🪛(fix): nav key errors #10
Conversation
|
This is a benchmark review for experiment This pull request was cloned from Experiment configurationreview_config:
# User configuration for the review
# - benchmark - use the user config from the benchmark reviews
# - <value> - use the value directly
user_review_config:
enable_ai_review: true
enable_rule_comments: false
enable_complexity_comments: benchmark
enable_docstring_comments: benchmark
enable_security_comments: benchmark
enable_tests_comments: benchmark
enable_comment_suggestions: benchmark
enable_functionality_review: benchmark
enable_approvals: true
ai_review_config:
# The model responses to use for the experiment
# - benchmark - use the model responses from the benchmark reviews
# - llm - call the language model to generate responses
model_responses:
comments_model: benchmark
comment_validation_model: benchmark
comment_suggestion_model: benchmark
complexity_model: benchmark
docstrings_model: benchmark
functionality_model: benchmark
security_model: benchmark
tests_model: benchmark
# The pull request dataset to run the experiment on
pull_request_dataset:
- https://github.com/Speccy-Rom/Leetcode_aka_speccy-rom/pull/305
- https://github.com/W-zrd/unishare_mobile/pull/19
- https://github.com/emoss08/Trenova/pull/258
- https://github.com/emoss08/Trenova/pull/259
- https://github.com/albertobardalez/demo-marcas/pull/1
- https://github.com/jackdewinter/pymarkdown/pull/1080
- https://github.com/Remi-Gau/eCobidas/pull/307
- https://github.com/Remi-Gau/eCobidas/pull/308
- https://github.com/duyet/clickhouse-monitoring/pull/243
- https://github.com/duyet/clickhouse-monitoring/pull/244
- https://github.com/Xmaster6y/lczerolens/pull/23
- https://github.com/iphysresearch/Survey4GWML/pull/1
- https://github.com/eniocc/bdgd-tools/pull/32
- https://github.com/elixir-cloud-aai/foca/pull/217
- https://github.com/wearypossum4770/vue-times-news/pull/5
- https://github.com/bluzky/salad_storybook/pull/11
- https://github.com/yusancky/AllUp-Satwiki/pull/94
- https://github.com/gdsfactory/kfactory/pull/316
- https://github.com/gdsfactory/kfactory/pull/317
- https://github.com/agatma/metrics/pull/6
- https://github.com/nicholasadamou/i3buntu/pull/2
- https://github.com/marimo-team/marimo/pull/1411
- https://github.com/marimo-team/marimo/pull/1410
- https://github.com/marimo-team/marimo/pull/1404
- https://github.com/browniebroke/deezer-python/pull/1039
- https://github.com/JoftheV/opentelemetry-operator/pull/1
- https://github.com/osama1998H/spms/pull/66
- https://github.com/osama1998H/spms/pull/67
- https://github.com/osama1998H/spms/pull/69
review_comment_labels:
- label: correct
question: Is this comment correct?
- label: helpful
question: Is this comment helpful?
- label: comment-type
question: Is the comment type correct?
- label: comment-area
question: Is the comment area correct?
- label: llm-test
question: |
What type of LLM test could this comment become?
- 👍 - this comment is really good/important and we should always make it
- 👎 - this comment is really bad and we should never make it
- no reaction - don't turn this comment into an LLM test
# Benchmark reviews generated by running
# python -m scripts.experiment benchmark <experiment_name>
benchmark_reviews: []
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hey @sourcery-ai-experiments-bot - I've reviewed your changes and they look great!
Here's what I looked at during the review
- 🟡 General issues: 4 issues found
- 🟢 Security: all looks good
- 🟢 Testing: all looks good
- 🟢 Complexity: all looks good
Help me be more useful! Please click 👍 or 👎 on each comment to tell me if it was helpful.
|
|
||
| * 🪛(fix): multi object form layouts (#257) | ||
| * 🟡(change): bulk creates (#256) | ||
| * 🟡(change); rename query files (#255) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
issue (typo): Inconsistent punctuation in changelog entry
The semicolon in this changelog entry should be a colon to maintain consistency with the other entries.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What type of LLM test could this comment become?
- 👍 - this comment is really good/important and we should always make it
- 👎 - this comment is really bad and we should never make it
- no reaction - don't turn this comment into an LLM test
| @@ -53,6 +36,7 @@ export const ProtectedLink: React.FC< | |||
|
|
|||
| return ( | |||
| <ListItem | |||
| key={`${label}-${link}`} | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
issue (bug_risk): Potential key collision in ProtectedLink component
Using ${label}-${link} as a key might lead to collisions if label and link are not unique. Consider using a more unique identifier if possible.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What type of LLM test could this comment become?
- 👍 - this comment is really good/important and we should always make it
- 👎 - this comment is really bad and we should never make it
- no reaction - don't turn this comment into an LLM test
| @@ -78,7 +78,11 @@ const UserAvatar = React.forwardRef<HTMLDivElement, UserAvatarProps>( | |||
| user.profilePicUrl || `https://avatar.vercel.sh/${user.email}`; | |||
|
|
|||
| return ( | |||
| <div className="flex select-none items-center" ref={ref} {...props}> | |||
| <div | |||
| className="flex select-none items-center hover:cursor-pointer" | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
suggestion: Added hover cursor pointer to user avatar
Adding hover:cursor-pointer to the user avatar improves the user experience by indicating that the avatar is clickable. Ensure this change is consistent with the overall design.
| className="flex select-none items-center hover:cursor-pointer" | |
| className="flex select-none items-center cursor-pointer hover:bg-gray-200" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What type of LLM test could this comment become?
- 👍 - this comment is really good/important and we should always make it
- 👎 - this comment is really bad and we should never make it
- no reaction - don't turn this comment into an LLM test
| @@ -90,6 +90,7 @@ export const createGlobalStore = <State extends object>( | |||
| // ) as unknown as State[K]; | |||
|
|
|||
| const result = store((state) => state[key], equalityFn || Object.is); | |||
| // eslint-disable-next-line react-hooks/rules-of-hooks | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
question: Disabling eslint rule for hooks
Disabling the react-hooks/rules-of-hooks rule should be done cautiously. Ensure that this is necessary and does not introduce any issues related to hook usage.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What type of LLM test could this comment become?
- 👍 - this comment is really good/important and we should always make it
- 👎 - this comment is really bad and we should never make it
- no reaction - don't turn this comment into an LLM test
No description provided.