UI: don't send the convMaskToPoly parameter on interactive detector calls

[SpecLad]

Motivation and context

The server doesn't use it; in the interactive case, the mask-to-polygon conversion is handled by the UI itself.

How has this been tested?

I verified that interactive detection still works (both with the "Convert masks to polygons" option and without).

Checklist

• I submit my changes into the develop branch
• [ ] I have created a changelog fragment
• [ ] I have updated the documentation accordingly
• [ ] I have added tests to cover my changes
• [ ] I have linked related issues (see GitHub docs)
• [ ] I have increased versions of npm packages if it is necessary
  (cvat-canvas,
  cvat-core,
  cvat-data and
  cvat-ui)

License

• I submit my code changes under the same MIT License that covers the project.
  Feel free to contact the maintainers if that's a concern.

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Bug Fixes
  • Improved the performance and reliability of tools control in the annotation workspace.

[coderabbitai]

Walkthrough

The primary change involves simplifying a function call within the ToolsControlComponent in the CVAT UI. Specifically, a destructuring assignment was used to extract the convMaskToPoly property from the body object before making the call to core.lambda.call, streamlining the code and improving readability.

Changes

File Path	Summary
cvat-ui/src/components/annotation-page/standard-workspace/controls-side-bar/tools-control.tsx	Extracted convMaskToPoly from body and updated the call to core.lambda.call to use this extracted variable.

Sequence Diagram(s)

No diagram needed as the changes are straightforward and merely involve code simplification with no modifications to control flow.

Poem

In code refined, a change so slight,
Extract the mask, set things right,
With clarity found and clutter gone,
Our tools now shine like the dawn.
🐇✨ CodeRabbit cheers, job well done!

---

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

• 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>.
  • 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 generate interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table.
  • @coderabbitai show all the console.log statements in this repository.
  • @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 as 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.

Additionally, you can add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.

CodeRabbit Configration 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.

[coderabbitai]

Actionable comments posted: 0

Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL

Commits

Files that changed from the base of the PR and between 2029486 and 8254108.

Files selected for processing (1)

• cvat-ui/src/components/annotation-page/standard-workspace/controls-side-bar/tools-control.tsx (2 hunks)

Additional comments not posted (2)

cvat-ui/src/components/annotation-page/standard-workspace/controls-side-bar/tools-control.tsx (2)

1235-1236: Refactoring to remove convMaskToPoly parameter in runInference method.

The destructuring assignment at line 1235 effectively removes the convMaskToPoly parameter from the body object, which aligns with the PR's goal to stop sending this parameter to the server. This change is consistent and should prevent any unintended sending of this parameter in API calls.

---

1313-1313: Conditional usage of convMaskToPoly remains after removal from API call.

While the convMaskToPoly parameter was removed from being sent to the server, it's still being used conditionally in the runInference method to determine if shapes should be converted to polygons. This is a good practice as it leverages client-side logic to handle the conversion, which is more efficient and reduces server load.