Fix/issues

[CorentinGS]

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Bug Fixes

  • Enhanced error handling in the LoadFromSource function to improve readability and safeguard against nil dereference errors.
  • Improved EOF error checking in the TestBytesBookSource function for better robustness.

• Chores

  • Updated the string representation of the Undefined token type for better clarity in the lexer.

[coderabbitai]

Walkthrough

This pull request introduces minor modifications across multiple files in the chess library. The changes primarily focus on error handling, token type representation, and defensive programming. The modifications include refining the TokenType string representation in lexer.go, enhancing position checking in pgn.go, improving error handling in polyglot.go, and updating error comparison in polyglot_test.go. These changes aim to improve code robustness and prevent potential nil dereference or error comparison issues.

Changes

File	Change Summary
lexer.go	Reordered Undefined token type in String() method's types slice
pgn.go	Added null check for parent position in parseVariation method
polyglot.go	Renamed error variable to readErr for clearer error handling
polyglot_test.go	Updated EOF error checking using errors.Is() function

Possibly related issues

• Issue ⚠️ Potential issue #6: The changes in lexer.go directly address the potential mismatch between TokenType constants and their string representations by modifying the types slice.

Possibly related PRs

• Fix/parser #5: The introduction of a new ParserError type could complement the defensive programming approach seen in the pgn.go changes.

Poem

🐰 A Lexer's Tale of Care and Might

In bytes and tokens, we dance so bright
Nil checks and errors, now crystal clear
Our chess code sings without a fear
Robustness blooms with each small tweak
A rabbit's code, both strong and sleek! 🏰♟️

Tip

CodeRabbit's docstrings feature is now available as part of our Early Access Program! Simply use the command @coderabbitai generate docstrings to have CodeRabbit automatically generate docstrings for your pull request. We would love to hear your feedback on Discord.

---

📜 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 fdb9968 and 8783810.

📒 Files selected for processing (4)

• lexer.go (1 hunks)
• pgn.go (1 hunks)
• polyglot.go (1 hunks)
• polyglot_test.go (2 hunks)

✅ Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (1)

• lexer.go

🧰 Additional context used

🪛 golangci-lint (1.62.2)

polyglot.go

198-198: comparing with == will fail on wrapped errors. Use errors.Is to check for a specific error

(errorlint)

🔇 Additional comments (3)

polyglot_test.go (1)

64-64: LGTM: Improved error comparison using errors.Is

The change from err != io.EOF to !errors.Is(err, io.EOF) enhances error handling by correctly identifying EOF errors even when they are wrapped.

polyglot.go (1)

197-202: LGTM: Enhanced error handling clarity

The changes improve code readability and maintainability by:

1. Using a more descriptive variable name (readErr)
2. Separating EOF check from other error handling

🧰 Tools

🪛 golangci-lint (1.62.2)

198-198: comparing with == will fail on wrapped errors. Use errors.Is to check for a specific error

(errorlint)

pgn.go (1)

522-522: LGTM: Added nil check for parent position

Good defensive programming practice to prevent nil pointer dereference. Consider adding similar nil checks in other parts of the code where position is accessed.

Let's check for other potential nil position accesses:

✅ Verification successful

LGTM: Position nil check is correctly placed

The added nil check for variationParent.parent.position is appropriate and well-placed. After analyzing the codebase:

• The position field is used consistently with proper nil checks across the codebase
• In Move struct, position represents the position after the move
• The parent-child relationship between moves maintains position state correctly
• Other accesses to position field are either:
  • After initialization
  • In lexer/parser position tracking (different context, refers to token position)
  • With proper nil checks in place

🏁 Scripts executed

The following scripts were executed for the analysis:

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Description: Find potential nil position accesses
# Look for direct position field access without nil checks

ast-grep --pattern 'position := $x.position'
ast-grep --pattern '$x.position.'

Length of output: 82

---

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Let's try a different approach to find position field accesses
# Search for lines containing '.position' in Go files
rg -U --type go '\.position' -A 2 -B 2

# Also search for struct definitions containing position field
ast-grep --pattern 'type $_ struct {
  $$$
  position $_
  $$$
}'

Length of output: 14780

---

🪧 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. (Beta)
• @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.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 50.00000% with 3 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 73.70%. Comparing base (fdb9968) to head (8783810).
Report is 3 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
polyglot.go	50.00%	1 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️
lexer.go	0.00%	1 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main      #13      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   73.71%   73.70%   -0.02%     
==========================================
  Files          28       28              
  Lines        4935     4936       +1     
==========================================
  Hits         3638     3638              
- Misses       1167     1168       +1     
  Partials      130      130              

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.