Conversation
WalkthroughThe pull request introduces several significant changes across the project, focusing on enhancing transaction and account management. The primary modifications include adding a Changes
Sequence DiagramsequenceDiagram
participant Core
participant ChargeDebit
participant BillingService
participant LedgerRepository
Core->>ChargeDebit: charge_debit()
ChargeDebit->>BillingService: Get draft invoice
BillingService-->>ChargeDebit: Return invoice
ChargeDebit->>LedgerRepository: Add charge to transaction
LedgerRepository-->>ChargeDebit: Confirm charge added
ChargeDebit-->>Core: Charge completed
Poem
Finishing Touches
🪧 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: 2
🧹 Nitpick comments (3)
src/core/usecase/charge_debit.py (2)
10-10: Verify the import statement forUpdatingTransaction.Ensure that the import path
from src.core.usecase.driven.update_transaction import UpdatingTransactionis correct. Misplaced or incorrect imports can lead toModuleNotFoundError.
40-43: Handle potential case sensitivity in invoice status check.The condition
if current_invoice.status != "Draft":may fail if the status string has different casing. To make the check case-insensitive, consider normalizing the status string.Apply this diff to normalize the status comparison:
def _charge_single_user(self, user: Account) -> None: if user.type is AccountType.PRE_PAID: return current_invoice = self.billing_fetching_invoice.get_current(user.external_id) - if current_invoice.status != "Draft": + if current_invoice.status.lower() != "draft": raise InvoicePostPaidError() charge = self.billing_updating_invoice.charge(current_invoice.id) self.updating_transaction.add_charge(user.id, charge.id)tests/core/usecase/test_charge_debit.py (1)
29-30: Consider using enums for status values.String literals like "Draft" and "Pending" are used for status. Consider using enums to prevent typos and ensure consistency.
from enum import Enum class InvoiceStatus(Enum): DRAFT = "Draft" # Add other statuses... class ChargeStatus(Enum): PENDING = "Pending" # Add other statuses...
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (15)
db/migrations/20230327184125_init-structure.sql(1 hunks)src/core/__init__.py(4 hunks)src/core/repository/account.py(2 hunks)src/core/repository/billing.py(1 hunks)src/core/repository/ledger.py(3 hunks)src/core/usecase/charge_debit.py(3 hunks)src/core/usecase/driven/update_account.py(1 hunks)src/core/usecase/driven/update_transaction.py(1 hunks)src/core/usecase/transform_to_post_paid.py(2 hunks)src/core/usecase/transform_to_pre_paid.py(2 hunks)src/presentation/worker.py(1 hunks)tests/core/usecase/test_charge_debit.py(3 hunks)tests/core/usecase/test_transform_to_post_paid.py(2 hunks)tests/core/usecase/test_transform_to_pre_paid.py(2 hunks)tests/presentation/test_worker.py(2 hunks)
✅ Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (2)
- src/core/usecase/driven/update_account.py
- src/core/usecase/transform_to_pre_paid.py
⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms (1)
- GitHub Check: Test
🔇 Additional comments (17)
src/presentation/worker.py (2)
10-11: Ensure proper initialization and dependency injection of theCoreclass.The
Coreclass is instantiated without any parameters. Verify thatCore()does not require any arguments or specific configuration. IfCoredepends on external resources or configurations, ensure that they are properly initialized to avoid runtime issues.
15-15: Confirm the scheduling time format and correctness.The job is scheduled to run daily at
"02:00". Ensure that theschedulelibrary accepts this time format and that it aligns with the desired execution time. The time should be in 24-hour format as a string.src/core/usecase/charge_debit.py (1)
24-29:⚠️ Potential issueUpdate all instantiations of
ChargeDebitwith the new dependency.The constructor of
ChargeDebitnow requires an additional parameterupdating_transaction. Verify that all instances whereChargeDebitis instantiated throughout the codebase are updated to pass this new dependency to preventTypeErrorexceptions.Run the following script to locate all instantiations of
ChargeDebit:✅ Verification successful
All
ChargeDebitinstantiations are properly updated ✅Both instances of
ChargeDebitin the codebase already include the newupdating_transactionparameter:
src/core/__init__.py: Correctly includes all dependenciestests/core/usecase/test_charge_debit.py: Properly set up with mocked dependency🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Find all instantiations of ChargeDebit that need updating. # Search for instances of ChargeDebit being instantiated. rg -F 'ChargeDebit(' --glob '!src/core/usecase/charge_debit.py'Length of output: 193
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Get context around ChargeDebit instantiations echo "=== Core initialization context ===" rg -B 2 -A 4 'ChargeDebit\(' src/core/__init__.py echo -e "\n=== Test context ===" rg -B 2 -A 4 'ChargeDebit\(' tests/core/usecase/test_charge_debit.pyLength of output: 734
tests/presentation/test_worker.py (3)
22-23: LGTM! Good improvement in test readability.Moving the
external_idgeneration outsidecreate_accountmakes the test more explicit and allows reusing the ID in the URL assertion.
53-55: LGTM! Assertion updated to match new endpoint.The assertion correctly validates the new endpoint URL format with user_id parameter.
30-31: Verify API contract changes.The endpoint has changed from POST to GET and now requires a user_id query parameter. Please ensure:
- These changes are documented in the API documentation
- All clients are updated to use the new endpoint format
src/core/usecase/transform_to_post_paid.py (1)
9-9: LGTM! Consistent class renaming.The rename from
UpdateAccounttoUpdatingAccountmaintains consistency with the broader refactoring changes.Also applies to: 25-25
tests/core/usecase/test_charge_debit.py (2)
8-8: LGTM! New imports support charge tracking.Added imports for
Chargeentity andLedgerRepositoryalign with the new charge tracking functionality.Also applies to: 11-11
37-39: LGTM! Comprehensive test coverage for charge tracking.The test properly validates:
- Charge creation through billing service
- Charge association with ledger entries
- Correct parameters passed to add_charge
Also applies to: 52-52
tests/core/usecase/test_transform_to_post_paid.py (1)
16-16: LGTM! Consistent class renaming.The rename from
UpdateAccounttoUpdatingAccountis consistently applied in both import and variable type annotation.Also applies to: 46-46
src/core/repository/billing.py (1)
36-36: Verify case sensitivity change impact.Changing the invoice status check from "draft" to "Draft" is a breaking change that could affect other parts of the system.
Let's verify the consistency of invoice status case usage across the codebase:
src/core/repository/ledger.py (1)
26-26: LGTM! Good addition of charge tracking.The charge_id column addition to the ledger table enables proper tracking of charges for transactions.
tests/core/usecase/test_transform_to_pre_paid.py (1)
21-21: LGTM! Consistent renaming applied.The update from UpdateAccount to UpdatingAccount is consistently applied in both import and variable type annotation.
Also applies to: 63-63
src/core/__init__.py (1)
25-26: LGTM! Well-structured dependency injection.The changes properly integrate the new UpdatingTransaction functionality while maintaining clean dependency injection patterns. The renaming from update_account to updating_account is consistently applied.
Also applies to: 47-48, 57-57, 76-76, 83-83
src/core/repository/account.py (1)
17-17: LGTM! Verify rename impact across codebase.The rename from
UpdateAccounttoUpdatingAccountlooks good and maintains the existing functionality.Let's verify that this rename has been consistently applied across the codebase:
Also applies to: 42-42
✅ Verification successful
Rename verification successful ✓
The rename from
UpdateAccounttoUpdatingAccounthas been consistently applied across all files in the codebase, with no remaining references to the old name.🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Check for any remaining references to the old name rg "UpdateAccount" --type py # Check for consistent usage of the new name rg "UpdatingAccount" --type pyLength of output: 1379
db/migrations/20230327184125_init-structure.sql (2)
38-38: Consider adding foreign key constraint for data integrity.The
charge_idcolumn appears to reference a charge entity, but there's no foreign key constraint. This could lead to data integrity issues if charges can be deleted while referenced by ledger entries.Consider either:
- Adding a foreign key constraint if there's a charges table
- Documenting why the constraint is intentionally omitted
Let's check if a charges table exists or is defined elsewhere:
Line range hint
1-56: Verify deployment strategy for init structure changes.This appears to be an initialization migration script, but it's being modified to add a new feature. This approach could cause issues:
- For new deployments: No problems, they'll get the complete structure
- For existing deployments: They might already have run this migration, making this change ineffective
Consider creating a new migration file for this change instead of modifying the init structure. Let's verify the migration strategy:
✅ Verification successful
Modifying init structure is acceptable in this case
Based on the evidence, this appears to be an early-stage project with minimal migration history. The current approach of modifying the initialization migration is acceptable, though for future changes, consider creating new migration files to maintain a clear upgrade path as the project matures.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Check for existing migrations fd -e sql -p "db/migrations" # Check if this migration has been applied in any environment rg "20230327184125" --type yaml --type jsonLength of output: 171
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Look for schema references and DB configuration rg -g '!*.sql' -l "CREATE TABLE|CREATE TYPE" -A 2 # Check for migration tracking or database configuration files fd -e yaml -e json -e conf -e config -e env . | grep -i "db\|database\|migrate"Length of output: 133
| class UpdatingTransaction(metaclass=ABCMeta): | ||
| @abstractmethod | ||
| def add_charge(self, account_id: UUID, charge_id: UUID) -> None: | ||
| pass |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Implement the UpdatingTransaction interface in concrete classes.
An abstract class UpdatingTransaction with the method add_charge has been introduced. Ensure that all concrete classes that should update transactions implement this interface and provide a concrete implementation of the add_charge method.
| def add_charge(self, account_id: UUID, charge_id: UUID) -> None: | ||
| query = ( | ||
| update(ledger_table) | ||
| .values(charge_id=charge_id) | ||
| .where( | ||
| ledger_table.c.account_id == account_id, | ||
| ledger_table.c.charge_id.__eq__(None), | ||
| ) | ||
| ) | ||
| self.session.execute(query) | ||
| self.session.commit() |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Add validation for charge_id existence.
The add_charge method should validate that the charge_id exists before updating transactions.
Consider adding validation:
def add_charge(self, account_id: UUID, charge_id: UUID) -> None:
+ if not charge_id:
+ raise ValueError("charge_id cannot be None or empty")
+
query = (
update(ledger_table)
.values(charge_id=charge_id)
.where(
ledger_table.c.account_id == account_id,
ledger_table.c.charge_id.__eq__(None),
)
)
self.session.execute(query)
self.session.commit()📝 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.
| def add_charge(self, account_id: UUID, charge_id: UUID) -> None: | |
| query = ( | |
| update(ledger_table) | |
| .values(charge_id=charge_id) | |
| .where( | |
| ledger_table.c.account_id == account_id, | |
| ledger_table.c.charge_id.__eq__(None), | |
| ) | |
| ) | |
| self.session.execute(query) | |
| self.session.commit() | |
| def add_charge(self, account_id: UUID, charge_id: UUID) -> None: | |
| if not charge_id: | |
| raise ValueError("charge_id cannot be None or empty") | |
| query = ( | |
| update(ledger_table) | |
| .values(charge_id=charge_id) | |
| .where( | |
| ledger_table.c.account_id == account_id, | |
| ledger_table.c.charge_id.__eq__(None), | |
| ) | |
| ) | |
| self.session.execute(query) | |
| self.session.commit() |
Coverage summary from CodacySee diff coverage on Codacy
Coverage variation details
Coverage variation is the difference between the coverage for the head and common ancestor commits of the pull request branch: Diff coverage details
Diff coverage is the percentage of lines that are covered by tests out of the coverable lines that the pull request added or modified: See your quality gate settings Change summary preferencesCodacy stopped sending the deprecated coverage status on June 5th, 2024. Learn more |
1 participant
Summary by CodeRabbit
Database Changes
charge_idcolumn to theledgertable as a UUID typeNew Features
Refactoring
UpdateAccounttoUpdatingAccountBug Fixes
Testing