fix: preserve previous labels steps before adding list step #288
Conversation
WalkthroughThe pull request introduces a refined approach to merging fields in the Changes
Poem
🪧 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: 1
🧹 Nitpick comments (1)
src/context/browserSteps.tsx (1)
71-81: Consider a more flexible merge strategy.
While preserving the label is correct, the current approach only keeps the existing “label” field if the key already exists. If any other existing property (e.g., “data”) also needs preservation, it might be overwritten. If that is not desired, a deeper merge could be considered.- if (existingListStep.fields[key]) { - acc[key] = { - ...field, - label: existingListStep.fields[key].label - }; - } else { - acc[key] = field; - } + if (existingListStep.fields[key]) { + // Example deeper merge for all fields except the new label + acc[key] = { + ...existingListStep.fields[key], + ...field, + // Overwrite only the label with the existing label + label: existingListStep.fields[key].label + }; + } else { + acc[key] = field; + }
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
src/context/browserSteps.tsx(1 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (4)
src/context/browserSteps.tsx (4)
65-65: No functional change introduced on this line.
69-69: Redundant blank line.
70-70: Good use of inline self-documentation.
Adding a comment to clarify the rationale behind preserving existing labels makes the code more readable.
85-85: No additional logic here; skip.
| fields: mergedFields, | ||
| pagination: pagination || existingListStep.pagination, | ||
| limit: limit |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codebase verification
Based on the gathered information, I can now generate the final response:
The limit parameter should preserve existing value when undefined
The codebase shows that limit is treated as an optional parameter in various places, and there are explicit checks for undefined limit values in multiple components. The current implementation would indeed discard the existing limit value when undefined is passed, which could lead to unintended behavior. The suggested change to preserve the existing limit is correct.
- In
src/context/browserSteps.tsx, line 90:
- limit: limit
+ limit: limit !== undefined ? limit : existingListStep.limit🔗 Analysis chain
Verify whether limit should always overwrite.
Currently, if “limit” is not provided, it will become undefined and effectively discard the existing limit. This might be intentional, but if you want to preserve the old limit when a new one is not specified, you can do:
- limit: limit
+ limit: limit !== undefined ? limit : existingListStep.limitLet me gather more information about how the limit parameter is used in the codebase.
Let me search for more specific context about how the limit is handled in the browser steps and its type definition.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Error: No shell scripts found
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for the usage and handling of 'limit' parameter
ast-grep --pattern 'limit: $_'
# Search for the type definition or interface that includes limit
ast-grep --pattern 'interface $_ {
$$$
limit$_
$$$
}'
# Search for any assignments or handling of limit parameter
rg "limit(\s*=|:)" -A 2 -B 2
Length of output: 5905
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for the type definition of the list step
ast-grep --pattern 'type $_ = {
$$$
limit$_
$$$
}'
# Look for the mergeListStep function implementation
rg -A 10 -B 10 "mergeListStep|updateListStep" src/
# Search for any undefined checks on limit
rg "limit(\s+!==|\s*===)\s*(undefined|null)" -A 2 -B 2
Length of output: 1862
The labels do not reset on selection of additional elements after current element confirmation.
fix: #286
Summary by CodeRabbit
New Features
Bug Fixes