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: Update binder in form_test #3336

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Mar 4, 2025
Merged

Conversation

devhaozi
Copy link
Contributor

@devhaozi devhaozi commented Mar 3, 2025

Description

Fix error binder in form_test.

Fixes # (issue)

Changes introduced

List the new features or adjustments introduced in this pull request. Provide details on benchmarks, documentation updates, changelog entries, and if applicable, the migration guide.

  • Benchmarks: Describe any performance benchmarks and improvements related to the changes.
  • Documentation Update: Detail the updates made to the documentation and links to the changed files.
  • Changelog/What's New: Include a summary of the additions for the upcoming release notes.
  • Migration Guide: If necessary, provide a guide or steps for users to migrate their existing code to accommodate these changes.
  • API Alignment with Express: Explain how the changes align with the Express API.
  • API Longevity: Discuss the steps taken to ensure that the new or updated APIs are consistent and not prone to breaking changes.
  • Examples: Provide examples demonstrating the new features or changes in action.

Type of change

Please delete options that are not relevant.

  • New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
  • Enhancement (improvement to existing features and functionality)
  • Documentation update (changes to documentation)
  • Performance improvement (non-breaking change which improves efficiency)
  • Code consistency (non-breaking change which improves code reliability and robustness)

Checklist

Before you submit your pull request, please make sure you meet these requirements:

  • Followed the inspiration of the Express.js framework for new functionalities, making them similar in usage.
  • Conducted a self-review of the code and provided comments for complex or critical parts.
  • Updated the documentation in the /docs/ directory for Fiber's documentation.
  • Added or updated unit tests to validate the effectiveness of the changes or new features.
  • Ensured that new and existing unit tests pass locally with the changes.
  • Verified that any new dependencies are essential and have been agreed upon by the maintainers/community.
  • Aimed for optimal performance with minimal allocations in the new code.
  • Provided benchmarks for the new code to analyze and improve upon.

Commit formatting

Please use emojis in commit messages for an easy way to identify the purpose or intention of a commit. Check out the emoji cheatsheet here: CONTRIBUTING.md

@devhaozi devhaozi requested a review from a team as a code owner March 3, 2025 20:29
@devhaozi devhaozi requested review from gaby, sixcolors, ReneWerner87 and efectn and removed request for a team March 3, 2025 20:29
Copy link
Contributor

coderabbitai bot commented Mar 3, 2025

Walkthrough

The pull request updates the benchmark function in binder/form_test.go by changing the binding mechanism from QueryBinding to FormBinding. It also modifies the request setup by replacing the use of req.URI().SetQueryString(...) with req.SetBodyString(...), aligning the test with form submission behavior. Additionally, references to the gorilla/schema package in documentation have been updated to reflect the use of the gofiber/schema package.

Changes

File(s) Change Summary
binder/form_test.go Updated Benchmark_FormBinder_Bind: replaced QueryBinding with FormBinding, modified struct tags in User, and switched request configuration from SetQueryString to SetBodyString.
binder/README.md Updated documentation to reference gofiber/schema instead of gorilla/schema.
binder/mapping.go Modified comment in parseToStruct function to reference gofiber/schema instead of gorilla/schema.
error.go Updated comment preceding type definitions for schema-related errors from gorilla/schema to gofiber/schema.

Possibly related PRs

  • 🔥 Feature: BodyParser Now Automatically Parses File Fields in Multipart Requests #3316: The changes in the main PR focus on modifying the Benchmark_FormBinder_Bind function to use FormBinding instead of QueryBinding, while the retrieved PR enhances the bindMultipart method within the FormBinding type, indicating a direct relationship through the shared use of FormBinding in the context of form data handling.
  • bind: add support for multipart file binding #3309: The changes in the main PR, which involve modifying the Benchmark_FormBinder_Bind function to use FormBinding and adjusting the User struct for form data binding, are related to the retrieved PR that adds support for multipart file binding in the FormBinding struct, as both PRs involve modifications to the FormBinding functionality and the User struct in binder/form_test.go.

Suggested labels

🧹 Updates

Suggested reviewers

  • gaby
  • sixcolors
  • ReneWerner87
  • efectn

Poem

I'm a little rabbit, hopping through the code,
Skipping bugs along a newly paved road.
From queries to forms, the change is so neat,
Binding the data with a gentle heartbeat.
I nibble on these tweaks, making our code complete! 🐇


📜 Recent review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 0a9b4fb and f4f5043.

📒 Files selected for processing (3)
  • binder/README.md (1 hunks)
  • binder/mapping.go (1 hunks)
  • error.go (1 hunks)
✅ Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (3)
  • binder/mapping.go
  • error.go
  • binder/README.md
⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms (5)
  • GitHub Check: unit (1.24.x, macos-13)
  • GitHub Check: unit (1.24.x, windows-latest)
  • GitHub Check: unit (1.23.x, windows-latest)
  • GitHub Check: repeated
  • GitHub Check: Compare

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 generate docstrings to generate docstrings for this 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: 1

📜 Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 9e6f4fd and 4766b86.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • binder/form_test.go (2 hunks)
⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms (7)
  • GitHub Check: unit (1.24.x, macos-13)
  • GitHub Check: unit (1.24.x, macos-latest)
  • GitHub Check: unit (1.24.x, windows-latest)
  • GitHub Check: unit (1.23.x, windows-latest)
  • GitHub Check: Compare
  • GitHub Check: Analyse
  • GitHub Check: repeated
🔇 Additional comments (2)
binder/form_test.go (2)

73-73: Correct method for setting form data in the request body.

The change from req.URI().SetQueryString() to req.SetBodyString() is appropriate because:

  1. Form data should be in the request body, not the URL query parameters
  2. This aligns with the "application/x-www-form-urlencoded" content type set on line 74
  3. It's consistent with how a real form submission would work

This change properly fixes the mismatch between the binding mechanism and the request data location.


57-87:

✅ Verification successful

Verify test accuracy with struct tag inconsistency.

While the binding mechanism has been corrected, the test may not be working as expected because of the struct tag mismatch. The User struct still uses query: tags while the FormBinding expects form: tags. This could result in binding not working correctly or relying on unintended fallback behavior.

To verify if the test is actually binding correctly, we can check for inconsistent behavior:


🏁 Script executed:

#!/bin/bash
# Check if there's any code in the repo that handles the mismatch between 
# binding type (form) and struct tags (query)

# Look for form binding implementation that might handle query tags
rg -A 10 -B 10 "func.*FormBinding.*Bind" --type go

# Look for any code that maps between query and form tags
rg "query.*form|form.*query" --type go

Length of output: 2797


Binding Test Verified: Supported Tags Are Correct

The review concern about a mismatch between struct tags and the binding mechanism is no longer applicable. The binder configuration in binder/mapping.go explicitly supports both query and form tags (as seen with the tags list: ["header", "respHeader", "cookie", "query", "form", "uri"]). This confirms that the User struct using query:"..." tags in the test is handled correctly by the binding code. No further changes are required for this test.

Copy link

codecov bot commented Mar 3, 2025

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 84.30%. Comparing base (9e6f4fd) to head (f4f5043).
Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #3336      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   84.23%   84.30%   +0.06%     
==========================================
  Files         116      116              
  Lines       11578    11578              
==========================================
+ Hits         9753     9761       +8     
+ Misses       1395     1389       -6     
+ Partials      430      428       -2     
Flag Coverage Δ
unittests 84.30% <ø> (+0.06%) ⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@ReneWerner87 ReneWerner87 added this to the v3 milestone Mar 3, 2025
Copy link
Member

@gaby gaby left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

👍 LGTM

@gaby gaby changed the title Fix: error binder in form_test 🐛 fix: Update binder in form_test Mar 4, 2025
@ReneWerner87 ReneWerner87 merged commit 8e54c8f into gofiber:main Mar 4, 2025
18 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
Status: Done
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants