fix:When splitting materials, a component can exist in multiple snippets. Also, there can be two components within one snippet (with the same componentName but different snippetName)

[webzmj530]

English | 简体中文

PR

PR Checklist

Please check if your PR fulfills the following requirements:

• The commit message follows our Commit Message Guidelines
• Tests for the changes have been added (for bug fixes / features)
• Docs have been added / updated (for bug fixes / features)
• Built its own designer, fully self-validated

PR Type

What kind of change does this PR introduce?

• Bugfix
• Feature
• Code style update (formatting, local variables)
• Refactoring (no functional changes, no api changes)
• Build related changes
• CI related changes
• Documentation content changes
• Other... Please describe:

Background and solution

What is the current behavior?

• 背景：
  表单分类里面存在复选框组和复选框拖拽按钮组两个组件，使用的是同一个组件TinyCheckboxGroup，但是在拆分之后TinyCheckboxGroup.json文件中复选框拖拽按钮组组丢失！
• 原因：
  拆包的时候没有考虑一个组件在多个分组里面也没有考虑一个分组里面存在两个组件(组件名相同，配置项不同)
• 解决方案：
  在splitMaterials拆分物料脚本的时候将组件名相同，snippetName不相同的组件都写入在拆分的组件文件的snippets字段里面

Issue Number: N/A

What is the new behavior?

拆分物料的时候一个组件在snippets中使用多次时在拆分的单个组件文件中snippets存在多项，TinyCheckboxGroup.json文件中存在复选框组和复选框组拖拽组

Does this PR introduce a breaking change?

• Yes
• No

Other information

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Chores
  • Performed a maintenance update to streamline internal documentation by removing outdated internal annotations. These changes enhance code clarity and maintainability without altering any features, functionality, or performance visible to end-users, ensuring a seamless experience.

[coderabbitai]

Walkthrough

The pull request removes an initial block comment from the scripts/splitMaterials.mjs file. The removed comment contained metadata such as description, date, and editor information. The implementation of the code, including the import statements and the splitMaterials function, remains unchanged.

Changes

File	Change Summary
scripts/splitMaterials.mjs	Removed block comment containing metadata (description, date, editor info), leaving code intact

Possibly related PRs

• fix: update splitMaterial and buildMaterials path #1094: Updates the path in the same file, showing direct code-level relevance.
• fix: 修复组件分离时，组件信息的不完整，根据组件的npm包，补全组件npm 字段 #1153: Modifies the splitMaterials function functionality, establishing a direct relationship.

Suggested labels

bug

Suggested reviewers

• chilingling
• hexqi

Poem

I'm a bunny, quick and light,
Hop-ping over code so bright.
Comments removed with a gentle cheer,
Clean code remains, oh so clear!
Dance along in lines of code, dear!
🐇✨

Warning

There were issues while running some tools. Please review the errors and either fix the tool’s configuration or disable the tool if it’s a critical failure.

🔧 ESLint

If the error stems from missing dependencies, add them to the package.json file. For unrecoverable errors (e.g., due to private dependencies), disable the tool in the CodeRabbit configuration.

 ERR_PNPM_OPTIONAL_DEPS_REQUIRE_PROD_DEPS  Optional dependencies cannot be installed without production dependencies

✨ Finishing Touches

• 📝 Generate Docstrings

---

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

🪧 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.

[coderabbitai]

Actionable comments posted: 0

🧹 Nitpick comments (2)

scripts/splitMaterials.mjs (2)

36-39: Potential edge case handling concern with key selection.

The fallback logic for determining the key (item?.schema?.componentName || item.snippetName) might lead to unexpected behavior if componentName exists but is falsy (empty string, 0, etc.). Consider using nullish coalescing (??) instead:

-const key = item?.schema?.componentName || item.snippetName
+const key = item?.schema?.componentName ?? item.snippetName

---

58-60: Potential null/undefined check improvement.

While the current check matchedSnippets?.length works, consider making it more explicit for better readability:

-if (matchedSnippets?.length) {
+if (matchedSnippets && matchedSnippets.length > 0) {

This makes the intent clearer to future readers of the code.

📜 Review details

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

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 47c63f7 and b5d67cd.

📒 Files selected for processing (2)

• scripts/splitMaterials.mjs (2 hunks)
• scripts/splitMaterials.mjs (0 hunks)

⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms (1)

• GitHub Check: push-check

🔇 Additional comments (4)

scripts/splitMaterials.mjs (4)

1-6: Unnecessary file header metadata removed.

The metadata comment at the top of the file has been removed. This is acceptable as it only contained internal information (editor, dates) that isn't relevant to the code functionality.

---

28-39: Improved snippet preprocessing with a more structured approach.

The new implementation creates a more organized snippetsMap object to store snippets, properly handling cases where snippets don't have children arrays. This is a good improvement in code structure.

---

40-48: Good implementation of snippet collection.

Storing all matching snippets in arrays keyed by component name efficiently solves the problem described in the PR objectives. This approach ensures components that appear in multiple snippets or different configurations are properly tracked.

---

51-60: Efficient component-snippet matching logic.

The new component processing logic correctly handles both single and array component definitions, and properly assigns all matching snippets to each component. This directly addresses the issue where components like TinyCheckboxGroup were losing some of their snippet representations.