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

Use typeOf as key instead of KClass in InstanceKeeper#getStore #138

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
May 28, 2024

Conversation

arkivanov
Copy link
Owner

@arkivanov arkivanov commented May 27, 2024

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • Bug Fixes

    • Improved type retrieval in the getStore function for better accuracy.
  • Tests

    • Added test cases for InstanceKeeperDispatcher to ensure correct behavior of the getStore method.

Copy link

coderabbitai bot commented May 27, 2024

Walkthrough

In the mvikotlin module, the getStore function within InstanceKeeperExt.kt has been updated to use typeOf<T>() instead of T::class for key retrieval. Additionally, new test cases have been introduced in InstanceKeeperExtTest.kt to validate the behavior of the getStore method with different types.

Changes

Files Change Summary
mvikotlin/src/commonMain/kotlin/com/arkivanov/mvikotlin/core/instancekeeper/InstanceKeeperExt.kt Updated getStore function to use typeOf<T>() for key retrieval instead of T::class.
mvikotlin/src/commonTest/kotlin/com/arkivanov/mvikotlin/core/instancekeeper/InstanceKeeperExtTest.kt Introduced test cases for InstanceKeeperDispatcher class, focusing on getStore method behavior.

In code's embrace, we find our path,
With typeOf<T>(), we cut through math.
Testing our stores, with types so bold,
Our functions now, a tale retold.
In Kotlin's land, where changes brew,
A rabbit's cheer, for code anew!
🐇✨


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>.
    • 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 generate interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table.
    • @coderabbitai show all the console.log statements in this repository.
    • @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.

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 as 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 full the review from scratch and review all the files again.
  • @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
  • @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
  • @coderabbitai help to get help.

Additionally, you can add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.

CodeRabbit Configration 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

@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: 0

Review Details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL

Commits Files that changed from the base of the PR and between 196d630 and c3a2df0.
Files selected for processing (2)
  • mvikotlin/src/commonMain/kotlin/com/arkivanov/mvikotlin/core/instancekeeper/InstanceKeeperExt.kt (1 hunks)
  • mvikotlin/src/commonTest/kotlin/com/arkivanov/mvikotlin/core/instancekeeper/InstanceKeeperExtTest.kt (1 hunks)
Additional comments not posted (4)
mvikotlin/src/commonMain/kotlin/com/arkivanov/mvikotlin/core/instancekeeper/InstanceKeeperExt.kt (2)

6-6: The import of typeOf is correctly added to support the new implementation of getStore.


14-14: The updated getStore function correctly uses typeOf<T>() to generate a key, enhancing type safety and flexibility.

mvikotlin/src/commonTest/kotlin/com/arkivanov/mvikotlin/core/instancekeeper/InstanceKeeperExtTest.kt (2)

16-22: The test case WHEN_getStore_with_same_type_THEN_same_instance is well-structured and correctly verifies that the same instance is returned for the same type.


24-30: The test case WHEN_getStore_with_different_types_THEN_instances_not_same effectively verifies that different instances are returned for different types.

@arkivanov arkivanov merged commit ec5b419 into master May 28, 2024
2 checks passed
@arkivanov arkivanov deleted the typeOf-getStore branch May 28, 2024 17:36
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant