Sort candidate page detection marks by timestamp #688
Conversation
WalkthroughThe changes in this pull request modify the sorting logic of the Changes
Poem
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 (
|
skanderm
changed the title
![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 (2)
ui/src/components/DetectionsTable.tsx (2)
78-84: LGTM! Consider a minor optimization.The new sorting logic correctly addresses the PR objective of sorting detection marks by timestamp. The use of
Dateobjects for comparison ensures accurate chronological ordering.For a slight performance improvement, consider memoizing the sorted array:
const sortedDetections = useMemo(() => detections.sort(({ timestamp: a }, { timestamp: b }) => +new Date(a) - +new Date(b)), [detections] ); // Then use sortedDetections instead of sorting inlineThis would prevent unnecessary re-sorting on each render, especially if the component re-renders frequently.
Line range hint
115-122: Consider extracting the sorting logic to reduce duplication.The sorting logic here is identical to the one used for the
marksprop. To improve maintainability and reduce code duplication, consider extracting this logic into a separate function.Here's a suggested refactor:
const sortDetectionsByTimestamp = (detections: Detection[]) => detections.slice().sort(({ timestamp: a }, { timestamp: b }) => +new Date(a) - +new Date(b)); // Use it in both places: const sortedDetections = useMemo(() => sortDetectionsByTimestamp(detections), [detections]); // In the DetectionsPlayer marks prop: marks={sortedDetections.map((d, index) => ({ // ... existing code }))} // In the TableBody: {sortedDetections.map((detection, index) => ( // ... existing code ))}This approach ensures consistency, reduces duplication, and improves maintainability.
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
- ui/src/components/DetectionsTable.tsx (1 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
🔇 Additional comments (1)
ui/src/components/DetectionsTable.tsx (1)
Line range hint
1-524: Overall assessment: PR objectives met with room for minor improvements.The changes successfully implement the sorting of detection marks by timestamp, addressing the bug mentioned in the PR objectives. The implementation is correct and maintains the existing functionality while improving the chronological ordering of detections.
Key points:
- The sorting logic correctly uses
Dateobjects for accurate timestamp comparison.- The changes are localized and don't introduce breaking changes.
- There's an opportunity to optimize performance and reduce code duplication by extracting and memoizing the sorting logic.
These minor improvements would enhance the overall code quality without changing the core functionality. Great job on addressing the bug!
Fixes a bug where mark labels are shown out of order.
Example: https://live.orcasound.net/reports/cand_02xuSDzBykrE1DftuaFkcv
Summary by CodeRabbit