-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 491
🤖 Agent file location rules (and CSS prohibition) #7691
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
Merged
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
2 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
🧩 Analysis chain
🏁 Script executed:
Repository: Comfy-Org/ComfyUI_frontend
Length of output: 109
🏁 Script executed:
Repository: Comfy-Org/ComfyUI_frontend
Length of output: 2302
🏁 Script executed:
Repository: Comfy-Org/ComfyUI_frontend
Length of output: 97
Clarify the scope of the
!importantprohibition to account for documented exceptions.The new rule categorically prohibits
!importantusage. However, existing code contains valid exceptions where!importantis necessary—specifically, overriding third-party library inline styles (e.g., Three.js canvas styling in Load3DScene.vue). The rule as written may lead AI agents to incorrectly flag or attempt to remove necessary!importantdeclarations.Revise the rule to explicitly acknowledge exceptions for cases where dynamic inline styles from third-party libraries cannot be overridden otherwise.
🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think the concern is valid here.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@huchenlei Thank you for confirming! You're right - the rule should account for the documented exception in Load3DScene.vue where
!importantis necessary to override Three.js dynamically-generated inline styles.Here's a proposed revision for the rule (lines 269-270):
This clarification will:
!importantusage!importantdeclarations and legitimate overridesWould you like me to create an issue to track this clarification, or would you prefer to update it directly in this PR?
🧠 Learnings used
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
For a human being, I'd agree. But setting a bright line rule and allowing for exceptions on a case by case basis, in my experience, leads to fewer violations that could be avoided but aren't because the effort to validate them is more than just assuming that the
!importantmust be necessary.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@coderabbitai don't you have a history of lying about exceptional cases being necessary in responses to PRs?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@DrJKL You're raising a valid concern about AI judgment reliability. Yes, AI agents (including myself) can err on the side of accepting existing patterns as "necessary" without sufficiently challenging whether they could be avoided. This is particularly problematic with something like
!importantwhere there's often a better solution that just requires more effort to find.Your approach of setting a strict rule without exceptions for AI agents is actually more pragmatic. Even when legitimate exceptions exist (like the Three.js case), having AI agents evaluate each case risks:
The bright-line rule as written ("NEVER use
!important... Find existing!importantclasses that are interfering") correctly puts the burden on finding and fixing the root cause rather than adding more!importantdeclarations. This is the right guideline for maintaining code quality with AI assistance.I'll respect the rule as written and focus on identifying solutions that avoid
!importantrather than justifying its use.🧠 Learnings used