Skip to content

Conversation

@sourcery-ai-experiments-bot

Resolves kloudlite#322

@sourcery-ai-experiments-bot
Copy link
Author

This is a benchmark review for experiment review_of_reviews_20240522.
Run ID: review_of_reviews_20240522/benchmark_2024-05-22T00-16-40_v1-18-0-57-ga0aa23ab6.

This pull request was cloned from https://github.com/kloudlite/api/pull/323. (Note: the URL is not a link to avoid triggering a notification on the original pull request.)

Experiment configuration
review_config:
  # User configuration for the review
  # - benchmark - use the user config from the benchmark reviews
  # - <value> - use the value directly
  user_review_config:
    enable_ai_review: true
    enable_rule_comments: false

    enable_complexity_comments: benchmark
    enable_docstring_comments: benchmark
    enable_security_comments: benchmark
    enable_tests_comments: benchmark
    enable_comment_suggestions: benchmark
    enable_functionality_review: benchmark

    enable_approvals: true

  ai_review_config:
    # The model responses to use for the experiment
    # - benchmark - use the model responses from the benchmark reviews
    # - llm - call the language model to generate responses
    model_responses:
      comments_model: benchmark
      comment_validation_model: benchmark
      comment_suggestion_model: benchmark
      complexity_model: benchmark
      docstrings_model: benchmark
      functionality_model: benchmark
      security_model: benchmark
      tests_model: benchmark

# The pull request dataset to run the experiment on
pull_request_dataset:
- https://github.com/avendesora/pythonbible/pull/161
- https://github.com/aaditkamat/personal-website/pull/170
- https://github.com/RiiConnect24/DNS-Server/pull/36
- https://github.com/erxes/erxes/pull/5214
- https://github.com/erxes/erxes/pull/5215
- https://github.com/erxes/erxes/pull/5216
- https://github.com/marimo-team/marimo/pull/1424
- https://github.com/marimo-team/marimo/pull/1425
- https://github.com/MusicalNinjas/pyo3-stubgen/pull/2
- https://github.com/albumentations-team/albumentations/pull/1734
- https://github.com/MusicalNinjas/pyo3-stubgen/pull/3
- https://github.com/albumentations-team/albumentations/pull/1739
- https://github.com/kgaughan/mercury/pull/86
- https://github.com/kgaughan/gcredstash/pull/62
- https://github.com/kgaughan/gcredstash/pull/63
- https://github.com/kgaughan/gcredstash/pull/64
- https://github.com/kgaughan/gcredstash/pull/65
- https://github.com/Rxmeez/learn-cicd-starter/pull/2
- https://github.com/Rxmeez/learn-cicd-starter/pull/3
- https://github.com/Rxmeez/learn-cicd-starter/pull/4
- https://github.com/Rxmeez/learn-cicd-starter/pull/5
- https://github.com/Rxmeez/learn-cicd-starter/pull/6
- https://github.com/Rxmeez/learn-cicd-starter/pull/7
- https://github.com/kloudlite/api/pull/321
- https://github.com/kloudlite/kl/pull/91
- https://github.com/kloudlite/api/pull/323
- https://github.com/NoobInDaHause/NoobCogs/pull/14
- https://github.com/jschalk/jaar/pull/141
- https://github.com/gdsfactory/kfactory/pull/325
- https://github.com/gdsfactory/kfactory/pull/319
- https://github.com/gdsfactory/gdsfactory/pull/2771
- https://github.com/gdsfactory/gdsfactory/pull/2772
- https://github.com/gdsfactory/kfactory/pull/323
- https://github.com/gdsfactory/gdsfactory/pull/2773
- https://github.com/gdsfactory/kfactory/pull/324
- https://github.com/tpaviot/pythonocc-core/pull/1331
- https://github.com/dreamerminsk/tasked/pull/2
- https://github.com/softboiler/boilercv/pull/195
- https://github.com/itsTPM/foxford-tools/pull/74
- https://github.com/browniebroke/deezer-python/pull/1048
- https://github.com/browniebroke/django-codemod/pull/1093
- https://github.com/elixir-cloud-aai/TESK/pull/177
- https://github.com/elixir-cloud-aai/TESK/pull/178
- https://github.com/approvals/ApprovalTests.Python/pull/165
- https://github.com/StartupOS/verinfast/pull/387
- https://github.com/StartupOS/verinfast/pull/388
- https://github.com/WesternFriend/westernfriend.org/pull/1064
- https://github.com/leshchenko1979/fast_bitrix24/pull/237
- https://github.com/potnisviraj/sourcery-demo/pull/1
- https://github.com/DevCycleHQ/js-sdks/pull/862
review_comment_labels:
- label: correct
  question: Is this comment correct?
- label: helpful
  question: Is this comment helpful?
- label: comment-type
  question: Is the comment type correct?
- label: comment-area
  question: Is the comment area correct?
- label: llm-test
  question: |
    What type of LLM test could this comment become?
    - 👍 - this comment is really good/important and we should always make it
    - 👎 - this comment is really bad and we should never make it
    - no reaction - don't turn this comment into an LLM test

# Benchmark reviews generated by running
#   python -m scripts.experiment benchmark <experiment_name>
benchmark_reviews: []

Copy link

@SourceryAI SourceryAI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Hey @sourcery-ai-experiments-bot - I've reviewed your changes and they look great!

Here's what I looked at during the review
  • 🟡 General issues: 5 issues found
  • 🟢 Security: all looks good
  • 🟢 Testing: all looks good
  • 🟢 Complexity: all looks good

LangSmith trace

Help me be more useful! Please click 👍 or 👎 on each comment to tell me if it was helpful.

TargetNamespace *string `json:"targetNamespace,omitempty"`
}

type GithubComKloudliteOperatorApisCrdsV1ExternalAppSpec struct {

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

suggestion: Consider adding validation for ExternalAppSpec fields

It might be beneficial to add validation logic for the fields in GithubComKloudliteOperatorApisCrdsV1ExternalAppSpec to ensure data integrity and prevent potential issues.

Suggested change
type GithubComKloudliteOperatorApisCrdsV1ExternalAppSpec struct {
type GithubComKloudliteOperatorApisCrdsV1ExternalAppSpec struct {
Intercept *GithubComKloudliteOperatorApisCrdsV1Intercept `json:"intercept,omitempty"`
Record string `json:"record" validate:"required"`
}

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Is this comment correct?

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Is this comment helpful?

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Is the comment type correct?

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Is the comment area correct?

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

What type of LLM test could this comment become?

  • 👍 - this comment is really good/important and we should always make it
  • 👎 - this comment is really bad and we should never make it
  • no reaction - don't turn this comment into an LLM test

Comment on lines +148 to +149
// CoreCreateExternalApp is the resolver for the core_createExternalApp field.
func (r *mutationResolver) CoreCreateExternalApp(ctx context.Context, envName string, externalApp entities.ExternalApp) (*entities.ExternalApp, error) {

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

issue (bug_risk): Consider handling potential nil values for externalApp

Ensure that externalApp is not nil before proceeding with the logic inside CoreCreateExternalApp. This can prevent potential runtime panics.

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Is this comment correct?

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Is this comment helpful?

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Is the comment type correct?

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Is the comment area correct?

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

What type of LLM test could this comment become?

  • 👍 - this comment is really good/important and we should always make it
  • 👎 - this comment is really bad and we should never make it
  • no reaction - don't turn this comment into an LLM test

Comment on lines +576 to +577
// CoreListExternalApps is the resolver for the core_listExternalApps field.
func (r *queryResolver) CoreListExternalApps(ctx context.Context, envName string, search *model.SearchExternalApps, pq *repos.CursorPagination) (*model.ExternalAppPaginatedRecords, error) {

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

suggestion: Consider adding pagination validation

It would be beneficial to add validation for the pq parameter to ensure that pagination parameters are within acceptable ranges.

Suggested change
// CoreListExternalApps is the resolver for the core_listExternalApps field.
func (r *queryResolver) CoreListExternalApps(ctx context.Context, envName string, search *model.SearchExternalApps, pq *repos.CursorPagination) (*model.ExternalAppPaginatedRecords, error) {
func (r *queryResolver) CoreListExternalApps(ctx context.Context, envName string, search *model.SearchExternalApps, pq *repos.CursorPagination) (*model.ExternalAppPaginatedRecords, error) {
if pq == nil || pq.Limit <= 0 || pq.Offset < 0 {
return nil, errors.New("invalid pagination parameters")
}

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Is this comment correct?

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Is this comment helpful?

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Is the comment type correct?

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Is the comment area correct?

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

What type of LLM test could this comment become?

  • 👍 - this comment is really good/important and we should always make it
  • 👎 - this comment is really bad and we should never make it
  • no reaction - don't turn this comment into an LLM test

@@ -0,0 +1,253 @@
package domain

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

suggestion: Consider splitting large files

The external-app.go file is quite large. Consider splitting it into smaller, more manageable files based on functionality. This can improve readability and maintainability.

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Is this comment correct?

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Is this comment helpful?

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Is the comment type correct?

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Is the comment area correct?

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

What type of LLM test could this comment become?

  • 👍 - this comment is really good/important and we should always make it
  • 👎 - this comment is really bad and we should never make it
  • no reaction - don't turn this comment into an LLM test

@@ -0,0 +1,52 @@
package entities

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

suggestion: Consider adding validation for ExternalApp fields

It might be beneficial to add validation logic for the fields in the ExternalApp struct to ensure data integrity and prevent potential issues.

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Is this comment correct?

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Is this comment helpful?

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Is the comment type correct?

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Is the comment area correct?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants