Skip to content

Conversation

@davidjsonn
Copy link
Contributor

Found this.approved ?? this.approved in ERC721.behavior.js which is a no-op - both operands are identical so the result is always this.approved regardless of its value. Looks like a copy-paste leftover. Cleaned it up.

@davidjsonn davidjsonn requested a review from a team as a code owner December 11, 2025 19:24
@changeset-bot
Copy link

changeset-bot bot commented Dec 11, 2025

⚠️ No Changeset found

Latest commit: 1a34dce

Merging this PR will not cause a version bump for any packages. If these changes should not result in a new version, you're good to go. If these changes should result in a version bump, you need to add a changeset.

This PR includes no changesets

When changesets are added to this PR, you'll see the packages that this PR includes changesets for and the associated semver types

Click here to learn what changesets are, and how to add one.

Click here if you're a maintainer who wants to add a changeset to this PR

@coderabbitai
Copy link
Contributor

coderabbitai bot commented Dec 11, 2025

Walkthrough

A test file for ERC721 token behavior was updated to simplify test expectations related to approval functionality. The change replaces redundant nullish coalescing expressions (this.approved ?? this.approved) with direct references to this.approved in two locations: the assertion comparing the approved address and the event argument validation for the Approval event. The modification reduces unnecessary code without altering test logic or behavior.

Pre-merge checks and finishing touches

❌ Failed checks (1 warning)
Check name Status Explanation Resolution
Docstring Coverage ⚠️ Warning Docstring coverage is 0.00% which is insufficient. The required threshold is 80.00%. You can run @coderabbitai generate docstrings to improve docstring coverage.
✅ Passed checks (2 passed)
Check name Status Explanation
Title check ✅ Passed The title accurately describes the main change: removing a redundant nullish coalescing operator from ERC721 behavior tests.
Description check ✅ Passed The description is directly related to the changeset, explaining the redundant expression found and why it was removed.
✨ Finishing touches
  • 📝 Generate docstrings
🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
  • Create PR with unit tests
  • Post copyable unit tests in a comment

📜 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 79e4988 and 8c38bc7.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • test/token/ERC721/ERC721.behavior.js (1 hunks)
⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms. You can increase the timeout in your CodeRabbit configuration to a maximum of 15 minutes (900000ms). (9)
  • GitHub Check: Redirect rules - solidity-contracts
  • GitHub Check: Header rules - solidity-contracts
  • GitHub Check: Pages changed - solidity-contracts
  • GitHub Check: slither
  • GitHub Check: tests-upgradeable
  • GitHub Check: tests
  • GitHub Check: coverage
  • GitHub Check: tests-foundry
  • GitHub Check: halmos
🔇 Additional comments (2)
test/token/ERC721/ERC721.behavior.js (2)

481-485: Approval expectation simplification is correct

Replacing this.approved ?? this.approved with this.approved keeps identical behavior and improves clarity. this.approved is always set in the surrounding setup, so this is a safe, no-op cleanup.


487-492: Approval event args cleanup maintains semantics

Using this.approved directly in .withArgs(this.owner, this.approved, tokenId) is equivalent to the previous nullish-coalescing expression and keeps the event expectation aligned with the configured approved address.


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

Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.

@Amxx Amxx changed the base branch from master to typo-fixes December 15, 2025 14:05
@Amxx Amxx merged commit bc9659f into OpenZeppelin:typo-fixes Dec 15, 2025
9 of 11 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants