Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Refactor exam completion eligibility check to not grant completions on some exams #1352

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

nygrenh
Copy link
Member

@nygrenh nygrenh commented Dec 9, 2024

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • New Features

    • Enhanced criteria for determining exam passage based on a points threshold.
    • Updated eligibility criteria for automatic course module completion.
  • Bug Fixes

    • Refined logic for identifying suspected cheaters based on specific criteria.
  • Documentation

    • Added comments for clarity regarding exam handling and completion conditions.

Copy link
Contributor

coderabbitai bot commented Dec 9, 2024

Walkthrough

The changes in the pull request primarily involve modifications to the progressing.rs file, which focuses on the logic for automatic course module completions and the identification of suspected cheaters. Key updates include renaming the function that checks exam passage criteria to incorporate a points-based threshold. The eligibility for automatic completion has been adjusted accordingly. Additionally, the logic for detecting suspected cheaters has been refined, ensuring that only users meeting specific criteria are flagged. Comments have been added for clarity, while error handling remains consistent.

Changes

File Path Change Summary
services/headless-lms/models/src/library/progressing.rs Renamed user_has_passed_exam_for_the_course to user_has_passed_exam_for_the_course_based_on_points; updated logic for exam passage and automatic completion eligibility; refined cheater detection criteria; added comments for clarity.

Poem

In the land of learning, where knowledge grows,
A rabbit hops swiftly, as progress flows.
With points now the key, exams take their flight,
Cheaters are spotted, in the soft moonlight.
Clarity reigns, in this code we adore,
Hooray for the changes, let’s learn even more! 🐇✨


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?

❤️ Share
🪧 Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

  • Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
    • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
    • Generate unit testing code for this file.
    • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
  • Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
    • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
  • PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
    • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
    • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
    • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

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)

  • @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
  • @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
  • @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
  • @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
  • @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
  • @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

  • Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
  • Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
  • Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

CodeRabbit Configuration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

  • You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
  • Please see the configuration documentation for more information.
  • If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json

Documentation and Community

  • Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
  • Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
  • Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

Copy link
Contributor

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Actionable comments posted: 0

🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (1)
services/headless-lms/models/src/library/progressing.rs (1)

The word 'treshold' is misspelled throughout the codebase and needs to be corrected to 'threshold'

The misspelling appears in multiple files across the codebase:

  • Rust files in services/headless-lms/models/src/
  • TypeScript files in services/main-frontend/src/
  • Translation files in shared-module/packages/common/src/locales/
  • Database migration files in services/headless-lms/migrations/

This is a consistent typo that should be fixed across the entire codebase for better maintainability and correctness.

🔗 Analysis chain

Line range hint 271-279: Correct typo: 'treshold' should be 'threshold'

The word treshold in minimum_points_treshold is misspelled. It should be minimum_points_threshold for consistency and readability.

Run the following script to find other occurrences of the typo in the codebase:

🏁 Scripts executed

The following scripts were executed for the analysis:

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Description: Find occurrences of the misspelling 'treshold' in the codebase.

rg 'treshold'

Length of output: 23913

📜 Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 10b199c and c452a38.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • services/headless-lms/models/src/library/progressing.rs (3 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (1)
services/headless-lms/models/src/library/progressing.rs (1)

195-200: Verify that all references to user_has_passed_exam_for_the_course have been updated

Ensure that all calls to user_has_passed_exam_for_the_course are updated to the renamed function user_has_passed_exam_for_the_course_based_on_points to prevent any broken references.

Run the following script to verify the function usage:

✅ Verification successful

Based on the search results, I can generate the final response as we have clear evidence that there are no remaining references to the old function name user_has_passed_exam_for_the_course. The only occurrences found are for the new function name user_has_passed_exam_for_the_course_based_on_points.

Function references are correctly updated

All references to the function have been properly renamed to user_has_passed_exam_for_the_course_based_on_points. No instances of the old function name remain in the codebase.

🏁 Scripts executed

The following scripts were executed for the analysis:

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Description: Search for references to the old function name.

rg 'user_has_passed_exam_for_the_course'

Length of output: 287

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant