[Box] get comments action #14145
[Box] get comments action #14145
Conversation
|
The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎ 3 Skipped Deployments
|
|
Caution Review failedThe pull request is closed. WalkthroughThe changes include the introduction of a new action called "Get Comments" in the Box application, which allows users to fetch comments associated with specific files. This is complemented by updates to existing actions, including modifications to property definitions for clarity. Additionally, the version numbers for various components and the package have been incremented to reflect these updates. Changes
Possibly related PRs
Suggested labels
Suggested reviewers
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
CodeRabbit Configuration File (
|
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (3)
components/box/package.json (1)
3-3: Version update looks good.The package version has been correctly updated from 0.2.0 to 0.3.0, which is appropriate for adding a new feature like the "Get Comments" action.
Don't forget to update the CHANGELOG.md file (if one exists) to document the new "Get Comments" action and any other changes in this release.
components/box/actions/get-comments/get-comments.mjs (2)
4-9: LGTM: Action definition is well-structuredThe action definition is complete and includes all necessary information. The description provides a clear purpose and includes a link to the documentation, which is helpful.
Consider expanding the description to include more details about what the action does, such as mentioning that it retrieves comments for a specific file and returns them as an array.
10-31: LGTM: Props are well-definedThe props are well-structured and use appropriate propDefinitions from the app. The descriptions for
folderIdandfileIdare clear and informative, providing good guidance for users.Consider adding input validation for the
fileIdprop to ensure it's a valid Box file ID format. This could help prevent potential errors when making API calls.
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (3)
- components/box/actions/get-comments/get-comments.mjs (1 hunks)
- components/box/box.app.mjs (1 hunks)
- components/box/package.json (1 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (4)
components/box/actions/get-comments/get-comments.mjs (3)
1-2: LGTM: Imports are appropriateThe imports for
appandutilsare correctly defined and seem appropriate for the action's functionality.
1-48: Overall assessment: Well-implemented with room for minor improvementsThe "Get Comments" action for Box is well-implemented and follows good practices. The code is structured logically, with clear definitions for the action, props, and the main run method. The use of
utils.getResourcesStreamfor fetching comments is a good approach for handling potentially large datasets.However, there are a few areas where the implementation could be enhanced:
- Error handling: Add try-catch blocks to handle potential API errors or network issues.
- Input validation: Consider adding validation for the
fileIdprop to ensure it's in the correct format before making API calls.- Code organization: The summary message generation could be moved to a separate function for better readability and testability.
- Performance: Consider using
Array.fromwith the async iterator for a more concise implementation of collecting results.These suggestions would further improve the robustness and maintainability of the code.
32-47: LGTM: Run method implements core functionality correctlyThe
runmethod effectively implements the core functionality of fetching and returning comments. The use ofutils.getResourcesStreamis a good practice for handling potentially large datasets.Consider the following improvements:
- Add error handling to catch and handle potential API errors or network issues.
- Implement pagination control to limit the number of results if needed.
- Consider using
Array.fromwith the async iterator for a more concise implementation:const results = await Array.from(resourcesStream);
- Move the summary message generation to a separate function for better readability and testability.
To ensure the
getCommentsmethod is correctly implemented in the Box app, run the following script:This will help confirm that the
getCommentsmethod is properly defined and implemented in the Box app.components/box/box.app.mjs (1)
313-321: LGTM! Consider adding input validation and a prop definition.The implementation of the
getCommentsmethod looks good and follows the existing patterns in the file. Here are some suggestions for improvement:
Consider adding input validation for
fileIdto ensure it's not undefined or empty before making the API call.If this method is intended to be used in component props, you might want to add a corresponding prop definition in the
propDefinitionsobject.Here's a suggested implementation with input validation:
async getComments({ fileId, ...args } = {}) { if (!fileId) { throw new Error("fileId is required"); } return this._makeRequest({ method: "GET", path: `/files/${fileId}/comments`, ...args, }); },Let's verify if this new method is being used correctly in other parts of the codebase:
✅ Verification successful
Verified:
getCommentsmethod is correctly implemented and not currently used elsewhere in the codebase.The
getCommentsmethod has been successfully added following existing patterns. Since there are no usages found, no further action is required at this time.🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Search for usage of the getComments method rg "getComments" --type jsLength of output: 26
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Search for usage of the getComments method rg "getComments" --type jsLength of output: 26
WHY
Summary by CodeRabbit
New Features
Chores