chore: fix some problematic function names in comment #22690
Conversation
Signed-off-by: thirdkeyword <[email protected]>
thirdkeyword
requested review from
facundomedica,
cool-develope,
akhilkumarpilli,
lucaslopezf and
a team
as code owners
📝 WalkthroughWalkthroughThe pull request introduces several modifications primarily focused on renaming methods and updating comments for clarity across multiple files. The Changes
Possibly related PRs
Suggested labels
Suggested reviewers
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
Documentation and Community
|
![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)
types/config.go (1)
Line range hint
18-20: Consider enhancing the deprecation noticeWhile the type is marked as deprecated, it would be helpful to:
- Add a link to documentation about the recommended address codec approach
- Create a tracking issue for the Stringer interface removal
Would you like me to help create a GitHub issue to track the Stringer interface removal?
types/context.go (1)
Line range hint
254-262: LGTM! Consider enhancing the documentation.The renaming from
WithIsRecheckTxtoWithIsReCheckTxfollows Go's naming conventions for compound words. The implementation correctly maintains the invariant betweencheckTxandrecheckTxflags.Consider updating the comment to also mention the
execModesetting:-// WithIsReCheckTx called with true will also set true on checkTx in order to -// enforce the invariant that if recheckTx = true then checkTx = true as well. +// WithIsReCheckTx called with true will also set true on checkTx in order to +// enforce the invariant that if recheckTx = true then checkTx = true as well. +// It also sets the execution mode to ExecModeReCheck.
📜 Review details
Configuration used: .coderabbit.yml
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (3)
types/config.go(1 hunks)types/context.go(1 hunks)x/upgrade/plan/downloader_test.go(1 hunks)
✅ Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (1)
- x/upgrade/plan/downloader_test.go
🧰 Additional context used
📓 Path-based instructions (2)
types/config.go (1)
Pattern **/*.go: Review the Golang code for conformity with the Uber Golang style guide, highlighting any deviations.
types/context.go (1)
Pattern **/*.go: Review the Golang code for conformity with the Uber Golang style guide, highlighting any deviations.
🔇 Additional comments (2)
types/config.go (2)
37-37: LGTM! The rename improves clarity
The change from New() to NewConfig() better follows Go naming conventions and makes the function's purpose more explicit.
Also applies to: 38-38
Line range hint 29-33: Verify thread-safety of the singleton initialization
The singleton pattern implementation uses sync.Once correctly, but let's verify there are no race conditions reported in tests.
Description
fix some problematic function names in comment
Author Checklist
All items are required. Please add a note to the item if the item is not applicable and
please add links to any relevant follow up issues.
I have...
!in the type prefix if API or client breaking changeCHANGELOG.mdReviewers Checklist
All items are required. Please add a note if the item is not applicable and please add
your handle next to the items reviewed if you only reviewed selected items.
Please see Pull Request Reviewer section in the contributing guide for more information on how to review a pull request.
I have...
Summary by CodeRabbit
New Features
Bug Fixes
Documentation
Refactor