-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 15
No longer assuming year for Label 44 POS #214
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
Conversation
|
Warning Rate limit exceeded@makrsmark has exceeded the limit for the number of commits or files that can be reviewed per hour. Please wait 24 minutes and 42 seconds before requesting another review. ⌛ How to resolve this issue?After the wait time has elapsed, a review can be triggered using the We recommend that you space out your commits to avoid hitting the rate limit. 🚦 How do rate limits work?CodeRabbit enforces hourly rate limits for each developer per organization. Our paid plans have higher rate limits than the trial, open-source and free plans. In all cases, we re-allow further reviews after a brief timeout. Please see our FAQ for further information. 📒 Files selected for processing (1)
WalkthroughThe pull request introduces modifications to the Changes
Sequence DiagramsequenceDiagram
participant Plugin as Label_44_POS
participant DateTimeUtils
participant ResultFormatter
participant Message
Message->>Plugin: Decode message
Plugin->>DateTimeUtils: Convert time formats
DateTimeUtils-->>Plugin: Processed time values
Plugin->>ResultFormatter: Format results
ResultFormatter-->>Plugin: Formatted output
Plugin-->>Message: Return decoded result
Possibly related PRs
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 (
|
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.
Actionable comments posted: 0
🧹 Nitpick comments (2)
lib/plugins/Label_44_POS.test.ts (2)
34-35: Add test cases for edge cases in time handling.While the current test case is valid, consider adding tests for:
- ETA crossing into next day/month
- Invalid time formats
- Edge times (23:59, 00:00)
37-53: Add error case tests for formatted items.While the happy path is well tested, consider adding tests for:
- Invalid month/day values
- Missing or malformed date/time fields
- Special characters in date/time fields
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (2)
lib/plugins/Label_44_POS.test.ts(1 hunks)lib/plugins/Label_44_POS.ts(2 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (4)
lib/plugins/Label_44_POS.ts (4)
1-1: LGTM! DateTimeUtils import added for improved time handling.The addition of DateTimeUtils is appropriate for the refactoring of time-related processing.
36-37: LGTM! Good code organization.The empty lines appropriately separate the flight level processing from the date/time processing section.
42-43: TODO comment needs to be addressed.The TODO comment indicates missing implementation for ETA month and DayFR. This could lead to incorrect ETA calculations if the ETA crosses month boundaries.
Would you like me to help implement the ETA month and DayFR handling? This would ensure accurate ETA calculations across month boundaries.
38-41: LGTM! Improved date/time handling.The changes correctly separate date components and use appropriate utility methods for time conversion, aligning with the PR objective of not assuming year.
Let's verify the time conversion implementation:
✅ Verification successful
Time conversion implementation verified and consistent
The
DateTimeUtils.convertHHMMSSToTodusage in Label_44_POS.ts follows the established pattern across the codebase, with consistent handling of time formats and proper integration with ResultFormatter.🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Check if DateTimeUtils.convertHHMMSSToTod is used consistently across the codebase ast-grep --pattern 'DateTimeUtils.convertHHMMSSToTod($_)'Length of output: 7738
kevinelliott
left a comment
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.
Good to know. LGTM ![]()
Summary by CodeRabbit
New Features
Bug Fixes
Tests