Conversation
WalkthroughThe pull request introduces a new Changes
Possibly related PRs
Poem
Tip CodeRabbit's docstrings feature is now available as part of our Early Access Program! Simply use the command 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 (
|
commit: |
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #7 +/- ##
=========================================
Coverage 100.00% 100.00%
=========================================
Files 1 1
Lines 118 129 +11
Branches 33 35 +2
=========================================
+ Hits 118 129 +11 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
![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
🧹 Nitpick comments (2)
test/index.test.ts (2)
Line range hint
142-169: Consider enhancing test clarity with separate test cases.While the current test covers all scenarios, separating the assertions into dedicated test cases would make the behavior more explicit and easier to maintain.
Consider restructuring like this:
describe('hasReadyCallbacks', () => { it('should be true initially due to constructor callback', () => { const someClass = new ReadyEventClass(); assert.equal(someClass.hasReadyCallbacks, true); }); it('should remain true when adding more callbacks', () => { const someClass = new ReadyEventClass(); someClass.ready(() => {}); assert.equal(someClass.hasReadyCallbacks, true); }); it('should become false after ready(true)', async () => { const someClass = new ReadyEventClass(); someClass.ready(true); await someClass.ready(); assert.equal(someClass.hasReadyCallbacks, false); }); it('should be false after error', async () => { const someClass = new ReadyEventClass(); someClass.ready(new Error('mock error')); assert.equal(someClass.hasReadyCallbacks, false); }); });
278-291: Consider separating hasReadyCallbacks assertions into dedicated test cases.Similar to the ReadyEventClass tests, the hasReadyCallbacks assertions would be clearer in dedicated test cases.
Consider adding:
describe('hasReadyCallbacks', () => { it('should be false initially', () => { const someClass = new ReadySubClass(); assert.equal(someClass.hasReadyCallbacks, false); }); it('should be true after adding callbacks', () => { const someClass = new ReadySubClass(); someClass.ready(() => {}); assert.equal(someClass.hasReadyCallbacks, true); }); it('should be false after ready(true)', async () => { const someClass = new ReadySubClass(); someClass.ready(() => {}); someClass.ready(true); await nextTick(); assert.equal(someClass.hasReadyCallbacks, false); }); });
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (2)
src/index.ts(3 hunks)test/index.test.ts(3 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (2)
src/index.ts (2)
126-128: LGTM! Proper delegation to underlying Ready instance.
The implementation maintains encapsulation while providing consistent API surface.
35-37: LGTM! Implementation is clean and straightforward.
The getter provides a safe way to check for pending callbacks without exposing the internal array.
Let's verify the usage pattern:
✅ Verification successful
Let me gather more context about the implementation and usage to ensure everything is consistent.
Verified: The hasReadyCallbacks getter is implemented and used consistently
The implementation is correctly used across the codebase:
- In
src/index.ts, it's properly implemented in the base class and correctly delegated in the wrapper class - Test cases demonstrate consistent usage patterns:
- Checking state before and after registering callbacks
- Verifying it returns
falseafter callbacks are processed - Used correctly in instance separation tests
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check if hasReadyCallbacks is used consistently across the codebase
rg "hasReadyCallbacks" --type ts
Length of output: 680
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Get implementation context from index.ts
rg -B 5 -A 5 "hasReadyCallbacks" src/index.ts
# Check test cases to understand usage patterns
rg -B 2 -A 2 "hasReadyCallbacks" test/index.test.ts
Length of output: 1694
[skip ci] ## [3.4.0](v3.3.0...v3.4.0) (2024-12-18) ### Features * export hasReadyCallbacks getter ([#7](#7)) ([8b09b7c](8b09b7c))
1 participant
Summary by CodeRabbit
New Features
hasReadyCallbacksto enhance the functionality of readiness checks in the application.Bug Fixes
Readyand its subclasses to ensure accurate behavior of thehasReadyCallbacksproperty.Tests
hasReadyCallbacksproperty and its state changes during callback registration.