fix: encode primary key before sending PATCH request #9616
Conversation
dosubot
bot
added
the
size:XS
|
|
📝 WalkthroughWalkthroughThe changes involve modifications to the Changes
Sequence Diagram(s)sequenceDiagram
participant User
participant UI
participant UseData
participant API
User->>UI: Trigger updateRowProperty
UI->>UseData: Call updateRowProperty(id)
UseData->>UseData: Encode id using encodeURIComponent(id)
UseData->>API: Call $api.dbViewRow.update(encodedId)
API-->>UseData: Confirm update
UseData-->>UI: Update UI state
Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media? 🪧 TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments. CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)
Other keywords and placeholders
CodeRabbit Configuration File (
|
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (3)
packages/nc-gui/composables/useData.ts (3)
Line range hint
196-224: Consider improving error handling and function structure.While the main change is good, there are a few suggestions to improve the overall function:
The error handling could be more specific. Instead of catching all errors and displaying a generic message, consider catching specific error types and providing more detailed error messages.
The undo/redo functionality is complex. Consider extracting it into a separate function to improve readability and maintainability.
This function is handling multiple responsibilities (updating data, managing state, handling undo/redo). Consider breaking it down into smaller, more focused functions.
Here's a suggestion for improving error handling:
try { // ... existing code ... } catch (e: any) { if (e instanceof NetworkError) { message.error(`${t('msg.error.networkError')}: ${await extractSdkResponseErrorMsg(e)}`) } else if (e instanceof ValidationError) { message.error(`${t('msg.error.validationError')}: ${await extractSdkResponseErrorMsg(e)}`) } else { message.error(`${t('msg.error.unknownError')}: ${await extractSdkResponseErrorMsg(e)}`) } // ... rest of the error handling ... }
Line range hint
1-1022: Consider refactoring for improved maintainability.While the overall structure of the file is logical, there are several areas where it could be improved:
Some functions, like
updateRowPropertyanddeleteSelectedRows, are quite long and complex. Consider breaking these down into smaller, more focused functions to improve readability and maintainability.There's some code duplication, particularly in error handling and undo/redo logic. Consider extracting common patterns into reusable functions.
The file could benefit from additional comments explaining complex logic, especially around the undo/redo functionality and bulk operations.
Consider grouping related functions (e.g., all delete operations) more closely together.
Here's a high-level suggestion for restructuring:
// Group all insert operations const insertOperations = { insertRow, bulkInsertRows, // ... } // Group all update operations const updateOperations = { updateRowProperty, bulkUpdateRows, // ... } // Group all delete operations const deleteOperations = { deleteRow, deleteRowById, deleteSelectedRows, // ... } // Extract undo/redo logic into a separate module import { useUndoRedo } from './useUndoRedo' // Main useData composable export function useData(args: {/* ... */}) { // ... existing code ... return { ...insertOperations, ...updateOperations, ...deleteOperations, // ... other returned functions ... } }This structure would make the file more modular and easier to maintain.
Line range hint
1-1022: Summary: Good security improvement, but consider broader refactoring.The change to encode the ID in the
updateRowPropertyfunction is a positive security improvement. However, this review has identified several areas where the overall code structure and maintainability could be enhanced:
- Break down large functions into smaller, more focused ones.
- Extract common patterns (like error handling and undo/redo logic) into reusable functions.
- Add more comments to explain complex logic.
- Consider reorganizing the file structure to group related functions more closely.
These refactoring efforts would improve the code's readability, maintainability, and potentially its performance. While not directly related to the current PR, these could be valuable improvements for future work.
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
- packages/nc-gui/composables/useData.ts (1 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
🔇 Additional comments (1)
packages/nc-gui/composables/useData.ts (1)
211-211: Encoding of ID in API call is a good security practice.The change to use
encodeURIComponent(id)when making the API call is a positive improvement. This ensures that any special characters in the ID are properly encoded, preventing potential URL-related issues or security vulnerabilities.
3 participants
Refs: #9615
Change Summary
Encoded id using the encodeURIComponent function call.
Change type