fix(filesystem): improve file deletion error handling

[soda3000]

Closes #1180

Summary:

• Use std::filesystem::remove’s return value instead of a prior exists() check
• Warn when remove() returns false (no file removed)
• Debug-log on successful deletion
• Catch exceptions and include the target path and error in the log

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Bug Fixes
  • Improved file deletion reliability and error handling during developer mode testing and shader cache clearing. Warnings are now logged if file removal fails, and unnecessary exceptions for missing files are avoided.

[coderabbitai]

Walkthrough

The changes refactor file deletion logic in FeatureIssues.cpp and ShaderCache.cpp by removing explicit file existence checks and exception handling. Instead, file removal now uses std::filesystem::remove with an error code parameter, enabling robust error logging and accurate success/failure reporting without exceptions for non-critical errors.

Changes

File(s)	Change Summary
src/FeatureIssues.cpp	Refactored file deletion logic: replaced existence checks and try-catch with error-code-based removal and logging.
src/ShaderCache.cpp	Updated file deletion to use error-code-based removal, removed try-catch and existence checks, improved logging.

Sequence Diagram(s)

sequenceDiagram
    participant Code as Calling Code
    participant FS as std::filesystem
    participant Logger as Logger

    Code->>FS: remove(path, error_code)
    alt error_code indicates error
        FS-->>Logger: Log warning with error message
    else file removed
        FS-->>Logger: Log debug message (deleted)
    else file not removed, no error
        FS-->>Logger: (No log, treat as file not existing)
    end

Loading

Assessment against linked issues

Objective	Addressed	Explanation
Use and check return values of std::filesystem::remove(), improve error handling and logging (#1180)	✅
Remove misleading log messages about successful deletion when removal may have failed (#1180)	✅
Replace try-catch and existence checks with error-code-based removal for consistency (#1180)	✅

Poem

A bunny hopped through code so neat,
Sweeping old checks right off their feet.
Now files are cleared with careful care,
Errors logged, no traps to snare.
With every hop, the bugs grow thin—
Hooray for tidy code within!
🐇✨

---

📜 Recent review details

Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 98325ad and 40d635a.

📒 Files selected for processing (2)

• src/FeatureIssues.cpp (2 hunks)
• src/ShaderCache.cpp (1 hunks)

✅ Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (1)

• src/FeatureIssues.cpp

🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)

• src/ShaderCache.cpp

⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms (1)

• GitHub Check: Build plugin and addons

✨ Finishing Touches

• 📝 Generate Docstrings

---

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

🪧 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.
  • Explain this complex logic.
  • 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 explain this code block.
  • @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 explain its main purpose.
  • @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.

Support

Need help? Create a ticket on our support page for assistance with any issues or questions.

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 generate docstrings to generate docstrings for this PR.
• @coderabbitai generate sequence diagram to generate a sequence diagram of the changes in this 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.

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.

[github-actions]

Using provided base ref: be967a1
Using base ref: be967a1
Base commit date: 2025-07-04T16:31:15-07:00 (Friday, July 04, 2025 04:31 PM)
No actionable suggestions for changed features.

[github-actions]

✅ A pre-release build is available for this PR:
Download

[alandtse]

Can you explain why you prefer to remove an existence check? Seems odd to blind delete things. It's not like this is a hot path where the io really matters to check existence vs delete.

[soda3000]

Can you explain why you prefer to remove an existence check? Seems odd to blind delete things. It's not like this is a hot path where the io really matters to check existence vs delete.

The method returns false if the file did not exist.
Source: https://devdocs.io/cpp/filesystem/remove

[alandtse]

That's not really answering my question.

[alandtse]

Like if it's the new cpp approach to delete without checking existence then fine, but I need to understand your reasoning.

[soda3000]

That's not really answering my question.

The existence check is redundant because the solution proposed already has handling built in for not-existent files. Removing the check means we don't sacrifice functionality, or add risk, and simplifies the file deletion code.

[alandtse]

@soda3000 Please revert the merge commit and then force push so it's only your changes and not all of dev. It'll cause conflicts.

[alandtse]

@coderabbitai is this a fix?

[coderabbitai]

Tip

For best results, initiate chat on the files or code changes.

@alandtse Yes, this appears to be appropriately classified as a "fix" based on conventional commits standards.

The changes address deficiencies in the existing file deletion error handling by:

• Fixing misleading log messages about successful deletion when removal may have failed
• Replacing problematic try-catch exception handling with more robust error-code-based approaches
• Improving error reporting and logging accuracy
• Addressing issue Improve error handling: Check return values of std::filesystem::remove() calls #1180 which indicates this was resolving a reported problem

Since this corrects existing functionality rather than adding new features, and addresses a specific issue with inadequate error handling, the "fix" classification is defensible under conventional commits standards.

  (\   /)
 ( ._.)
o_(")(")

thinking deeply

---

✏️ Learnings added

Learnt from: alandtse
URL: https://github.com/doodlum/skyrim-community-shaders/pull/1217

Timestamp: 2025-07-05T05:20:45.777Z
Learning: In the skyrim-community-shaders repository, file deletion error handling improvements that replace existence checks and try-catch blocks with std::filesystem::remove error-code-based approaches are considered bug fixes rather than refactoring, as they address inadequate error handling and misleading log messages.

Note: Learnings are effective only in the context of similar code segments. To apply general coding guidelines, please configure review instructions. You can manage existing learnings in the app.

---

🧠 Learnings used

Learnt from: alandtse
PR: doodlum/skyrim-community-shaders#0
File: :0-0
Timestamp: 2025-06-29T00:27:42.717Z
Learning: When reviewing PRs, the committer's description should inform analysis of changes and may take precedence to conclusions when reasonable, but the choice of commit type should still be independently evaluated for compliance with conventional commits. Both committer intent and conventional commit standards should be considered to determine if the classification is defensible.

---

Learnt from: alandtse
PR: doodlum/skyrim-community-shaders#0
File: :0-0
Timestamp: 2025-06-24T07:17:36.604Z
Learning: When reviewing PRs, always clarify the scope if there are multiple related features or dependencies. WeatherPicker was a separate PR that was already merged, while this PR focuses specifically on WetnessEffects climate preset system enhancements.