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

Fix/sync dev after v1.52.1 #245

Merged
merged 6 commits into from
Sep 25, 2024
Merged

Fix/sync dev after v1.52.1 #245

merged 6 commits into from
Sep 25, 2024

Conversation

PavelInjective
Copy link
Contributor

@PavelInjective PavelInjective commented Sep 25, 2024

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • Improvements
    • Simplified the method for determining the path to the OFAC list, enhancing efficiency and reliability.

Copy link

coderabbitai bot commented Sep 25, 2024

Walkthrough

The changes in the pull request focus on simplifying the path resolution for the OFAC list in the client/chain/ofac.go file. The previous method involved traversing the directory structure to locate the necessary file, while the new implementation directly utilizes a function to construct the path, enhancing clarity and reducing complexity in the code.

Changes

File Change Summary
client/chain/ofac.go Simplified the path resolution for the OFAC list by using getFileAbsPath instead of a loop to traverse directories.

Possibly related PRs

Suggested reviewers

  • aarmoa

Poem

In the code where paths do roam,
A rabbit found a simpler home.
No more loops to twist and bend,
Just a path that leads to the end.
Hopping through with joy and cheer,
OFAC lists are now quite clear! 🐇✨


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.

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

@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)
client/chain/ofac.go (1)

42-42: Approve changes with a suggestion for improvement.

The new implementation of getOfacListPath is more concise and potentially more robust. It eliminates complex directory traversal logic and uses path.Join for proper path construction across different operating systems.

However, the use of a relative path ("..") assumes the current directory structure, which might be fragile if the project structure changes in the future.

Consider using a more robust method to determine the project root, such as looking for a specific marker file (e.g., .project_root) or using an environment variable. This would make the code more resilient to potential changes in the project structure.

Example implementation:

func getOfacListPath() string {
    projectRoot := findProjectRoot()
    return getFileAbsPath(path.Join(projectRoot, "metadata", ofacListFilename))
}

func findProjectRoot() string {
    // Implementation to find the project root
    // This could involve looking for a marker file or using an environment variable
}
📜 Review details

Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL

📥 Commits

Files that changed from the base of the PR and between feafa40 and 92ece76.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • client/chain/ofac.go (2 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments not posted (3)
client/chain/ofac.go (3)

9-9: LGTM: Import of path package.

The addition of the path package import is appropriate for the new implementation of getOfacListPath.


Line range hint 1-94: Summary of changes and their impact.

The changes in this file focus on improving the path resolution for the OFAC list. The new implementation in getOfacListPath is more concise and potentially more robust, eliminating complex directory traversal logic. These changes should not affect the overall functionality of the OFAC checking.

Key points:

  1. The path package is now imported and used appropriately.
  2. The getOfacListPath function has been simplified.
  3. The rest of the file remains unchanged, maintaining the existing OFAC checking functionality.

While the changes are an improvement, consider the suggestions for further enhancing the robustness of the path resolution and verifying its correctness in different environments.


42-42: Verify path resolution in different environments.

While the changes to getOfacListPath should not affect the overall behavior of the OFAC checking functionality, it's important to ensure that the new path resolution works correctly in different environments (development, testing, production).

Please run the following script to verify the path resolution:

This script will help verify that the OFAC list path is correctly resolved and that the file exists at the expected location.

Copy link
Collaborator

@aarmoa aarmoa left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Changes look good to me

@aarmoa aarmoa merged commit 6e47286 into dev Sep 25, 2024
4 checks passed
@aarmoa aarmoa deleted the fix/sync_dev_after_v1_52_1 branch September 25, 2024 14:29
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.

3 participants