Skip to content
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

Minor fixes: Remove redundant code, fix repeated func defs and fix color of node #190

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Oct 12, 2024

Conversation

tapishr
Copy link
Member

@tapishr tapishr commented Oct 12, 2024

Please check the action items covered in the PR -

  • Build is running
  • Eventing is functional and tested
  • Unit or integration tests added and running
  • Manual QA

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • New Features

    • Enhanced processing of graph edges with improved efficiency and clarity.
    • Introduced a mechanism to prevent duplicate processing of function definitions.
    • Updated edge color handling for certain graph elements.
  • Bug Fixes

    • Streamlined code by removing unnecessary complexity and commented-out sections.
  • Documentation

    • Updated method signatures for clarity on function parameters and usage.
  • Chores

    • Incremented package version from 2.0.1 to 2.0.2.

Copy link
Contributor

coderabbitai bot commented Oct 12, 2024

Caution

Review failed

The pull request is closed.

Walkthrough

The pull request introduces modifications to the graph_edges.rs file, focusing on the incoming_edges and process_func_defs functions. Key changes include the removal of commented-out code, the introduction of a HashSet to prevent duplicate function processing, and adjustments to edge color handling. Additionally, method signatures for process_func_defs and outgoing_edges have been updated, reflecting changes in their internal logic while maintaining overall functionality. The Cargo.toml file has also been updated to reflect a new package version.

Changes

File Change Summary
vibi-dpu/src/graph/graph_edges.rs - Removed commented-out code in incoming_edges.
- Introduced HashSet in process_func_defs to track processed functions.
- Changed edge color handling to a fixed value of "yellow".
- Updated method signatures for process_func_defs and outgoing_edges.
vibi-dpu/Cargo.toml - Updated package version from 2.0.1 to 2.0.2.

Possibly related PRs

  • Minor fixes: strip json response from llm #189: Minor fixes: strip json response from llm - This PR modifies the function_call.rs, function_name.rs, and other files related to graph processing, which may share underlying logic with the incoming_edges and process_func_defs functions in graph_edges.rs.

Poem

🐇 In the code where edges flow,
Functions dance, and logic grows.
With colors bright and paths so clear,
We streamline code, bring cheer, oh dear!
A HashSet here to keep things neat,
In the graph, our work's complete! 🌟


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: 1

🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (1)
vibi-dpu/src/graph/graph_edges.rs (1)

Line range hint 16-19: Remove unused funcdef_identifier initialization in incoming_edges

The variable funcdef_identifier is initialized but no longer used in the incoming_edges function after the changes to process_func_defs. You can remove this initialization to clean up the code.

Apply this diff to remove the unused code:

-    let func_def_identifier_opt = FunctionDefIdentifier::new();
-    if func_def_identifier_opt.is_none() {
-        log::debug!("[outgoing_edges] Unable to create func def identifier");
-        return;
-    }
-    let mut funcdef_identifier = func_def_identifier_opt.expect("Empty func_def_identifier_opt");
📜 Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL

📥 Commits

Files that changed from the base of the PR and between 36ac0c5 and e3c256b.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • vibi-dpu/src/graph/graph_edges.rs (6 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
🔇 Additional comments (1)
vibi-dpu/src/graph/graph_edges.rs (1)

136-136: Verify the use of hardcoded edge color "yellow" in add_edge

In the calls to graph_elems.add_edge at lines 136 and 171, the edge color parameter is hardcoded as "yellow". If this is intentional to represent a specific type of edge, that's acceptable. However, if the edge color should reflect the edge_color parameter passed to the function, consider replacing "yellow" with edge_color.

Also applies to: 171-171

Comment on lines +211 to +215
if repeated_funcs.get(dest_func_name).is_some() {
continue;
} else {
repeated_funcs.insert(dest_func_name.to_string());
}
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

🛠️ Refactor suggestion

Simplify duplicate function check using HashSet::insert

You can streamline the duplicate function check by utilizing the return value of HashSet::insert, which indicates whether the value was newly inserted. This eliminates the need for the explicit if-else block.

Apply this diff to simplify the code:

-                if repeated_funcs.get(dest_func_name).is_some()  {
-                    continue;
-                } else {
-                    repeated_funcs.insert(dest_func_name.to_string());
-                }
+                if !repeated_funcs.insert(dest_func_name.to_string()) {
+                    continue;
+                }
📝 Committable suggestion

‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.

Suggested change
if repeated_funcs.get(dest_func_name).is_some() {
continue;
} else {
repeated_funcs.insert(dest_func_name.to_string());
}
if !repeated_funcs.insert(dest_func_name.to_string()) {
continue;
}

Copy link

sonarcloud bot commented Oct 12, 2024

@tapishr tapishr merged commit 44d25f4 into main Oct 12, 2024
2 checks passed
@tapishr tapishr deleted the tr/phind/fixes branch October 12, 2024 23:59
Copy link

vibinex-dpu bot commented Oct 13, 2024

Relevant users for this PR:

Contributor Name/Alias Relevance
tapishr 100.00%

Auto assigning to relevant reviewers.

If you are a relevant reviewer, you can use the Vibinex browser extension to see parts of the PR relevant to you
Relevance of the reviewer is calculated based on the git blame information of the PR. To know more, hit us up at contact@vibinex.com.

To change comment and auto-assign settings, go to your Vibinex settings page.

1 similar comment
Copy link

vibinex-dpu bot commented Oct 13, 2024

Relevant users for this PR:

Contributor Name/Alias Relevance
tapishr 100.00%

Auto assigning to relevant reviewers.

If you are a relevant reviewer, you can use the Vibinex browser extension to see parts of the PR relevant to you
Relevance of the reviewer is calculated based on the git blame information of the PR. To know more, hit us up at contact@vibinex.com.

To change comment and auto-assign settings, go to your Vibinex settings page.

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.

1 participant