chore(deps): Update dependency @easyops-cn/brick-next-pipes to ^0.7.6… #4794
Conversation
Walkthrough在 Changes
Estimated code review effort🎯 2 (Simple) | ⏱️ ~10 minutes Pre-merge checks and finishing touches❌ Failed checks (1 warning)
✅ Passed checks (2 passed)
✨ Finishing touches
🧪 Generate unit tests
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. Comment |
next-core
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Project |
next-core
|
| Branch Review |
zekun/v3-chore
|
| Run status |
|
| Run duration | 00m 27s |
| Commit |
|
| Committer | 吃猫的鱼 |
| View all properties for this run ↗︎ | |
| Test results | |
|---|---|
Failures
|
0
|
Flaky
|
0
|
Pending
|
0
|
Skipped
|
0
|
Passing
|
17
|
| View all changes introduced in this branch ↗︎ | |
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 2
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
Cache: Disabled due to data retention organization setting
Knowledge base: Disabled due to data retention organization setting
⛔ Files ignored due to path filters (1)
yarn.lockis excluded by!**/yarn.lock,!**/*.lock
📒 Files selected for processing (2)
packages/pipes/package.json(1 hunks)packages/pipes/src/index.spec.ts(3 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). (2)
- GitHub Check: build (20.x)
- GitHub Check: Analyze (javascript-typescript)
🔇 Additional comments (2)
packages/pipes/package.json (1)
42-42: 验证未完成 — 需生成 package-lock 并重跑安全审计
- 已确认 npm registry 存在 @easyops-cn/brick-next-pipes 0.7.6（输出显示 0.7.3、0.7.5、0.7.6）。
- 问题：npm audit 因 ENOLOCK（缺少 package-lock.json）失败，安全审计未完成。
- 影响文件：packages/pipes/package.json (line 42)
- 行动（在仓库根目录执行并将输出粘回本复审）:
npm i --package-lock-only
npm audit --audit-level=moderate --json | jq '.vulnerabilities'
完成后同时检查该包的 changelog/release notes 并运行回归测试以验证兼容性。packages/pipes/src/index.spec.ts (1)
269-270: 验证 unitFormat 基数（1024 vs 1000）packages/pipes/src/index.spec.ts（约第269–270行）将测试输入从 1024.0 改为 1000.0，但期望仍为 "1.00"/"1.000" MBps；仓库中未找到 unitFormat 实现（仅在 spec 中出现）。确认来源：是依赖 @easyops-cn/brick-next-pipes (^0.7.6) 在新版本将基数改为 1000，还是需要在本仓库恢复旧实现或更新测试/文档；检查 packages/pipes/package.json、lockfile 或依赖 changelog 并反馈结果。
| it.each(stringCases)( | ||
| "process %j with pipe %j should return %j", | ||
| (value, parameter, result) => { | ||
| (value, parameter) => { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
测试回调函数缺少断言逻辑
根据 AI 摘要，原本的测试有第三个参数 result 和相应的断言，但在当前代码中，测试回调函数只使用了 (value, parameter) 参数，缺少了 toEqual(result) 断言。这会导致测试不验证实际结果。
应该恢复完整的测试断言：
it.each(stringCases)(
"process %j with pipe %j should return %j",
- (value, parameter) => {
+ (value, parameter, result) => {
const [pipe, param1, param2] = parameter.split(":");
expect(
processPipes(value, [
{
type: "PipeCall",
identifier: pipe,
parameters: [+param1, +param2],
},
])
- );
+ ).toEqual(result);
}
);📝 Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| (value, parameter) => { | |
| it.each(stringCases)( | |
| "process %j with pipe %j should return %j", | |
| (value, parameter, result) => { | |
| const [pipe, param1, param2] = parameter.split(":"); | |
| expect( | |
| processPipes(value, [ | |
| { | |
| type: "PipeCall", | |
| identifier: pipe, | |
| parameters: [+param1, +param2], | |
| }, | |
| ]) | |
| ).toEqual(result); | |
| } | |
| ); |
🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
In packages/pipes/src/index.spec.ts around line 119, the test callback currently
accepts only (value, parameter) and omits the third parameter result and the
assertion, so the test does not verify the expected output; restore the callback
signature to accept (value, parameter, result) and add the missing assertion
(e.g., expect(value).toEqual(result) or expect(actual).toEqual(result)) using
the appropriate actual value variable so the test validates the expected result.
| [[1, 2, 3, 4, 5], "slice:1:3", [2, 3]], | ||
| [[1, 2, 3, 4, 5], "slice:1", [2, 3, 4, 5]], | ||
| ])("process %j with pipe %j should return %j", (value, parameter, result) => { | ||
| ])("process %j with pipe %j should return %j", (value, parameter) => { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
测试回调函数缺少断言逻辑
与上一个测试用例相同的问题，缺少对结果的断言验证。
应该恢复完整的测试断言：
- ])("process %j with pipe %j should return %j", (value, parameter) => {
+ ])("process %j with pipe %j should return %j", (value, parameter, result) => {
const [pipe, param1, param2] = parameter.split(":");
expect(
processPipes(value, [
{
type: "PipeCall",
identifier: pipe,
parameters: [+param1, +param2],
},
])
- );
+ ).toEqual(result);
});📝 Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| ])("process %j with pipe %j should return %j", (value, parameter) => { | |
| ])("process %j with pipe %j should return %j", (value, parameter, result) => { | |
| const [pipe, param1, param2] = parameter.split(":"); | |
| expect( | |
| processPipes(value, [ | |
| { | |
| type: "PipeCall", | |
| identifier: pipe, | |
| parameters: [+param1, +param2], | |
| }, | |
| ]) | |
| ).toEqual(result); | |
| }); |
🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
In packages/pipes/src/index.spec.ts around line 136, the test callback currently
only takes (value, parameter) and is missing the assertion for the expected
result — restore the full test by accepting the expected/result argument (e.g.,
(value, parameter, expected) or matching the previous test signature) and add
the assertion that compares the actual processed value to expected (using the
same assertion style as the previous test, and handle async if needed by
returning the promise or using async/await).
… (next)
依赖检查
组件之间的依赖声明，是微服务组件架构下的重要信息，请确保其正确性。
请勾选以下两组选项其中之一：
或者：
提交信息检查
Git 提交信息将决定包的版本发布及自动生成的 CHANGELOG，请检查工作内容与提交信息是否相符，并在以下每组选项中都依次确认。
破坏性变更：
feat作为提交类型。BREAKING CHANGE: 你的变更说明。新特性：
feat作为提交类型。问题修复：
fix作为提交类型。杂项工作：
即所有对下游使用者无任何影响、且没有必要显示在 CHANGELOG 中的改动，例如修改注释、测试用例、开发文档等：
chore,docs,test等作为提交类型。Summary by CodeRabbit