capture and log input values in vendors view #104
Conversation
WalkthroughThe changes in this pull request involve updates to several components in the codebase, specifically focusing on the Changes
Possibly related PRs
Suggested labels
Suggested reviewers
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 (
|
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 7
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (3)
Clients/src/presentation/pages/Vendors/index.tsx (1)
Discrepancy Detected: Input Capture Not Implemented as per PR Objectives
The current changes include layout adjustments and logging statements; however, there is no implementation for capturing input values in the vendors view as outlined in the PR objectives. Please ensure that input capture functionality is incorporated to fully meet the stated goals of this PR.
🔗 Analysis chain
Line range hint
1-68: Discrepancy between PR objectives and implemented changes.The PR objectives mention "capture and log input values in vendors view", but the changes in this file don't seem to address this directly. The only modification is a layout adjustment to the Stack component.
Could you please clarify how this change relates to the stated objectives? If there are other files in this PR that implement the input capture and logging functionality, it would be helpful to reference them here.
If the PR objectives have changed or if this is just a partial implementation, consider updating the PR description to accurately reflect the current changes.
To help verify the implementation of input capture and logging, we can search for related changes in other files:
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Search for potential input capture and logging implementations echo "Searching for potential input capture implementations:" rg --type typescript --type javascript -i '(capture|log).*input' echo "\nSearching for new logging statements:" rg --type typescript --type javascript -i '(console\.log|logger\.)' echo "\nSearching for modifications to vendor-related files:" rg --type typescript --type javascript -i 'vendor'Length of output: 619
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Search for potential input capture and logging implementations using file extensions echo "Searching for potential input capture implementations:" rg -g "*.ts" -g "*.js" -i '(capture|log).*input' echo "\nSearching for new logging statements:" rg -g "*.ts" -g "*.js" -i '(console\.log|logger\.)' echo "\nSearching for modifications to vendor-related files:" rg -g "*.ts" -g "*.js" -i 'vendor'Length of output: 31352
Clients/src/presentation/components/Table/WithPlaceholder/index.tsx (1)
Line range hint
1-158: Summary of changes and suggestions for further actionsThe changes in this file improve code organization and align with best practices:
- Mock data import has been updated and reorganized.
- Default prop value has been adjusted to use the new import.
- Property naming has been updated to follow camelCase convention.
These changes partially address the PR objectives by refactoring the vendor data handling. However, there's no explicit implementation of input value capturing or logging visible in this file.
To fully meet the PR objectives:
- Ensure that input value capturing is implemented in the relevant components (e.g., AddNewVendor).
- Implement logging mechanisms for captured input values.
- Update any other components or files that may be affected by these changes, especially those that interact with vendor data.
Consider opening separate issues or PRs for these additional tasks if they're not already covered in other files of this PR.
Clients/src/presentation/components/Modals/NewVendor/index.tsx (1)
439-450: Correct placeholder text for 'Likelihood' Select componentThe placeholder text for the 'Likelihood' Select component is incorrect; it currently says "Select risk severity" instead of "Select likelihood", which might confuse users.
Apply this diff to fix the placeholder:
label="Likelihood" - placeholder="Select risk severity" + placeholder="Select likelihood" isHidden={false} id=""
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (5)
- Clients/src/presentation/components/Inputs/Datepicker/index.tsx (4 hunks)
- Clients/src/presentation/components/Modals/NewVendor/index.tsx (11 hunks)
- Clients/src/presentation/components/Table/WithPlaceholder/index.tsx (4 hunks)
- Clients/src/presentation/mocks/vendors.data.ts (0 hunks)
- Clients/src/presentation/pages/Vendors/index.tsx (1 hunks)
💤 Files with no reviewable changes (1)
- Clients/src/presentation/mocks/vendors.data.ts
🧰 Additional context used
🔇 Additional comments (3)
Clients/src/presentation/pages/Vendors/index.tsx (1)
24-24: Layout change approved, but clarification needed.The addition of
maxWidth={1400}to the Stack component is a valid layout adjustment. This change will limit the width of the content, potentially improving readability on larger screens.However, could you please clarify the specific reason for this change? Understanding the motivation behind this adjustment would be helpful for future maintenance and ensure it aligns with the overall design goals of the application.
Clients/src/presentation/components/Table/WithPlaceholder/index.tsx (2)
56-56: LGTM! Default prop value updated correctly.The default value for the
dataprop has been updated to use the newly importedvendorList. This change is consistent with the updated import statement and maintains the component's existing behavior.
31-31: LGTM! Verify the new import path.The update to the import statement looks good. It reflects a better organization of mock data and uses a named import, which is generally preferred for clarity.
To ensure the new import path is correct, please run the following command:
#!/bin/bash # Verify the existence of the new import file fd -t f "vendors.data.ts" src/presentation/mocks/vendorsThis command will search for the
vendors.data.tsfile in the expected location. If the file exists, the import path is correct.
| @@ -123,7 +123,7 @@ const TableWithPlaceholder = ({ data = listOfVendors }) => { | |||
| <TableCell sx={cellStyle}>{row.assignee}</TableCell> | |||
| <TableCell sx={cellStyle}>{row.status}</TableCell> | |||
| <TableCell sx={cellStyle}>{row.risk}</TableCell> | |||
| <TableCell sx={cellStyle}>{row.review_date}</TableCell> | |||
| <TableCell sx={cellStyle}>{row.reviewDate}</TableCell> | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codebase verification
Attention: Residual review_date Usages Found.
The property review_date is still present in several files and should be updated to reviewDate to maintain consistency and prevent potential issues:
Servers/mocks/vendors/vendors.data.tsServers/models/Vendor.tsServers/models/Overview.tsServers/mocks/overviews/overviews.data.tsClients/src/presentation/components/Table/WithPlaceholder/index.tsx
Please update all instances of review_date to reviewDate across these files.
🔗 Analysis chain
LGTM! Verify property usage across the codebase.
The update from row.review_date to row.reviewDate aligns with JavaScript/TypeScript naming conventions (camelCase). This is a good change for consistency.
To ensure this change doesn't break any existing code, please run the following command to check for any remaining uses of review_date:
This command will search for any occurrences of review_date in TypeScript and JavaScript files. If any are found, they may need to be updated to match this new naming convention.
Action Required: Re-run the search for review_date with a corrected script.
Please execute the following command to search for any remaining uses of review_date in TypeScript and JavaScript files:
If the command fails again or produces unexpected results, please perform a manual verification of the property usage.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for any remaining uses of 'review_date' in TypeScript/JavaScript files
rg --type-add 'web:*.{ts,tsx,js,jsx}' -t web 'review_date'
Length of output: 268
Script:
# Search for any remaining uses of 'review_date' in TypeScript/JavaScript files
rg --type-add 'web:*.{ts,tsx,js,jsx}' -t web 'review_date'
Length of output: 1501
| sx={{ | ||
| ".MuiIconButton-root:hover": { backgroundColor: "unset" }, | ||
| "& svg": { display: "none" }, | ||
| "& button": { position: "absolute", left: "14px", top: "7px", width: "20px", height: "20px" }, | ||
| "& button:before": { | ||
| content: "url('/src/presentation/assets/icons/calendar.svg')", | ||
| display: "block", | ||
| "& button": { | ||
| position: "absolute", | ||
| left: "14px", | ||
| top: "7px", | ||
| width: "20px", | ||
| height: "20px", | ||
| }, | ||
| "& button:before": { | ||
| content: "url('/src/presentation/assets/icons/calendar.svg')", | ||
| display: "block", | ||
| position: "absolute", | ||
| top: 0, | ||
| left: 0 | ||
| left: 0, | ||
| }, | ||
| "& .MuiInputBase-root input": { | ||
| position: "absolute", | ||
| left: "36px", | ||
| top: "3px", | ||
| maxWidth: "145px", | ||
| }, | ||
| "& .MuiInputBase-root input": { position: "absolute", left: "36px", top: "3px", maxWidth: "145px" }, | ||
| ...sx | ||
| ...sx, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Avoid extensive inline styling for better maintainability
The extensive inline styling in the sx prop modifies internal elements of MuiDatePicker, which may lead to maintainability issues and potential breakage with library updates. Consider using the component's provided styling APIs, theme customizations, or minimal styling to achieve the desired look without manipulating internal classes or using absolute positioning excessively.
Consider alternative styling approaches:
- Use the
slotPropsprop: LeverageslotPropsto customize internal components without directly targeting internal classes. - Theme overrides: Utilize theme overrides to apply consistent styling across components.
- Custom components: If significant customization is required, create a custom component or extend the existing one for better control.
| }} | ||
| value={date ? dayjs(date) : null} |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Simplify the value prop by removing unnecessary wrapping
Since date is already of type Dayjs | null, wrapping it with dayjs(date) is redundant. You can pass date directly to the value prop of MuiDatePicker.
Apply this change:
- value={date ? dayjs(date) : null}
+ value={date}📝 Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| value={date ? dayjs(date) : null} | |
| value={date} |
|
|
||
| interface DatePickerProps { | ||
| label?: string; | ||
| isRequired?: boolean; | ||
| isOptional?: boolean; | ||
| optionalLabel?: string; | ||
| sx?: SxProps<Theme> | undefined; | ||
| sx?: object; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Maintain type safety for the sx prop
Changing the type of sx from SxProps<Theme> | undefined to object reduces type safety and removes the benefits of theme-aware styling provided by Material-UI. It's recommended to keep the original type to ensure better developer experience and to catch styling errors during development.
Apply this diff to restore the original type and imports:
- import { Stack, Typography, useTheme } from "@mui/material";
+ import { Stack, Typography, useTheme, SxProps, Theme } from "@mui/material";
...
- sx?: object;
+ sx?: SxProps<Theme> | undefined;Committable suggestion was skipped due to low confidence.
| reviewStatus: "0", | ||
| reviewer: "0", | ||
| riskStatus: "0", | ||
| reviewDate: "", | ||
| }, | ||
| risks: { | ||
| riskDescription: "", | ||
| impactDescription: "", | ||
| projectName: "0", | ||
| probability: "0", | ||
| impact: "0", | ||
| actionOwner: "0", | ||
| riskSeverity: "0", | ||
| likelihood: "0", | ||
| riskLevel: "0", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ensure default values for select fields match option IDs
The initial state for select fields like reviewStatus, reviewer, riskStatus, projectName, etc., is set to "0". However, your options _id values start from 1. This mismatch means the default selection will not correspond to any option, which might cause unexpected behavior.
Consider initializing these values to an empty string "" to represent no selection, or adjust your options to include an _id of "0" if that represents a valid default option.
| const handleOnSave = () => { | ||
| console.log("Vendor Details:", values.vendorDetails); | ||
| console.log("Risks:", values.risks); | ||
| }; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Implement data persistence in handleOnSave function
Currently, the handleOnSave function only logs the vendorDetails and risks to the console. To complete the functionality, you should implement actual data persistence, such as sending this data to your backend API or updating the application state accordingly.
Would you like assistance in implementing the data persistence logic?
| <Field | ||
| label="Review result" | ||
| width={350} | ||
| type="description" | ||
| value={values.vendorDetails.reviewResult} | ||
| onChange={(e) => | ||
| handleOnChange("vendorDetails", "reviewResult", e.target.value) | ||
| } | ||
| /> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Fix incorrect state reference in 'Review result' field within Risks panel
In the Risks panel, the 'Review result' field is incorrectly referencing values.vendorDetails.reviewResult instead of values.risks.reviewResult. This will cause the field to display and update the wrong data.
Apply this diff to correct the state reference:
<Field
label="Review result"
width={350}
type="description"
- value={values.vendorDetails.reviewResult}
- onChange={(e) =>
- handleOnChange("vendorDetails", "reviewResult", e.target.value)
- }
+ value={values.risks.reviewResult}
+ onChange={(e) =>
+ handleOnChange("risks", "reviewResult", e.target.value)
+ }
/>📝 Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| <Field | |
| label="Review result" | |
| width={350} | |
| type="description" | |
| value={values.vendorDetails.reviewResult} | |
| onChange={(e) => | |
| handleOnChange("vendorDetails", "reviewResult", e.target.value) | |
| } | |
| /> | |
| <Field | |
| label="Review result" | |
| width={350} | |
| type="description" | |
| value={values.risks.reviewResult} | |
| onChange={(e) => | |
| handleOnChange("risks", "reviewResult", e.target.value) | |
| } | |
| /> |
Addressing issue #78
Summary by CodeRabbit
Release Notes
New Features
DatePickercomponent for improved date management.AddNewVendormodal.Improvements
TableWithPlaceholderto streamline data handling and naming conventions.Vendorscomponent for better rendering.Bug Fixes