fix(application-system-api-worker): Get template error catch #17186
Conversation
WalkthroughThe changes in the Changes
Possibly related PRs
Suggested labels
Suggested reviewers
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
Documentation and Community
|
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (1)
apps/application-system/api/src/app/modules/application/lifecycle/application-lifecycle.service.ts (1)
162-190: Consider extracting notification preparation logic.While the error handling is appropriate, the nested try-catch and complex logic could be more maintainable if extracted into a separate method.
Consider refactoring like this:
+ private createNotificationFromPruneMessage( + pruneMessage: any, + application: PruningApplication, + ): CreateHnippNotificationDto { + return { + recipient: application.applicant, + templateId: pruneMessage.notificationTemplateId, + args: [ + { + key: 'externalBody', + value: pruneMessage.externalBody || '', + }, + { + key: 'internalBody', + value: pruneMessage.internalBody || '', + }, + ], + } + } private async preparePrunedNotification( application: PruningApplication, ): Promise<CreateHnippNotificationDto | null> { try { // ... template retrieval code ... if (lifeCycle && lifeCycle.shouldBePruned && lifeCycle.pruneMessage) { try { const pruneMessage = typeof lifeCycle.pruneMessage === 'function' ? lifeCycle.pruneMessage( application as ApplicationWithAttachments, ) : lifeCycle.pruneMessage - const notification = { - recipient: application.applicant, - templateId: pruneMessage.notificationTemplateId, - args: [ - { - key: 'externalBody', - value: pruneMessage.externalBody || '', - }, - { - key: 'internalBody', - value: pruneMessage.internalBody || '', - }, - ], - } - return notification + return this.createNotificationFromPruneMessage(pruneMessage, application) } catch (error) { // ... error handling ... } }
📜 Review details
Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
apps/application-system/api/src/app/modules/application/lifecycle/application-lifecycle.service.ts(1 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
📓 Path-based instructions (1)
apps/application-system/api/src/app/modules/application/lifecycle/application-lifecycle.service.ts (1)
Pattern apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
🪛 Biome (1.9.4)
apps/application-system/api/src/app/modules/application/lifecycle/application-lifecycle.service.ts
[error] 161-161: Change to an optional chain.
Unsafe fix: Change to an optional chain.
(lint/complexity/useOptionalChain)
🔇 Additional comments (2)
apps/application-system/api/src/app/modules/application/lifecycle/application-lifecycle.service.ts (2)
154-159: LGTM! Robust error handling for template retrieval.
The added try-catch block with early return and proper error logging improves the robustness of the code.
193-198: LGTM! Comprehensive error handling.
The error handling includes proper logging with relevant context and maintains consistent return behavior.
...pplication-system/api/src/app/modules/application/lifecycle/application-lifecycle.service.ts
Show resolved
Hide resolved
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #17186 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 35.73% 35.73%
=======================================
Files 6928 6928
Lines 147806 147811 +5
Branches 42124 42125 +1
=======================================
+ Hits 52814 52816 +2
- Misses 94992 94995 +3
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.
Continue to review full report in Codecov by Sentry.
|
Datadog ReportAll test runs ✅ 4 Total Test Services: 0 Failed, 4 Passed Test Services
|
Co-authored-by: kodiakhq[bot] <49736102+kodiakhq[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
...
Attach a link to issue if relevant
What
Specify what you're trying to achieve
Why
Specify why you need to achieve this
Screenshots / Gifs
Attach Screenshots / Gifs to help reviewers understand the scope of the pull request
Checklist:
Summary by CodeRabbit