Skip to content

Conversation

@omermecitoglu
Copy link
Owner

@omermecitoglu omermecitoglu commented Dec 19, 2024

Fixes #13

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • Bug Fixes

    • Improved error handling and response management for route definitions, ensuring proper addition of error responses.
    • Enhanced control flow by checking for the presence of error handling functions before execution.
  • New Features

    • Streamlined response handling process for better robustness in route definitions.

@coderabbitai
Copy link
Contributor

coderabbitai bot commented Dec 19, 2024

Walkthrough

The changes in src/core/definer.ts focus on improving the error handling and response management within the defineRoute function. The modifications introduce more conditional logic for adding "400" and "500" responses to the responses object. The changes ensure that these default error responses are only added when they don't already exist, preventing unnecessary overwriting of existing error response definitions.

Changes

File Change Summary
src/core/definer.ts - Modified conditional logic for adding "400" and "500" responses
- Updated error handling to check for handleErrors function presence
- Refined function signature for defineRoute

Assessment against linked issues

Objective Addressed Explanation
Allow custom 400 status code description and content [#13]
Improve flexibility of error response handling

Poem

🐰 In the realm of routes, a rabbit's delight,
Errors now dance with conditional might!
No more default responses that blindly repeat,
Our code now dances to a more elegant beat!
Hop, skip, and jump through error's domain! 🚀


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:

  • Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
    • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
    • Generate unit testing code for this file.
    • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
  • 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 gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
    • @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.
    • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

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)

  • @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
  • @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
  • @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
  • @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
  • @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
  • @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

  • Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
  • Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
  • Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

CodeRabbit Configuration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

  • You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
  • Please see the configuration documentation for more information.
  • 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/schema.v2.json

Documentation and Community

  • Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
  • Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
  • Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

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

🧹 Nitpick comments (2)
src/core/definer.ts (2)

133-140: LGTM! Clean implementation of response override prevention.

The changes effectively prevent overriding custom 400 and 500 responses while maintaining fallback defaults. This aligns perfectly with the PR objectives.

Consider extracting the default 500 response description to a constant for consistency and reusability:

+const DEFAULT_INTERNAL_ERROR_RESPONSE = { description: "Internal Server Error" };
+
 if (!input.responses["500"]) {
-  responses["500"] = { description: "Internal Server Error" };
+  responses["500"] = DEFAULT_INTERNAL_ERROR_RESPONSE;
 }

133-140: Consider enhancing type safety for HTTP status codes.

To improve maintainability and prevent typos, consider:

  1. Using an enum or constants for HTTP status codes
  2. Creating a type-safe pattern that could be extended to other status codes

Example implementation:

enum HttpStatus {
  BAD_REQUEST = "400",
  INTERNAL_SERVER_ERROR = "500",
  // ... other status codes
}

const DEFAULT_RESPONSES: Partial<Record<HttpStatus, ResponseObject>> = {
  [HttpStatus.INTERNAL_SERVER_ERROR]: { description: "Internal Server Error" },
};

// Usage
if (!input.responses[HttpStatus.BAD_REQUEST]) {
  const response400 = addBadRequest(input.queryParams, input.requestBody);
  if (response400) {
    responses[HttpStatus.BAD_REQUEST] = response400;
  }
}

if (!input.responses[HttpStatus.INTERNAL_SERVER_ERROR]) {
  responses[HttpStatus.INTERNAL_SERVER_ERROR] = DEFAULT_RESPONSES[HttpStatus.INTERNAL_SERVER_ERROR]!;
}
📜 Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 78fe556 and b32acda.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • src/core/definer.ts (1 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (1)
src/core/definer.ts (1)

133-140: Verify alignment with error handling middleware.

Let's ensure that the error handling middleware uses these same status codes consistently.

✅ Verification successful

Let me gather more context about the error handling implementation to ensure a comprehensive verification.


Let me check one more aspect focusing on the error response handling in the definer module specifically.


Let me check the content of the error types file for a complete verification.


Error handling is properly aligned with OpenAPI definitions

The error handling implementation in definer.ts correctly aligns with the OpenAPI response definitions:

  • 400 status is returned for form data, request body, and search params parsing errors
  • 500 status is returned as a fallback for unhandled errors
  • Error types are well-defined in types/error.ts and properly used in the error handling flow
🏁 Scripts executed

The following scripts were executed for the analysis:

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Search for usage of 400 and 500 status codes in error handling
rg -A 2 "status: (?:400|500)" src/

Length of output: 812


Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Search for error handling related functions and middleware
ast-grep --pattern 'function $_(error$_) {
  $$$
}'

# Look for error handling middleware registration
rg -A 3 "app\.use.*error" src/

# Search for other error response patterns
rg "new Response.*error" src/

Length of output: 200


Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Look at the complete error handling context in definer.ts
rg -B 3 -A 3 "Response.*status: (?:400|500)" src/core/definer.ts

# Check for any error type definitions
ast-grep --pattern 'type $Error = {
  $$$
}'

# Look for error-related constants or enums
rg "(?:enum|const).*Error" src/

Length of output: 724


Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Check the content of error types file
cat src/types/error.ts

# Look for the actual usage of these error types
rg "customErrorTypes" src/

Length of output: 642

@omermecitoglu omermecitoglu merged commit b32acda into main Dec 19, 2024
1 check passed
@omermecitoglu omermecitoglu deleted the fix-overridden-responses branch December 19, 2024 03:29
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.

Why is it not possible to provide description and content for 400 status code?

2 participants