Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

fix: auth() field from a base model is not properly resolved #1192

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Mar 30, 2024
Merged

Conversation

ymc9
Copy link
Member

@ymc9 ymc9 commented Mar 30, 2024

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • Refactor
    • Simplified the linking process in the language server for better performance and reliability.
  • Tests
    • Added a new test case for regression issue 1179 to ensure data model integrity.

Copy link
Contributor

coderabbitai bot commented Mar 30, 2024

Walkthrough

Walkthrough

This update streamlines the linking process in the schema language server and refines scope handling for models, particularly focusing on authentication models. Additionally, it introduces a regression test for a previously identified issue, ensuring robustness in data model configurations. The simplification of the linking method and the adjustment in scope retrieval underscore a move towards more efficient and targeted functionality within the schema management framework.

Changes

File Path Change Summary
.../src/language-server/zmodel-linker.ts Simplified the link method by removing onlyFromExtraScopes parameter and related logic.
.../src/language-server/zmodel-scope.ts Replaced createScopeForNodes with createScopeForModel for the authentication model scope retrieval.
tests/integration/tests/regression/issue-1179.test.ts Added a regression test for issue 1179 related to a data model configuration.

Possibly related issues

  • Zenstack does not let me define multiple fields that are referencing the same model #653: The simplification in the linking process and the refined scope handling might indirectly support the objectives of allowing multiple fields in a model to reference the same model without validation issues, ensuring compatibility and preventing regressions in model relationships. This is particularly relevant if the changes improve the underlying framework's ability to handle complex model relationships and constraints.

Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media?

Share

Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

Note: Auto-reply has been disabled for this repository by the repository owner. The CodeRabbit bot will not respond to your replies unless it is explicitly tagged.

  • Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
    • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
  • PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai generate interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table.
    • @coderabbitai show all the console.log statements in this repository.
    • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
    • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.

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 as PR comments)

  • @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
  • @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
  • @coderabbitai review to trigger a review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
  • @coderabbitai help to get help.

Additionally, you can add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.

CodeRabbit Configration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

  • You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
  • The JSON schema for the configuration file is available here.
  • If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/coderabbit-overrides.v2.json

CodeRabbit Discord Community

Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.

@ymc9
Copy link
Member Author

ymc9 commented Mar 30, 2024

Fixes #1179

Copy link
Contributor

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Actionable comments posted: 0

Review Status

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI

Commits Files that changed from the base of the PR and between 1b2f48e and 932f0f5.
Files selected for processing (3)
  • packages/schema/src/language-server/zmodel-linker.ts (1 hunks)
  • packages/schema/src/language-server/zmodel-scope.ts (1 hunks)
  • tests/integration/tests/regression/issue-1179.test.ts (1 hunks)
Additional Context Used
Additional comments not posted (3)
tests/integration/tests/regression/issue-1179.test.ts (1)

1-27: The integration test structure looks good and is focused on the specific regression issue it aims to prevent. However, it would be beneficial to add comments explaining the purpose of the test, the specific issue it addresses, and any setup or teardown steps required to ensure the test is self-contained and maintainable.

packages/schema/src/language-server/zmodel-scope.ts (1)

227-227: The change from createScopeForNodes to createScopeForModel aligns with the PR's objectives and simplifies the scope retrieval for authentication models. Ensure comprehensive tests are in place to verify the correct behavior of this updated mechanism, given its importance to the system's functionality and security.

packages/schema/src/language-server/zmodel-linker.ts (1)

100-108: The simplification of the link method by removing the onlyFromExtraScopes parameter and its related conditional logic is a positive change that aligns with the PR's objectives. Ensure comprehensive tests are in place to verify the correct behavior of the simplified link method, given its importance to the model linking process.

@ymc9 ymc9 merged commit 0f558cb into v2 Mar 30, 2024
12 checks passed
@ymc9 ymc9 deleted the fix/issue-1179 branch March 30, 2024 15:38
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant