chore: remove front end validation of urls #395
Conversation
WalkthroughThe pull request involves modifications to URL validation and error handling in two frontend components: Changes
Possibly Related Issues
Possibly Related PRs
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 comments (1)
frontend/src/scenes/popup/CreatePopupPage.jsx (1)
Line range hint
89-96: Yo dawg, we got some dead code here! 🍝The
validateUrlfunction is just chillin' there without being used anywhere since the front-end validation was removed. Let's keep our codebase clean and fresh!- const validateUrl = (url) => { - try { - new URL(url); - return null; - } catch (err) { - return "Invalid URL format"; - } - };
🧹 Nitpick comments (2)
frontend/src/scenes/popup/CreatePopupPage.jsx (2)
120-120: Ope! Console.log in production? Mom's spaghetti! 🍝Let's not leave debug statements in production code. If we need to track responses, we should use proper logging utilities.
- console.log(response) + // Consider using a proper logging utility if needed
128-128: Hold up! We're losing error context faster than losing yourself in the music! 🎵The simplified error handling might make it harder to debug issues in production. Consider preserving some context in the error message.
- emitToastError(error); + const errorMessage = `Failed to ${location.state?.isEdit ? 'edit' : 'create'} popup: ${error.message}`; + emitToastError(errorMessage);
📜 Review details
Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (2)
frontend/src/scenes/banner/CreateBannerPage.jsx(0 hunks)frontend/src/scenes/popup/CreatePopupPage.jsx(1 hunks)
💤 Files with no reviewable changes (1)
- frontend/src/scenes/banner/CreateBannerPage.jsx
🔇 Additional comments (1)
frontend/src/scenes/popup/CreatePopupPage.jsx (1)
Line range hint 97-130: Yo, we need to talk about this validation situation! 🤔
While removing front-end validation aligns with the PR objectives, consider these implications:
- Users won't get immediate feedback on invalid URLs
- More invalid requests might hit the backend
- This could impact user experience and server load
Consider implementing client-side validation as a UX enhancement while keeping the backend validation as the source of truth.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
🔭 Outside diff range comments (1)
frontend/src/tests/scenes/popup/CreatePopupPage.test.jsx (1)
Line range hint
21-94: Mom's spaghetti moment: We're missing some crucial test cases!With the removal of frontend URL validation, we should add test cases to verify that:
- The form submission succeeds with invalid URLs
- The form submission succeeds with empty URLs
- The error handling correctly processes backend validation errors
Here's a suggested test case to add:
it('allows submission with invalid URLs', async () => { const mockAddPopup = vi.spyOn(popupServices, 'addPopup').mockResolvedValueOnce({ data: { success: true }, }); render( <Router> <CreatePopupPage /> </Router> ); // Set an invalid URL const urlInput = screen.getByDisplayValue('https://'); fireEvent.change(urlInput, { target: { value: 'not-a-valid-url' } }); const saveButton = await screen.findByRole('button', { name: /Save/i }); fireEvent.click(saveButton); // Verify form submission was attempted expect(mockAddPopup).toHaveBeenCalledTimes(1); });
🧹 Nitpick comments (1)
frontend/src/tests/scenes/popup/CreatePopupPage.test.jsx (1)
Line range hint
119-171: Knees weak, arms heavy... but I gotchu covered with this TODO!I notice there's a commented-out test for edit mode functionality. This is an important test case that should be implemented, especially since URL handling might be different in edit mode.
Would you like me to help implement this test case? I can create a GitHub issue to track this and provide a complete implementation that:
- Tests edit mode initialization
- Verifies URL field population
- Validates edit mode submission
📜 Review details
Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
frontend/src/tests/scenes/popup/CreatePopupPage.test.jsx(1 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (1)
frontend/src/tests/scenes/popup/CreatePopupPage.test.jsx (1)
87-87: Yo dawg, let's keep our error messages consistent!
The error message expectation has been simplified from "An unexpected error occurred" to "An error occurred". Make sure this matches the actual error message being emitted in the component after the URL validation removal.
✅ Verification successful
Yo, the error message test is on point, homie!
The test's expectation of expect.stringContaining('An error occurred') is perfectly aligned with the actual error handling in the codebase. The emitToastError function in guideHelper.js uses two variants of the message:
- "An error occurred: " + specific error message
- "An error occurred. Please check your network connection and try again."
Both messages contain the test's expected substring "An error occurred", making the test robust enough to catch both cases. No changes needed, eh!
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for other error message occurrences to ensure consistency
rg "An (unexpected )?error occurred" --type js
Length of output: 2725
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's check the actual component to see what error message it's using
ast-grep --pattern 'catch ($err) { $$$}' frontend/src/scenes/popup/CreatePopupPage.jsx
Length of output: 88
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's try a broader pattern to catch error handling in the component
rg -A 5 "setError|toast" frontend/src/scenes/popup/CreatePopupPage.jsx
Length of output: 654
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's check what emitToastError does
rg -A 5 "emitToastError" --type js
Length of output: 6417
Describe your changes
Briefly describe the changes you made and their purpose.
Issue number
Mention the issue number(s) this PR addresses (e.g., #123).
Please ensure all items are checked off before requesting a review: