Skip to content

Conversation

@RohitR311
Copy link
Collaborator

@RohitR311 RohitR311 commented Dec 17, 2024

Popups visible only for a certain duration on the page can not be clicked on. If click and force click actions fail then continue as the selector is not visible.

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • New Features
    • Enhanced error handling for action execution, allowing workflows to continue despite failures.
    • Improved resilience in the click action with a retry mechanism.
    • Updated handling in the getSelectors method to return an empty array for empty workflows.

@RohitR311 RohitR311 requested a review from amhsirak December 17, 2024 16:28
@coderabbitai
Copy link

coderabbitai bot commented Dec 17, 2024

Walkthrough

The pull request introduces enhancements to error handling in the Interpreter class within the maxun-core/src/interpret.ts file. The modifications focus on improving the resilience of action execution, particularly for the click action. A new try-catch mechanism is implemented to attempt action execution twice, with the second attempt using a force option. Additionally, the getSelectors method is updated to return an empty array for empty workflows, ensuring more robust handling of edge cases.

Changes

File Change Summary
maxun-core/src/interpret.ts - Added try-catch block for click action in carryOutSteps method
- Implemented retry mechanism with { force: true } option
- Modified getSelectors to return empty array for empty workflows

Possibly related PRs

Suggested labels

Type: Bug

Suggested reviewers

  • amhsirak

Poem

🐰 In the realm of code, where errors might hide,
A rabbit's resilience takes a brave stride
Clicks that falter, now given a second chance
Workflows flow on with a determined dance
Selectors refined, edge cases now tamed
Interpreter's magic, no longer constrained! 🚀

Tip

CodeRabbit's docstrings feature is now available as part of our Early Access Program! Simply use the command @coderabbitai generate docstrings to have CodeRabbit automatically generate docstrings for your pull request. We would love to hear your feedback on Discord.


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 generate docstrings to generate docstrings for this PR. (Beta)
  • @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

@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 comments (1)
maxun-core/src/interpret.ts (1)

Line range hint 476-484: Enhance executeAction function with better error handling and logging

The current implementation of executeAction could benefit from more robust error handling and consistent logging.

Consider this improved implementation:

    const executeAction = async (invokee: any, methodName: string, args: any) => {
-     console.log("Executing action:", methodName, args);
+     this.log(`Executing action: ${methodName} with args: ${JSON.stringify(args)}`, Level.LOG);
+     try {
        if (!args || Array.isArray(args)) {
          await (<any>invokee[methodName])(...(args ?? []));
        } else {
          await (<any>invokee[methodName])(args);
        }
+     } catch (error) {
+       this.log(`Action execution failed: ${methodName}, Error: ${error.message}`, Level.ERROR);
+       throw error; // Re-throw to be handled by the specific action handlers
+     }
    };

This change:

  1. Uses the class logger instead of console.log
  2. Adds consistent error handling
  3. Improves logging with better context
🧹 Nitpick comments (1)
maxun-core/src/interpret.ts (1)

Line range hint 1-1024: General improvements needed across the codebase

  1. Replace console.log statements with the class logger for consistency:

    • Line 477: console.log("Executing action:"...)
    • Line 673: console.log("MATCHED ACTION:"...)
    • Line 674: console.log("MATCHED ACTION ID:"...)
    • And others...
  2. Standardize error handling patterns across methods:

    • Some methods use try-catch with logging
    • Others silently catch errors
    • Some re-throw errors while others don't

Consider creating a centralized error handling utility:

private handleError(error: Error, context: string, level: Level = Level.ERROR): void {
  this.log(`${context}: ${error.message}`, level);
  if (this.options.debug) {
    this.log(error.stack || 'No stack trace available', Level.DEBUG);
  }
}

This would provide consistent error handling and logging across the codebase.

📜 Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between c25975b and e34cfda.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • maxun-core/src/interpret.ts (1 hunks)

Comment on lines +509 to +513
try{
await executeAction(invokee, methodName, [step.args[0], { force: true }]);
} catch (error) {
continue
}
Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

⚠️ Potential issue

Improve error handling for click actions

While the attempt to handle click failures is good, the current implementation has some issues:

  1. Silent failure: The error is caught but not logged, making it difficult to debug issues.
  2. Potentially dangerous: Force clicking without checking element state could lead to unintended interactions.
  3. Inconsistent indentation in the try-catch block.

Consider this improved implementation:

            try {
              await executeAction(invokee, methodName, step.args);
            } catch (error) {
-              try{
-                await executeAction(invokee, methodName, [step.args[0], { force: true }]);
-              } catch (error) {
-                continue
-              }
+              try {
+                // Check if element exists but is not visible
+                const selector = step.args[0];
+                const isPresent = await page.$(selector);
+                if (!isPresent) {
+                  this.log(`Element not found: ${selector}`, Level.ERROR);
+                  continue;
+                }
+                const isVisible = await page.isVisible(selector);
+                if (!isVisible) {
+                  this.log(`Element not visible: ${selector}`, Level.WARN);
+                }
+                await executeAction(invokee, methodName, [selector, { force: true }]);
+              } catch (error) {
+                this.log(`Click action failed: ${error.message}`, Level.ERROR);
+                continue;
+              }
            }

Committable suggestion skipped: line range outside the PR's diff.

@amhsirak amhsirak merged commit 9f40124 into develop Dec 18, 2024
1 check passed
@amhsirak amhsirak added the Type: Bug Something isn't working label Dec 20, 2024
@amhsirak amhsirak deleted the click-fix branch January 2, 2025 17:28
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

Type: Bug Something isn't working

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants