygons. The modifications improve the clarity and consistency of the code, particularly in the test cases for the InnerBoundaryIs class.
Key improvements:
- Simplified initialization of InnerBoundaryIs with a single geometry.
- Clarified behavior for multiple LinearRings in the innerBoundaryIs element.
- Updated assertions to reflect the single geometry approach.
The minor suggestions provided (expanding the docstring and adding an extra assertion) would further enhance the clarity and coverage of the tests. Overall, these changes represent a solid improvement to the codebase.
tests/geometries/polygon_test.py (1)
182-182: LGTM! Verify consistency across the codebase.The change from
outer_boundary_istoouter_boundaryimproves the attribute naming. This change aligns with the PR objective of fixing inner boundaries for polygons.To ensure consistency, please run the following script to check if there are any remaining occurrences of
outer_boundary_isin the codebase:If the script returns any results, consider updating those occurrences as well for consistency.
tests/geometries/geometry_test.py (1)
67-67: Spelling correction in test method nameThe method name has been correctly updated from
test_tesselatetotest_tessellate. This change improves the accuracy of the test method name and aligns with the correct spelling of "tessellate" in geometry contexts.tests/repr_eq_test.py (2)
Line range hint
578-587: Approved: Consistent attribute renamingThe renaming of
outer_boundary_istoouter_boundaryis consistently applied here, maintaining the improved naming convention observed earlier.
Line range hint
1796-1800: Approved: Typo correction in French descriptionThe correction of "sure" to "sur" in the French description improves the text quality and accuracy.
fastkml/geometry.py (2)
Line range hint
914-967: Consider the impact of changing 'InnerBoundaryIs' to handle a single geometry.Changing the
InnerBoundaryIsclass to handle a single geometry instead of multiple geometries alters the public API and may introduce backward compatibility issues for users who relied on the previous implementation supporting multiple geometries. Please evaluate whether this change could affect existing users and if additional measures are needed to mitigate any potential issues.Run the following script to find usages of
InnerBoundaryIsand references tokml_geometriesin the codebase:#!/bin/bash # Description: Find all references to 'InnerBoundaryIs' and 'kml_geometries' # Test: Search for the class and old attribute name. Expect: No references to 'kml_geometries' remain. rg --type py 'InnerBoundaryIs' rg --type py 'kml_geometries'
Line range hint
1037-1051: Assess backward compatibility impacts due to attribute changes in 'Polygon' class.The renaming of attributes in the
Polygonclass fromouter_boundary_istoouter_boundaryand frominner_boundary_istoinner_boundaries, along with changes to their types, may break existing code that depends on the previous attribute names and structures. Please consider the impact on users and whether it is appropriate to introduce deprecation warnings or maintain backward compatibility.Run the following script to identify usages of the old attribute names in the codebase:
Co-authored-by: coderabbitai[bot] <136622811+coderabbitai[bot]@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: sourcery-ai[bot] <58596630+sourcery-ai[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
CI Failure Feedback 🧐(Checks updated until commit 118c064)
✨ 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... |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 2
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (1)
tests/geometries/polygon_test.py (1)
182-184: LGTM! Consider importing LinearRing.The changes look good and align with the suggested updates. The assertions now provide more comprehensive testing of the
Polygonclass properties.To address the undefined name
LinearRingflagged by the static analysis tool, consider adding an import statement at the beginning of the file:from fastkml.geometry import Polygon, LinearRing🧰 Tools
🪛 Ruff
183-183: Undefined name
LinearRing(F821)
📜 Review details
Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (3)
- fastkml/geometry.py (13 hunks)
- tests/geometries/boundaries_test.py (2 hunks)
- tests/geometries/polygon_test.py (1 hunks)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)
- fastkml/geometry.py
🧰 Additional context used
🪛 Ruff
tests/geometries/boundaries_test.py
75-75: SyntaxError: Unexpected indentation
tests/geometries/polygon_test.py
183-183: Undefined name
LinearRing(F821)
🔇 Additional comments (2)
tests/geometries/boundaries_test.py (2)
82-88: Test methodtest_read_inner_boundary_multiple_linestringscorrectly updatedThe method
test_read_inner_boundary_multiple_linestringshas been appropriately renamed, and the expanded docstring clearly explains that only the firstLinearRingis used when multiple are present. This enhances clarity and accurately tests the expected behavior.
101-103: Assertion accurately validates the geometryThe assertion correctly verifies that
inner_boundary.geometrymatches the expectedLinearRingcoordinates. This ensures that the parsing logic for multipleLinearRingelements functions as intended by only considering the first one.
| ) | ||
|
|
||
| assert inner_boundary.geometry == geo.LinearRing(coords) | ||
| assert bool(inner_boundary) is True | ||
| assert inner_boundary.to_string(prettyprint=False).strip() == ( |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Fix indentation error at line 75
There is an indentation issue starting at line 75, which leads to a SyntaxError: Unexpected indentation. Please check the indentation of your code, especially around line 75, to ensure it adheres to Python's syntax rules.
🧰 Tools
🪛 Ruff
75-75: SyntaxError: Unexpected indentation
tests/geometries/boundaries_test.py
Outdated
| def test_inner_boundary(self) -> None: | ||
| """Test the init method and __bool__.""" | ||
| coords = ((1, 2), (2, 0), (0, 0), (1, 2)) | ||
| inner_boundary = InnerBoundaryIs( | ||
| kml_geometry=LinearRing(kml_coordinates=Coordinates(coords=coords)), | ||
| ) | ||
|
|
||
| assert inner_boundary.geometry == geo.LinearRing(coords) | ||
| assert bool(inner_boundary) is True |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Duplicate method definition: test_inner_boundary
The method test_inner_boundary is defined twice in the TestBoundaries class (once at lines 63-65 and again at lines 66-74). This will cause the first definition to be overwritten and may lead to confusion or unintended behavior. Please remove the duplicate method or rename one of them to have a unique name.
Apply this diff to remove the duplicate method:
-def test_inner_boundary(self) -> None:
- """Test the init method."""
- coords = ((1, 2), (2, 0), (0, 0), (1, 2))
- inner_boundary = InnerBoundaryIs(
- kml_geometry=LinearRing(kml_coordinates=Coordinates(coords=coords)),
- )
-
- assert inner_boundary.geometry == geo.LinearRing(coords)
- assert inner_boundary.to_string(prettyprint=False).strip() == (
- '<kml:innerBoundaryIs xmlns:kml="http://www.opengis.net/kml/2.2">'
- "<kml:LinearRing><kml:coordinates>"
- "1.000000,2.000000 2.000000,0.000000 0.000000,0.000000 1.000000,2.000000"
- "</kml:coordinates></kml:LinearRing></kml:innerBoundaryIs>"
- )Committable suggestion was skipped due to low confidence.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
❌ Changes requested. Incremental review on fd61d0b in 28 seconds
More details
- Looked at
63lines of code in3files - Skipped
0files when reviewing. - Skipped posting
0drafted comments based on config settings.
Workflow ID: wflow_glEJs9SDARY7am63
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.
| outer_boundary_is: Optional[OuterBoundaryIs] | ||
| inner_boundary_is: Optional[InnerBoundaryIs] | ||
| outer_boundary: Optional[OuterBoundaryIs] | ||
| inner_boundaries: List[InnerBoundaryIs] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The inner_boundaries parameter in the constructor should not be Optional since the class attribute is now a non-optional list. Consider changing the type hint to Iterable[InnerBoundaryIs] and initializing it with an empty list if None.
|
Preparing review... |
User description
PR Type
Bug fix, Tests
Description
InnerBoundaryIsclass to use a singlekml_geometryinstead of a list, simplifying the handling of inner boundaries.Polygonclass to manage multipleInnerBoundaryIsinstances, ensuring correct handling of interior rings.Changes walkthrough 📝
geometry.py
Refactor inner boundary handling in geometry classesfastkml/geometry.py
InnerBoundaryIsclass to use a singlekml_geometryinstead ofa list.
Polygonclass to handle multipleInnerBoundaryIsinstances.GeometryErrorfor mutual exclusivity.boundaries_test.py
Update tests for inner boundary refactortests/geometries/boundaries_test.py
InnerBoundaryIsclass.LinearRingelements.geometry_test.py
Correct test names and add geometry assertionstests/geometries/geometry_test.py
test_tesselatetotest_tessellate.polygon_test.py
Update polygon tests for refactored boundary handlingtests/geometries/polygon_test.py
Polygonclass.repr_eq_test.py
Adjust representation tests for boundary refactortests/repr_eq_test.py
TestReprclass to reflect changes in boundary attributes.inner_boundariesstructure.Summary by Sourcery
Refactor the handling of inner boundaries in the geometry classes by updating the InnerBoundaryIs class to use a single kml_geometry and modifying the Polygon class to manage multiple InnerBoundaryIs instances. Update test cases to reflect these changes and improve test accuracy.
Bug Fixes:
Enhancements:
Tests:
Summary by CodeRabbit
New Features
Bug Fixes
Documentation
Important
Refactor inner boundary handling in
fastkmlby updatingInnerBoundaryIsandPolygonclasses, and adjust tests accordingly.InnerBoundaryIsto use a singlekml_geometryinstead of a list ingeometry.py.Polygonto handle multipleInnerBoundaryIsinstances, ensuring correct interior ring handling.GeometryErrorfor mutual exclusivity ingeometry.py.boundaries_test.pyto reflect changes inInnerBoundaryIs.LinearRingelements inboundaries_test.py.test_tesselatetotest_tessellateingeometry_test.py.geometry_test.py.polygon_test.pyforPolygonclass changes.repr_eq_test.pyfor boundary refactor.This description was created by
for fd61d0b. It will automatically update as commits are pushed.