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

fix!: typo in error codes #2004

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jul 2, 2024
Merged

fix!: typo in error codes #2004

merged 1 commit into from
Jul 2, 2024

Conversation

sainoe
Copy link
Contributor

@sainoe sainoe commented Jul 2, 2024

Please go to the Preview tab and select the appropriate sub-template:

  • Production code - for types fix, feat, and refactor.
  • Docs - for documentation changes.
  • Others - for changes that do not affect production code.

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • Bug Fixes
    • Adjusted error messages to reflect correct indices, providing more accurate error reporting for consumer modification proposals, unbonding times, addresses, authorization, and consumer chain IDs.

@sainoe sainoe requested a review from a team as a code owner July 2, 2024 09:11
Copy link
Contributor

coderabbitai bot commented Jul 2, 2024

Walkthrough

The changes involve adjusting the indices of error constants in the errors.go file in the x/ccv/provider/types package. This affects the numerical values associated with specific error messages, which include ErrInvalidConsumerModificationProposal, ErrNoUnbondingTime, ErrInvalidAddress, ErrUnauthorized, and ErrBlankConsumerChainID. These alterations ensure that the error constants are correctly indexed for their respective messages.

Changes

File Change Summary
x/ccv/provider/types/errors.go Adjusted the indices of ErrInvalidConsumerModificationProposal, ErrNoUnbondingTime, ErrInvalidAddress, ErrUnauthorized, and ErrBlankConsumerChainID by decrementing each by 1.

Tip

Early access features: enabled

We are currently testing the following features in early access:

  • OpenAI gpt-4o model for code reviews and chat: OpenAI claims that this model is better at understanding and generating code than the previous models. We seek your feedback over the next few weeks before making it generally available.

Note:

  • You can enable or disable early access features from the CodeRabbit UI or by updating the CodeRabbit configuration file.
  • Please join our Discord Community to provide feedback and report issues.
  • OSS projects are currently opted into early access features by default.

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.
    • @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 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 do a full 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 configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
  • @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.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the C:x/provider Assigned automatically by the PR labeler label Jul 2, 2024
Copy link
Contributor

@p-offtermatt p-offtermatt left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Approved. I guess no test failed because skipping a code isn't actually breaking anything, just bad practice?

@sainoe
Copy link
Contributor Author

sainoe commented Jul 2, 2024

Yes, our tests rarely check error codes. In this case, it could have been state-breaking to have a different code for ErrInvalidConsumerModificationProposal in v5.1.x and v4.3.x.

@sainoe sainoe merged commit 9ee0312 into release/v5.1.x Jul 2, 2024
13 of 16 checks passed
@sainoe sainoe deleted the sainoe/fix-error-code branch July 2, 2024 13:20
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
C:x/provider Assigned automatically by the PR labeler
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants