Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
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
🔥 Feature: Add Req and Res API #2894
🔥 Feature: Add Req and Res API #2894
Changes from 2 commits
85f5e09
4b3dc9a
cf05889
2b891e8
3a8f64a
bb91f32
64dd9bb
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Fix documentation comment for Req() method.
The comment incorrectly mentions "Res" instead of "Req". It should be:
"Req returns a convenience type whose API is limited to operations on the incoming request."
Check warning on line 1471 in ctx.go
ctx.go#L1470-L1471
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
💡 Codebase verification
Add test coverage for the Req() method
The method needs test coverage to ensure it correctly returns the req field. Here's a suggested test structure:
ctx_test.go
that:🔗 Analysis chain
Add test coverage for the Req() method
While the implementation is correct and the documentation is clear, test coverage is missing for this method. Please add unit tests to ensure the method correctly returns the req field.
Would you like me to help generate unit tests for this method?
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
Length of output: 83
Script:
Length of output: 2112
Script:
Length of output: 233
🧰 Tools
🪛 GitHub Check: codecov/patch
[warning] 1470-1471: ctx.go#L1470-L1471
Added lines #L1470 - L1471 were not covered by tests
Check warning on line 1477 in ctx.go
ctx.go#L1476-L1477
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
💡 Codebase verification
Add test coverage for the Res() method
The review comment is correct. The codebase search reveals that while there are interface and implementation definitions for
Res
, there is no direct test coverage for theRes()
method ofDefaultCtx
. A test should be added to verify that:res
fieldRes
interface🔗 Analysis chain
Add test coverage for the Res() method
While the implementation is correct and the documentation is clear, test coverage is missing for this method. Please add unit tests to ensure the method correctly returns the res field.
Would you like me to help generate unit tests for this method?
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
Length of output: 83
Script:
Length of output: 2109
Script:
Length of output: 620
🧰 Tools
🪛 GitHub Check: codecov/patch
[warning] 1476-1477: ctx.go#L1476-L1477
Added lines #L1476 - L1477 were not covered by tests
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Fix initialization of req and res fields
The current initialization creates empty structs without setting the context reference. This will likely cause issues when methods try to access the context.
Apply this diff to properly initialize the fields:
📝 Committable suggestion
Some generated files are not rendered by default. Learn more about how customized files appear on GitHub.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Consider adding validation for ctx field.
The
DefaultReq
struct should validate that thectx
field is not nil during initialization to prevent potential panics.Check warning on line 9 in req.go
req.go#L8-L9
Check warning on line 13 in req.go
req.go#L12-L13
Check warning on line 17 in req.go
req.go#L16-L17
Check warning on line 21 in req.go
req.go#L20-L21
Check warning on line 25 in req.go
req.go#L24-L25
Check warning on line 29 in req.go
req.go#L28-L29
Check warning on line 33 in req.go
req.go#L32-L33
Check warning on line 37 in req.go
req.go#L36-L37
Check warning on line 41 in req.go
req.go#L40-L41
Check warning on line 45 in req.go
req.go#L44-L45
Check warning on line 49 in req.go
req.go#L48-L49
Check warning on line 53 in req.go
req.go#L52-L53
Check warning on line 57 in req.go
req.go#L56-L57
Check warning on line 61 in req.go
req.go#L60-L61
Check warning on line 65 in req.go
req.go#L64-L65
Check warning on line 69 in req.go
req.go#L68-L69
Check warning on line 73 in req.go
req.go#L72-L73
Check warning on line 77 in req.go
req.go#L76-L77
Check warning on line 81 in req.go
req.go#L80-L81
Check warning on line 85 in req.go
req.go#L84-L85
Check warning on line 89 in req.go
req.go#L88-L89
Check warning on line 93 in req.go
req.go#L92-L93
Check warning on line 97 in req.go
req.go#L96-L97
Check warning on line 101 in req.go
req.go#L100-L101
Check warning on line 105 in req.go
req.go#L104-L105
Check warning on line 109 in req.go
req.go#L108-L109
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Add unit tests for the request API methods.
The static analysis indicates that the new request API methods lack test coverage. Comprehensive testing is essential for validating the delegation behavior.
Would you like me to help generate comprehensive unit tests for these methods?
🧰 Tools
🪛 GitHub Check: codecov/patch
[warning] 8-9: req.go#L8-L9
Added lines #L8 - L9 were not covered by tests
[warning] 12-13: req.go#L12-L13
Added lines #L12 - L13 were not covered by tests
[warning] 16-17: req.go#L16-L17
Added lines #L16 - L17 were not covered by tests
[warning] 20-21: req.go#L20-L21
Added lines #L20 - L21 were not covered by tests
[warning] 24-25: req.go#L24-L25
Added lines #L24 - L25 were not covered by tests
[warning] 28-29: req.go#L28-L29
Added lines #L28 - L29 were not covered by tests
[warning] 32-33: req.go#L32-L33
Added lines #L32 - L33 were not covered by tests
[warning] 36-37: req.go#L36-L37
Added lines #L36 - L37 were not covered by tests
[warning] 40-41: req.go#L40-L41
Added lines #L40 - L41 were not covered by tests
[warning] 44-45: req.go#L44-L45
Added lines #L44 - L45 were not covered by tests
[warning] 48-49: req.go#L48-L49
Added lines #L48 - L49 were not covered by tests
[warning] 52-53: req.go#L52-L53
Added lines #L52 - L53 were not covered by tests
[warning] 56-57: req.go#L56-L57
Added lines #L56 - L57 were not covered by tests
[warning] 60-61: req.go#L60-L61
Added lines #L60 - L61 were not covered by tests
[warning] 64-65: req.go#L64-L65
Added lines #L64 - L65 were not covered by tests
[warning] 68-69: req.go#L68-L69
Added lines #L68 - L69 were not covered by tests
[warning] 72-73: req.go#L72-L73
Added lines #L72 - L73 were not covered by tests
[warning] 76-77: req.go#L76-L77
Added lines #L76 - L77 were not covered by tests
[warning] 80-81: req.go#L80-L81
Added lines #L80 - L81 were not covered by tests
[warning] 84-85: req.go#L84-L85
Added lines #L84 - L85 were not covered by tests
[warning] 88-89: req.go#L88-L89
Added lines #L88 - L89 were not covered by tests
[warning] 92-93: req.go#L92-L93
Added lines #L92 - L93 were not covered by tests
[warning] 96-97: req.go#L96-L97
Added lines #L96 - L97 were not covered by tests
[warning] 100-101: req.go#L100-L101
Added lines #L100 - L101 were not covered by tests
[warning] 104-105: req.go#L104-L105
Added lines #L104 - L105 were not covered by tests
[warning] 108-109: req.go#L108-L109
Added lines #L108 - L109 were not covered by tests
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Add unit tests for the request API methods.
The static analysis indicates that the new request API methods lack test coverage. Comprehensive testing is essential for validating the delegation behavior.
Would you like me to help generate comprehensive unit tests for these methods?
🧰 Tools
🪛 GitHub Check: codecov/patch
[warning] 8-9: req.go#L8-L9
Added lines #L8 - L9 were not covered by tests
[warning] 12-13: req.go#L12-L13
Added lines #L12 - L13 were not covered by tests
[warning] 16-17: req.go#L16-L17
Added lines #L16 - L17 were not covered by tests
[warning] 20-21: req.go#L20-L21
Added lines #L20 - L21 were not covered by tests
[warning] 24-25: req.go#L24-L25
Added lines #L24 - L25 were not covered by tests
[warning] 28-29: req.go#L28-L29
Added lines #L28 - L29 were not covered by tests
[warning] 32-33: req.go#L32-L33
Added lines #L32 - L33 were not covered by tests
[warning] 36-37: req.go#L36-L37
Added lines #L36 - L37 were not covered by tests
[warning] 40-41: req.go#L40-L41
Added lines #L40 - L41 were not covered by tests
[warning] 44-45: req.go#L44-L45
Added lines #L44 - L45 were not covered by tests
[warning] 48-49: req.go#L48-L49
Added lines #L48 - L49 were not covered by tests
[warning] 52-53: req.go#L52-L53
Added lines #L52 - L53 were not covered by tests
[warning] 56-57: req.go#L56-L57
Added lines #L56 - L57 were not covered by tests
[warning] 60-61: req.go#L60-L61
Added lines #L60 - L61 were not covered by tests
[warning] 64-65: req.go#L64-L65
Added lines #L64 - L65 were not covered by tests
[warning] 68-69: req.go#L68-L69
Added lines #L68 - L69 were not covered by tests
[warning] 72-73: req.go#L72-L73
Added lines #L72 - L73 were not covered by tests
[warning] 76-77: req.go#L76-L77
Added lines #L76 - L77 were not covered by tests
[warning] 80-81: req.go#L80-L81
Added lines #L80 - L81 were not covered by tests
[warning] 84-85: req.go#L84-L85
Added lines #L84 - L85 were not covered by tests
[warning] 88-89: req.go#L88-L89
Added lines #L88 - L89 were not covered by tests
[warning] 92-93: req.go#L92-L93
Added lines #L92 - L93 were not covered by tests
[warning] 96-97: req.go#L96-L97
Added lines #L96 - L97 were not covered by tests
[warning] 100-101: req.go#L100-L101
Added lines #L100 - L101 were not covered by tests
[warning] 104-105: req.go#L104-L105
Added lines #L104 - L105 were not covered by tests
[warning] 108-109: req.go#L108-L109
Added lines #L108 - L109 were not covered by tests
Some generated files are not rendered by default. Learn more about how customized files appear on GitHub.
Check warning on line 9 in res.go
res.go#L8-L9
Check warning on line 13 in res.go
res.go#L12-L13
Check warning on line 17 in res.go
res.go#L16-L17
Check warning on line 21 in res.go
res.go#L20-L21
Check warning on line 25 in res.go
res.go#L24-L25
Check warning on line 29 in res.go
res.go#L28-L29
Check warning on line 33 in res.go
res.go#L32-L33
Check warning on line 37 in res.go
res.go#L36-L37
Check warning on line 41 in res.go
res.go#L40-L41
Check warning on line 45 in res.go
res.go#L44-L45
Check warning on line 49 in res.go
res.go#L48-L49
Check warning on line 53 in res.go
res.go#L52-L53
Check warning on line 57 in res.go
res.go#L56-L57
Check warning on line 61 in res.go
res.go#L60-L61
Check warning on line 65 in res.go
res.go#L64-L65
Check warning on line 69 in res.go
res.go#L68-L69
Check warning on line 73 in res.go
res.go#L72-L73
Check warning on line 77 in res.go
res.go#L76-L77
Check warning on line 81 in res.go
res.go#L80-L81
Check warning on line 86 in res.go
res.go#L84-L86
Check warning on line 91 in res.go
res.go#L89-L91
Check warning on line 95 in res.go
res.go#L94-L95
Check warning on line 99 in res.go
res.go#L98-L99
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Add unit tests for the response API methods.
The static analysis indicates that the new response API methods lack test coverage. This is critical for ensuring the delegation pattern works correctly and maintaining reliability during future changes.
Would you like me to help generate comprehensive unit tests for these methods?
🧰 Tools
🪛 GitHub Check: codecov/patch
[warning] 8-9: res.go#L8-L9
Added lines #L8 - L9 were not covered by tests
[warning] 12-13: res.go#L12-L13
Added lines #L12 - L13 were not covered by tests
Some generated files are not rendered by default. Learn more about how customized files appear on GitHub.