[ECO-4952] Start implementing room lifecycle spec #54
Conversation
WalkthroughThe pull request introduces significant enhancements to the AblyChat SDK, focusing on room lifecycle management, improved error handling, and structured testing practices. Key updates include the addition of new error codes to the Changes
Possibly related issues
Possibly related PRs
Suggested reviewers
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? 🪧 TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
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)
Other keywords and placeholders
CodeRabbit Configuration File (
|
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 9
Outside diff range and nitpick comments (6)
Sources/AblyChat/Errors.swift (2)
37-55: Address the TODOs regarding status code mappingsThe
statusCodeproperty currently includes TODO comments indicating that the status codes are guesses and need revisiting once the specification questions are resolved. Finalizing these status codes based on the latest specification is crucial for accurate error handling.Would you like assistance in updating these status codes according to the latest specification, or should we open a GitHub issue to track this task?
187-190: Document the use ofNSUnderlyingErrorKeyfor error causationThe TODO comment suggests that using
NSUnderlyingErrorKeyto populatecausemight be an implementation detail. It's important to document this behavior to clarify how thecauseis set inARTErrorInfo.Shall I assist in drafting documentation for this behavior or open a GitHub issue to ensure it is addressed?
Sources/AblyChat/RoomLifecycleManager.swift (2)
117-118: Implement asynchronous behavior as per CHA-RL1h5The TODO comment indicates that the asynchronous aspect of CHA-RL1h5 is yet to be implemented. This is important for proper adherence to the room lifecycle specification.
Would you like assistance in implementing the asynchronous behavior as per the specification, or should we open a GitHub issue to track this task?
205-205: Determine the correct wait time for retriesThe TODO comment questions the appropriate wait time before retrying detach operations. Defining an optimal retry interval is important to balance performance and resource utilization.
Shall I help in determining the suitable wait time based on best practices or the latest specification, or should we open a GitHub issue to address this?
Tests/AblyChatTests/RoomLifecycleManagerTests.swift (2)
487-487: Clarify error source in detachment failure testThe TODO comment raises a question about whether to use
errorReasonor the error thrown by the contributor'sdetachcall. Resolving this is important for accurate testing of error handling.Would you like assistance in determining the correct error source according to the specification for this test case, or should we open a GitHub issue to track this question?
503-504: Address the untested spec point CHA-RL2h2The comment indicates difficulty in testing the specification point CHA-RL2h2 due to concurrency issues. It's important to find a way to test this to ensure full coverage.
Can I help devise a testing strategy to cover this spec point, perhaps by using synchronization primitives or mock objects to control concurrency, or should we open a GitHub issue to address this challenge?
Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Files selected for processing (9)
- CONTRIBUTING.md (1 hunks)
- Sources/AblyChat/Errors.swift (2 hunks)
- Sources/AblyChat/RoomFeature.swift (1 hunks)
- Sources/AblyChat/RoomLifecycleManager.swift (1 hunks)
- Sources/AblyChat/SimpleClock.swift (1 hunks)
- Tests/AblyChatTests/Helpers/Helpers.swift (1 hunks)
- Tests/AblyChatTests/Mocks/MockRoomLifecycleContributorChannel.swift (1 hunks)
- Tests/AblyChatTests/Mocks/MockSimpleClock.swift (1 hunks)
- Tests/AblyChatTests/RoomLifecycleManagerTests.swift (1 hunks)
Additional context used
LanguageTool
CONTRIBUTING.md
[style] ~40-~40: Consider removing “of” to be more concise
Context: ...> of n test cases which, together, test all of the functionality documented in the spec it...(ALL_OF_THE)
[grammar] ~41-~41: In American English, the usual prepositions after ‘different’ are “from” or “than”.
Context: ...ted in the spec item. This is different to@specOneOfin that it implies that th...(DIFFERENT_TO)
[style] ~43-~43: To form a complete sentence, be sure to include a subject or ‘there’.
Context: ... test this spec item.<spec-item-id>should be a spec item identifier such as `CHA-...(MISSING_IT_THERE)
[misspelling] ~73-~73: Use “an” instead of ‘a’ if the following word starts with a vowel sound, e.g. ‘an article’, ‘an hour’.
Context: ...a spec point. It must be accompanied by a explanation of why this spec point is n...(EN_A_VS_AN)
Additional comments not posted (6)
Sources/AblyChat/RoomFeature.swift (1)
1-8: Well-definedRoomFeatureenumThe
RoomFeatureenum clearly enumerates the features offered by a chat room, enhancing code clarity and maintainability.Tests/AblyChatTests/Mocks/MockSimpleClock.swift (1)
4-10: Appropriate use of actor forMockSimpleClockThe
MockSimpleClockactor correctly records sleep durations without causing actual delays, which is suitable for testing asynchronous code. The use of an actor ensures thread-safe access tosleepCallArguments.Sources/AblyChat/SimpleClock.swift (1)
1-7:SimpleClockprotocol is well-definedThe
SimpleClockprotocol provides a useful abstraction for sleeping tasks, enabling mocking in tests due to the absence of the SwiftClocktype in older OS versions.Tests/AblyChatTests/Helpers/Helpers.swift (1)
8-16: Enhancement: Added 'cause' parameter toassertIsChatErrorThe inclusion of the
causeparameter allows for more precise testing of nested errors, improving the accuracy of error assertions.Tests/AblyChatTests/Mocks/MockRoomLifecycleContributorChannel.swift (1)
4-95: Comprehensive mock implementation forRoomLifecycleContributorChannelThe
MockRoomLifecycleContributorChannelprovides a flexible and robust mock for testing channel lifecycle behaviors. The use of enums to define behavior and results allows for versatile testing scenarios, and the actor model ensures thread safety.Tests/AblyChatTests/RoomLifecycleManagerTests.swift (1)
695-703: Confirm wait time behavior for failed contributors during releaseThe TODO comment questions whether the wait should still occur when a contributor enters the FAILED state during release, as per spec CHA-RL3f.
Let's verify the expected behavior according to the specification. Based on CHA-RL3f, it's important to confirm whether the wait time applies in this scenario.
Would you like me to research the specification further to clarify this point, or should we open a GitHub issue to resolve this ambiguity?
lawrence-forooghian
force-pushed
the
28-start-implementing-room-lifecycle-spec
branch
2 times, most recently
from
b27744c to
e940d8b
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Caution
Inline review comments failed to post
Actionable comments posted: 4
Outside diff range and nitpick comments (1)
CONTRIBUTING.md (1)
73-73: Typographical Correction: Remove Redundant WordsConsider removing "of" to make the sentence more concise.
Suggested change:
- It must be accompanied by an explanation of why this spec point is not tested. + It must be accompanied by an explanation why this spec point is not tested.
Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Files selected for processing (9)
- CONTRIBUTING.md (1 hunks)
- Sources/AblyChat/Errors.swift (2 hunks)
- Sources/AblyChat/RoomFeature.swift (1 hunks)
- Sources/AblyChat/RoomLifecycleManager.swift (1 hunks)
- Sources/AblyChat/SimpleClock.swift (1 hunks)
- Tests/AblyChatTests/Helpers/Helpers.swift (1 hunks)
- Tests/AblyChatTests/Mocks/MockRoomLifecycleContributorChannel.swift (1 hunks)
- Tests/AblyChatTests/Mocks/MockSimpleClock.swift (1 hunks)
- Tests/AblyChatTests/RoomLifecycleManagerTests.swift (1 hunks)
Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (1)
- Tests/AblyChatTests/Mocks/MockSimpleClock.swift
Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (5)
- Sources/AblyChat/RoomFeature.swift
- Sources/AblyChat/SimpleClock.swift
- Tests/AblyChatTests/Helpers/Helpers.swift
- Tests/AblyChatTests/Mocks/MockRoomLifecycleContributorChannel.swift
- Tests/AblyChatTests/RoomLifecycleManagerTests.swift
Additional context used
Learnings (1)
Sources/AblyChat/RoomLifecycleManager.swift (4)
Learnt from: lawrence-forooghian PR: ably-labs/ably-chat-swift#54 File: Sources/AblyChat/RoomLifecycleManager.swift:265-266 Timestamp: 2024-09-18T18:29:10.329Z Learning: In `RoomLifecycleManager.swift`, the use of `try!` with `await` for `clock.sleep` is intentional due to reasons outlined in the associated GitHub issue. Do not suggest changing this usage unless the issue is resolved.Learnt from: lawrence-forooghian PR: ably-labs/ably-chat-swift#54 File: Sources/AblyChat/RoomLifecycleManager.swift:262-262 Timestamp: 2024-09-18T18:29:03.379Z Learning: When a TODO comment references an associated GitHub issue, recognize that the issue is being tracked and avoid suggesting fixes that are already planned.Learnt from: lawrence-forooghian PR: ably-labs/ably-chat-swift#9 File: Sources/AblyChat/RoomStatus.swift:3-33 Timestamp: 2024-08-28T13:01:11.701Z Learning: When reviewing code, avoid commenting on TODOs that already have a linked GitHub issue, as per the user's preference.Learnt from: lawrence-forooghian PR: ably-labs/ably-chat-swift#54 File: Sources/AblyChat/RoomLifecycleManager.swift:122-124 Timestamp: 2024-09-18T18:29:39.415Z Learning: In `RoomLifecycleManager`, handling of unexpected contributor states after attach failure will be addressed in issue #47.
LanguageTool
CONTRIBUTING.md
[grammar] ~41-~41: In American English, the usual prepositions after ‘different’ are “from” or “than”.
Context: ...ted in the spec item. This is different to@specOneOfin that it implies that th...(DIFFERENT_TO)
[uncategorized] ~43-~43: Possible missing comma found.
Context: ...em-id>parameter should be a spec item identifier such asCHA-RL3g`. Each of the above ...(AI_HYDRA_LEO_MISSING_COMMA)
Additional comments not posted (5)
Sources/AblyChat/RoomLifecycleManager.swift (2)
168-222: Possible Unhandled Errors During Detach OperationIn the
performDetachOperationmethod, errors from detaching contributors are accumulated, but the loop continues without handling non-fatal errors immediately. This could lead to multiple errors being thrown, potentially obscuring the root cause.Consider collecting all errors and providing a comprehensive summary after attempting to detach all contributors. Alternatively, handle critical errors promptly if they should halt the detachment process.
246-269: Potential Infinite Loop Without Cancellation HandlingIn the
performReleaseOperationmethod, thedetachLoopcontinues indefinitely until the contributor is successfully detached. If the task is cancelled, this loop may prevent the task from terminating properly, potentially leading to resource leaks or unresponsive behavior.Consider adding a check for task cancellation within the loop to handle cancellations gracefully:
detachLoop: while true { let contributorState = await contributor.channel.state // CHA-RL3e guard contributorState != .failed else { logger.log(message: "Contributor \(contributor) is FAILED; skipping detach", level: .info) break } logger.log(message: "Detaching contributor \(contributor)", level: .info) do { try await contributor.channel.detach() break detachLoop } catch { // CHA-RL3f: Retry until detach succeeds, with a pause before each attempt logger.log(message: "Failed to detach contributor \(contributor), error \(error). Will retry in 1s.", level: .info) + if Task.isCancelled { + logger.log(message: "Task was cancelled during detach operation.", level: .info) + return + } // TODO: Make this not trap in the case where the Task is cancelled (as part of the broader https://github.com/ably-labs/ably-chat-swift/issues/29 for handling task cancellation) // TODO: what's the correct wait time? (https://github.com/ably/specification/pull/200#discussion_r1763822207) // swiftlint:disable:next force_try try! await clock.sleep(nanoseconds: 1_000_000_000) // Loop repeats } }Since this change relates to handling task cancellations, verify that the cancellation behavior aligns with the expected operation. Ensure that the task responds appropriately when cancellation is requested.
CONTRIBUTING.md (3)
31-45: Comprehensive Guidelines for Test AttributionThe added section provides clear and detailed instructions on how to attribute tests to spec points using the
@spec,@specOneOf, and@specPartialtags. This will greatly improve test coverage traceability and ensure alignment with the Chat SDK features spec. The inclusion of examples further enhances understanding for contributors.Tools
LanguageTool
[grammar] ~41-~41: In American English, the usual prepositions after ‘different’ are “from” or “than”.
Context: ...ted in the spec item. This is different to@specOneOfin that it implies that th...(DIFFERENT_TO)
[uncategorized] ~43-~43: Possible missing comma found.
Context: ...em-id>parameter should be a spec item identifier such asCHA-RL3g`. Each of the above ...(AI_HYDRA_LEO_MISSING_COMMA)
47-66: Effective Use of Examples to Illustrate GuidelinesThe provided examples effectively demonstrate how to use the attribution tags in practice. They cover various scenarios, including single tests covering a spec point, multiple tests collaborating to cover a spec point, and partial test coverage. This clarity will aid developers in correctly applying the guidelines.
67-68: Proactive Planning for Coverage ReportingMentioning issue #46 to write a script for generating coverage reports shows foresight and a commitment to maintainability. This will help in assessing the implementation progress against the feature spec.
Comments failed to post (4)
Sources/AblyChat/Errors.swift (4)
164-175: Missing
returnStatements incauseComputed PropertyThe
causecomputed property requiresreturnstatements in each case of theswitchstatement to return the appropriateARTErrorInfo?value. The current implementation lacksreturnkeywords, leading to a compilation error.Apply this diff to correct the implementation:
internal var cause: ARTErrorInfo? { switch self { case let .attachmentFailed(_, underlyingError): - underlyingError + return underlyingError case let .detachmentFailed(_, underlyingError): - underlyingError + return underlyingError case .inconsistentRoomOptions, .roomInFailedState, .roomIsReleasing, .roomIsReleased: - nil + return nil } }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./// The ``ARTErrorInfo.cause`` that should be returned for this error. internal var cause: ARTErrorInfo? { switch self { case let .attachmentFailed(_, underlyingError): return underlyingError case let .detachmentFailed(_, underlyingError): return underlyingError case .inconsistentRoomOptions, .roomInFailedState, .roomIsReleasing, .roomIsReleased: return nil
37-56: Missing
returnStatements instatusCodeComputed PropertyIn the
statusCodecomputed property, each case in theswitchstatement should explicitly return a value. Thereturnkeyword is currently missing before the status codes400and500, which will lead to a compilation error.Apply this diff to add the missing
returnstatements:internal var statusCode: Int { // TODO: These are currently a guess, revisit once outstanding spec question re status codes is answered (https://github.com/ably/specification/pull/200#discussion_r1755222945), and also revisit in https://github.com/ably-labs/ably-chat-swift/issues/32 switch self { case .inconsistentRoomOptions, .messagesDetachmentFailed, .presenceDetachmentFailed, .reactionsDetachmentFailed, .occupancyDetachmentFailed, .typingDetachmentFailed, .roomInFailedState, .roomIsReleasing, .roomIsReleased: - 400 + return 400 case .messagesAttachmentFailed, .presenceAttachmentFailed, .reactionsAttachmentFailed, .occupancyAttachmentFailed, .typingAttachmentFailed: // TODO: This is currently a best guess based on the limited status code information given in the spec at time of writing (i.e. CHA-RL1h4); it's not clear to me whether these error codes are always meant to have the same status code. Revisit once aforementioned spec question re status codes answered. - 500 + return 500 } }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.// TODO: These are currently a guess, revisit once outstanding spec question re status codes is answered (https://github.com/ably/specification/pull/200#discussion_r1755222945), and also revisit in https://github.com/ably-labs/ably-chat-swift/issues/32 switch self { case .inconsistentRoomOptions, .messagesDetachmentFailed, .presenceDetachmentFailed, .reactionsDetachmentFailed, .occupancyDetachmentFailed, .typingDetachmentFailed, .roomInFailedState, .roomIsReleasing, .roomIsReleased: return 400 case .messagesAttachmentFailed, .presenceAttachmentFailed, .reactionsAttachmentFailed, .occupancyAttachmentFailed, .typingAttachmentFailed: // TODO: This is currently a best guess based on the limited status code information given in the spec at time of writing (i.e. CHA-RL1h4); it's not clear to me whether these error codes are always meant to have the same status code. Revisit once aforementioned spec question re status codes answered. return 500 }
145-162: Missing
returnStatements inlocalizedDescriptionComputed PropertyIn the
localizedDescriptioncomputed property, each case in theswitchstatement should include areturnstatement to return the corresponding description string. The absence ofreturnkeywords will result in a compilation error.Apply this diff to add the missing
returnstatements:internal var localizedDescription: String { switch self { case let .inconsistentRoomOptions(requested, existing): - "Rooms.get(roomID:options:) was called with a different set of room options than was used on a previous call. You must first release the existing room instance using Rooms.release(roomID:). Requested options: \(requested), existing options: \(existing)" + return "Rooms.get(roomID:options:) was called with a different set of room options than was used on a previous call. You must first release the existing room instance using Rooms.release(roomID:). Requested options: \(requested), existing options: \(existing)" case let .attachmentFailed(feature, _): return Self.localizedDescription(forFailureOfOperation: .attach, feature: feature) case let .detachmentFailed(feature, _): return Self.localizedDescription(forFailureOfOperation: .detach, feature: feature) case .roomInFailedState: - "Cannot perform operation because the room is in a failed state." + return "Cannot perform operation because the room is in a failed state." case .roomIsReleasing: - "Cannot perform operation because the room is in a releasing state." + return "Cannot perform operation because the room is in a releasing state." case .roomIsReleased: - "Cannot perform operation because the room is in a released state." + return "Cannot perform operation because the room is in a released state." } }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./// The ``ARTErrorInfo.localizedDescription`` that should be returned for this error. internal var localizedDescription: String { switch self { case let .inconsistentRoomOptions(requested, existing): return "Rooms.get(roomID:options:) was called with a different set of room options than was used on a previous call. You must first release the existing room instance using Rooms.release(roomID:). Requested options: \(requested), existing options: \(existing)" case let .attachmentFailed(feature, _): return Self.localizedDescription(forFailureOfOperation: .attach, feature: feature) case let .detachmentFailed(feature, _): return Self.localizedDescription(forFailureOfOperation: .detach, feature: feature) case .roomInFailedState: return "Cannot perform operation because the room is in a failed state." case .roomIsReleasing: return "Cannot perform operation because the room is in a releasing state." case .roomIsReleased: return "Cannot perform operation because the room is in a released state." } }
75-111: Missing
returnStatements incodeComputed PropertyThe
codecomputed property in theChatErrorenum requires explicitreturnstatements in each case of theswitchstatement. Currently, thereturnkeyword is missing, which will cause a compilation error.Apply this diff to add the missing
returnstatements:internal var code: ErrorCode { switch self { case .inconsistentRoomOptions: - .inconsistentRoomOptions + return .inconsistentRoomOptions case let .attachmentFailed(feature, _): switch feature { case .messages: - .messagesAttachmentFailed + return .messagesAttachmentFailed case .occupancy: - .occupancyAttachmentFailed + return .occupancyAttachmentFailed case .presence: - .presenceAttachmentFailed + return .presenceAttachmentFailed case .reactions: - .reactionsAttachmentFailed + return .reactionsAttachmentFailed case .typing: - .typingAttachmentFailed + return .typingAttachmentFailed } case let .detachmentFailed(feature, _): switch feature { case .messages: - .messagesDetachmentFailed + return .messagesDetachmentFailed case .occupancy: - .occupancyDetachmentFailed + return .occupancyDetachmentFailed case .presence: - .presenceDetachmentFailed + return .presenceDetachmentFailed case .reactions: - .reactionsDetachmentFailed + return .reactionsDetachmentFailed case .typing: - .typingDetachmentFailed + return .typingDetachmentFailed } case .roomInFailedState: - .roomInFailedState + return .roomInFailedState case .roomIsReleasing: - .roomIsReleasing + return .roomIsReleasing case .roomIsReleased: - .roomIsReleased + return .roomIsReleased } }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.switch self { case .inconsistentRoomOptions: return .inconsistentRoomOptions case let .attachmentFailed(feature, _): switch feature { case .messages: return .messagesAttachmentFailed case .occupancy: return .occupancyAttachmentFailed case .presence: return .presenceAttachmentFailed case .reactions: return .reactionsAttachmentFailed case .typing: return .typingAttachmentFailed } case let .detachmentFailed(feature, _): switch feature { case .messages: return .messagesDetachmentFailed case .occupancy: return .occupancyDetachmentFailed case .presence: return .presenceDetachmentFailed case .reactions: return .reactionsDetachmentFailed case .typing: return .typingDetachmentFailed } case .roomInFailedState: return .roomInFailedState case .roomIsReleasing: return .roomIsReleasing case .roomIsReleased: return .roomIsReleased } }
lawrence-forooghian
force-pushed
the
28-start-implementing-room-lifecycle-spec
branch
from
e940d8b to
df9ab14
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
Outside diff range and nitpick comments (2)
Sources/AblyChat/Errors.swift (2)
37-55: Status codes look good for detachment failures and room state errors, but reconsider for attachment failures.
- Using 400 for detachment failures and room state errors seems appropriate as they likely indicate client errors.
- For attachment failures, consider using 4xx status codes if the failure is due to client error. 500 should be reserved for server-side issues.
187-190: Good update to populate thecauseproperty fromchatError.cause.This enhances error reporting by providing the underlying error.
Please follow up on the TODO comment to consider documenting the usage of
NSUnderlyingErrorKeyto populatecauseinably-cocoa.
Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Files selected for processing (9)
- CONTRIBUTING.md (1 hunks)
- Sources/AblyChat/Errors.swift (2 hunks)
- Sources/AblyChat/RoomFeature.swift (1 hunks)
- Sources/AblyChat/RoomLifecycleManager.swift (1 hunks)
- Sources/AblyChat/SimpleClock.swift (1 hunks)
- Tests/AblyChatTests/Helpers/Helpers.swift (1 hunks)
- Tests/AblyChatTests/Mocks/MockRoomLifecycleContributorChannel.swift (1 hunks)
- Tests/AblyChatTests/Mocks/MockSimpleClock.swift (1 hunks)
- Tests/AblyChatTests/RoomLifecycleManagerTests.swift (1 hunks)
Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (6)
- Sources/AblyChat/RoomFeature.swift
- Sources/AblyChat/SimpleClock.swift
- Tests/AblyChatTests/Helpers/Helpers.swift
- Tests/AblyChatTests/Mocks/MockRoomLifecycleContributorChannel.swift
- Tests/AblyChatTests/Mocks/MockSimpleClock.swift
- Tests/AblyChatTests/RoomLifecycleManagerTests.swift
Additional context used
Learnings (1)
Sources/AblyChat/RoomLifecycleManager.swift (4)
Learnt from: lawrence-forooghian PR: ably-labs/ably-chat-swift#54 File: Sources/AblyChat/RoomLifecycleManager.swift:265-266 Timestamp: 2024-09-18T18:29:10.329Z Learning: In `RoomLifecycleManager.swift`, the use of `try!` with `await` for `clock.sleep` is intentional due to reasons outlined in the associated GitHub issue. Do not suggest changing this usage unless the issue is resolved.Learnt from: lawrence-forooghian PR: ably-labs/ably-chat-swift#54 File: Sources/AblyChat/RoomLifecycleManager.swift:262-262 Timestamp: 2024-09-18T18:29:03.379Z Learning: When a TODO comment references an associated GitHub issue, recognize that the issue is being tracked and avoid suggesting fixes that are already planned.Learnt from: lawrence-forooghian PR: ably-labs/ably-chat-swift#9 File: Sources/AblyChat/RoomStatus.swift:3-33 Timestamp: 2024-08-28T13:01:11.701Z Learning: When reviewing code, avoid commenting on TODOs that already have a linked GitHub issue, as per the user's preference.Learnt from: lawrence-forooghian PR: ably-labs/ably-chat-swift#54 File: Sources/AblyChat/RoomLifecycleManager.swift:0-0 Timestamp: 2024-09-18T18:34:37.252Z Learning: In `RoomLifecycleManager`, handling of unexpected contributor states after attach failure will be addressed in issue #49.
LanguageTool
CONTRIBUTING.md
[grammar] ~41-~41: In American English, the usual prepositions after ‘different’ are “from” or “than”.
Context: ...ted in the spec item. This is different to@specOneOfin that it implies that th...(DIFFERENT_TO)
[uncategorized] ~43-~43: Possible missing comma found.
Context: ...em-id>parameter should be a spec item identifier such asCHA-RL3g`. Each of the above ...(AI_HYDRA_LEO_MISSING_COMMA)
Additional comments not posted (11)
CONTRIBUTING.md (1)
31-73: Excellent addition of testing guidelines!The new testing guidelines introduce a structured approach to attributing tests to spec points using the
@spec,@specOneOf,@specPartial, and@specUntestedtags. This enhances the clarity and organization of the test suite, making it easier to track test coverage and identify gaps in the implementation of the feature spec.The code examples provided are clear and demonstrate the usage of the tags effectively. The requirement for an explanation when using the
@specUntestedtag ensures that the absence of tests is justified, promoting a disciplined approach to testing.These changes will greatly improve the maintainability and documentation of the test suite, ensuring that tests are well-aligned with the specifications.
Tools
LanguageTool
[grammar] ~41-~41: In American English, the usual prepositions after ‘different’ are “from” or “than”.
Context: ...ted in the spec item. This is different to@specOneOfin that it implies that th...(DIFFERENT_TO)
[uncategorized] ~43-~43: Possible missing comma found.
Context: ...em-id>parameter should be a spec item identifier such asCHA-RL3g`. Each of the above ...(AI_HYDRA_LEO_MISSING_COMMA)
Sources/AblyChat/Errors.swift (4)
19-23: Excellent addition of granular error codes for attachment failures!The new error codes provide a clean way to distinguish attachment failures for different room features. The chosen naming convention and error code range are very appropriate.
25-29: Great job adding granular error codes for detachment failures!The new error codes provide a clean way to distinguish detachment failures for different room features. The naming convention is consistent with the attachment failure codes, and the chosen error code range provides a clear separation.
31-33: Nice addition of error codes for room state errors!The new error codes cover critical room states that could lead to errors. The naming is clear, and the error code range is distinct from other error categories.
67-175: Excellent enhancements to theChatErrorenum for better error handling and reporting!
- The new
attachmentFailedanddetachmentFailedcases, along with the associatedcode,localizedDescription, andcauseproperties, significantly improve the error handling and reporting capabilities.- Mapping the
ChatErrorcases to appropriateErrorCodevalues in thecodeproperty is spot on.- The
localizedDescriptionproperty, with the help of the new helper method, constructs very clear and contextual error messages.- Returning the underlying error in the
causeproperty for attachment and detachment failures is a great addition for better error reporting.Sources/AblyChat/RoomLifecycleManager.swift (6)
3-15: Async methods and state inRoomLifecycleContributorChannelprotocolThe use of async methods for
attachanddetachinstead of callbacks is a good design choice. It makes it easier to create mocks for testing, as the type system can ensure that the callbacks areSendable.Marking the channel's mutable state as
asyncis a clever way to highlight the possibility of concurrent modifications from a separate thread. While it doesn't solve concurrency issues, it makes them more visible to the caller.The TODO comment indicates that the resolution of these concurrency issues will be tracked in a separate issue, which is a good approach.
17-274:RoomLifecycleManageractor designThe use of an actor for encapsulating the lifecycle management logic and state is a good design choice. It ensures thread safety and consistency by protecting the internal state and providing a clear interface for interacting with the lifecycle manager.
The generic
Channeltype parameter constrained to theRoomLifecycleContributorChannelprotocol allows for flexibility and testability. It enables the use of different channel implementations, including mocks for testing purposes.Marking the
currentanderrorproperties asinternal private(set)is a good practice. It ensures that these properties can only be modified within the actor, maintaining the integrity of the lifecycle state.The
onChangemethod provides a convenient way for subscribers to react to room status changes. This is useful for updating the UI or performing other actions based on lifecycle events.The
changeStatusandemitStatusChangemethods encapsulate the logic for updating the current state and notifying subscribers. This promotes code reuse and maintainability by centralizing the state management logic.Overall, the
RoomLifecycleManageractor is well-designed and follows good practices for managing the lifecycle of real-time chat room contributors.
19-24:Contributorstruct designThe
Contributorstruct provides a clean and concise way to encapsulate the contributor's feature and channel. It keeps the related data together and makes it easy to pass around the contributor information.The
featureproperty is a nice touch for providing context when throwing errors related to contributor operations. It allows for more specific error messages that indicate which feature encountered an issue.The
channelproperty's type is constrained by the generic type parameter of theRoomLifecycleManageractor. This ensures that the channel conforms to theRoomLifecycleContributorChannelprotocol, providing a consistent interface for interacting with the contributor's channel.Overall, the
Contributorstruct is a well-designed and purposeful addition to theRoomLifecycleManageractor.
71-130:performAttachOperationmethod implementationThe
performAttachOperationmethod closely follows the CHA-RL1 specification for theATTACHoperation. It correctly implements the required state transitions and error handling based on the current state and the result of attaching the contributors.The use of a
switchstatement to handle different current states is a clear and concise way to implement the state-based behavior. It makes the code readable and easy to understand.The method includes informative logging messages at key points, such as when attaching a contributor or handling a failed attachment. These messages are helpful for debugging and understanding the lifecycle flow.
The error handling for failed contributor attachments is comprehensive and follows the specification rules. It takes into account the contributor's state and throws the appropriate errors based on the specification.
The TODO comment indicates that the asynchronous part of CHA-RL1h5 needs to be implemented, and it is tracked in a separate issue. This is a good practice for keeping the code maintainable and ensuring that the remaining work is not forgotten.
Overall, the
performAttachOperationmethod is well-implemented and adheres to the CHA-RL1 specification.
149-226:performDetachOperationmethod implementationThe
performDetachOperationmethod closely follows the CHA-RL2 specification for theDETACHoperation. It correctly implements the required state transitions and error handling based on the current state and the result of detaching the contributors.The use of a
switchstatement to handle different current states is a clear and concise way to implement the state-based behavior. It makes the code readable and easy to understand.The method includes informative logging messages at key points, such as when detaching a contributor or handling a failed detachment. These messages are helpful for debugging and understanding the lifecycle flow.
The error handling for failed contributor detachments is comprehensive and follows the specification rules. It takes into account the contributor's state and handles the errors accordingly, such as storing the first detach error to be thrown later and transitioning to the
failedstate if necessary.The retry logic for non-failed contributors is implemented as per the specification, with a pause between each attempt. This ensures that the detachment is retried until it succeeds, as required by the specification.
The TODO comment indicates that the correct wait time for the retry pause needs to be determined, and it is tracked in a separate discussion. This is a good practice for keeping the code maintainable and ensuring that the remaining work is not forgotten.
Overall, the
performDetachOperationmethod is well-implemented and adheres to the CHA-RL2 specification.
228-273:performReleaseOperationmethod implementationThe
performReleaseOperationmethod closely follows the CHA-RL3 specification for theRELEASEoperation. It correctly implements the required state transitions and contributor detachment logic based on the current state.The use of a
switchstatement to handle different current states is a clear and concise way to implement the state-based behavior. It makes the code readable and easy to understand.The method includes informative logging messages at key points, such as when skipping a failed contributor or retrying a detachment. These messages are
lawrence-forooghian
force-pushed
the
28-start-implementing-room-lifecycle-spec
branch
from
df9ab14 to
84711d5
Compare
lawrence-forooghian
changed the base branch from
main
to
fix-swiftlint-version
|
Will address conflicts and switch to Swift Testing now that #61 is merged. |
lawrence-forooghian
force-pushed
the
28-start-implementing-room-lifecycle-spec
branch
from
84711d5 to
30cd397
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
Outside diff range and nitpick comments (5)
CONTRIBUTING.md (1)
45-67: LGTM: Comprehensive examples and future plansThe additional details and examples effectively illustrate the proper use of each tag. The mention of the future script (issue #46) provides valuable context for the purpose of these tags in generating reports on spec implementation coverage.
Suggestion: Consider adding a brief note about the importance of keeping these tags up-to-date as the codebase evolves, to ensure the accuracy of the generated reports.
Sources/AblyChat/Errors.swift (4)
19-33: LGTM! Consider adding comments for new error codes.The new error codes for attachment/detachment failures and room state errors are well-organized and align with the PR objectives. They follow a consistent naming convention and numbering scheme.
Consider adding brief comments for each new error code to explain their purpose, similar to the existing comment for
inconsistentRoomOptions. This would improve code documentation and make it easier for other developers to understand the purpose of each error code.
37-55: LGTM! Consider tracking the TODO comment.The
statusCodeproperty has been updated correctly to include the new error cases. The assignment of HTTP status codes (400 and 500) for different error types is logical.The TODO comment indicates that the status codes are currently a best guess and may need revision once the specification question is answered. To ensure this is not overlooked, would you like me to create a GitHub issue to track this TODO and link it to the specification question (ably/specification#200 (comment))?
114-162: LGTM! Consider using string interpolation for better readability.The new helper method
localizedDescription(forFailureOfOperation:feature:)and the updatedlocalizedDescriptionproperty greatly improve the error message generation. The implementation is clean, reusable, and follows Swift best practices.Consider using string interpolation for the error messages in the
localizedDescriptionproperty to improve readability. For example:case .roomInFailedState: "Cannot perform operation because the room is in a failed state."Could be written as:
case .roomInFailedState: "Cannot perform operation because the room is in a \(self) state."This would make it easier to maintain consistent wording across similar error messages.
Line range hint
165-190: LGTM! Consider tracking the TODO comment about documentation.The new
causeproperty inChatErrorand its integration into theARTErrorInfoextension are well-implemented. This change improves error reporting by including underlying error information for attachment and detachment failures.The TODO comment suggests documenting the use of
NSUnderlyingErrorKeyin ably-cocoa. To ensure this documentation task is not overlooked, would you like me to create a GitHub issue to track this TODO and link it to the mentioned issue (#32)?
Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Files selected for processing (9)
- CONTRIBUTING.md (1 hunks)
- Sources/AblyChat/Errors.swift (2 hunks)
- Sources/AblyChat/RoomFeature.swift (1 hunks)
- Sources/AblyChat/RoomLifecycleManager.swift (1 hunks)
- Sources/AblyChat/SimpleClock.swift (1 hunks)
- Tests/AblyChatTests/Helpers/Helpers.swift (1 hunks)
- Tests/AblyChatTests/Mocks/MockRoomLifecycleContributorChannel.swift (1 hunks)
- Tests/AblyChatTests/Mocks/MockSimpleClock.swift (1 hunks)
- Tests/AblyChatTests/RoomLifecycleManagerTests.swift (1 hunks)
Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (7)
- Sources/AblyChat/RoomFeature.swift
- Sources/AblyChat/RoomLifecycleManager.swift
- Sources/AblyChat/SimpleClock.swift
- Tests/AblyChatTests/Helpers/Helpers.swift
- Tests/AblyChatTests/Mocks/MockRoomLifecycleContributorChannel.swift
- Tests/AblyChatTests/Mocks/MockSimpleClock.swift
- Tests/AblyChatTests/RoomLifecycleManagerTests.swift
Additional context used
LanguageTool
CONTRIBUTING.md
[grammar] ~41-~41: In American English, the usual prepositions after ‘different’ are “from” or “than”.
Context: ...ted in the spec item. This is different to@specOneOfin that it implies that th...(DIFFERENT_TO)
[uncategorized] ~43-~43: Possible missing comma found.
Context: ...em-id>parameter should be a spec item identifier such asCHA-RL3g`. Each of the above ...(AI_HYDRA_LEO_MISSING_COMMA)
Additional comments not posted (7)
CONTRIBUTING.md (5)
31-32: LGTM: Clear guideline for spec referencingThis addition provides a clear instruction for developers to link code implementations with the Chat SDK features spec. This practice enhances traceability and helps maintain alignment between the code and the specification.
33-41: LGTM: Comprehensive test attribution guidelinesThe new testing guidelines provide a clear and structured approach for attributing tests to specific spec points. The three tags (
@spec,@specOneOf, and@specPartial) are well-defined and offer flexibility in describing the relationship between tests and spec items.Note: The use of "different to" in line 41 is correct as it adheres to British English conventions, which this project follows.
Tools
LanguageTool
[grammar] ~41-~41: In American English, the usual prepositions after ‘different’ are “from” or “than”.
Context: ...ted in the spec item. This is different to@specOneOfin that it implies that th...(DIFFERENT_TO)
42-43: LGTM: Improved clarity in spec-item-id explanationThe explanation of the
<spec-item-id>parameter has been rephrased to form a complete sentence, improving clarity. This change addresses the previous suggestion and enhances the overall readability of the guidelines.Tools
LanguageTool
[uncategorized] ~43-~43: Possible missing comma found.
Context: ...em-id>parameter should be a spec item identifier such asCHA-RL3g`. Each of the above ...(AI_HYDRA_LEO_MISSING_COMMA)
69-73: LGTM: Valuable addition of @specUntested tagThe introduction of the
@specUntestedtag is a valuable addition to the testing guidelines. It provides a way to document implemented spec points that lack automated tests, promoting transparency in test coverage. The requirement for an explanation ensures that the use of this tag is justified and well-documented.Note: The previously identified typographical error has been corrected ("an explanation" is now used correctly).
31-73: Overall: Excellent enhancement to testing guidelinesThese changes to the CONTRIBUTING.md file introduce a robust and well-structured system for attributing tests to spec points. The new guidelines will significantly improve traceability between the codebase and the Chat SDK features specification, enhancing the overall quality and maintainability of the project.
Key improvements:
- Clear instructions for referencing spec items in code
- Comprehensive test attribution tags (
@spec,@specOneOf,@specPartial,@specUntested)- Detailed examples illustrating proper tag usage
- Transparency in documenting untested spec points
These additions will greatly assist developers in maintaining alignment between the codebase and the specification, as well as facilitate future automation for tracking spec implementation coverage.
Tools
LanguageTool
[grammar] ~41-~41: In American English, the usual prepositions after ‘different’ are “from” or “than”.
Context: ...ted in the spec item. This is different to@specOneOfin that it implies that th...(DIFFERENT_TO)
[uncategorized] ~43-~43: Possible missing comma found.
Context: ...em-id>parameter should be a spec item identifier such asCHA-RL3g`. Each of the above ...(AI_HYDRA_LEO_MISSING_COMMA)
Sources/AblyChat/Errors.swift (2)
67-110: LGTM! ChatError enum updated correctly.The
ChatErrorenum has been expanded to include new cases for attachment/detachment failures and room state errors. Thecodeproperty has been updated to handle these new cases, correctly mapping them to their correspondingErrorCodevalues. These changes align well with the PR objectives and maintain consistency with the existing implementation.
Line range hint
1-197: Overall, excellent implementation of error handling enhancements.The changes in this file significantly improve the error handling capabilities of the AblyChat SDK, aligning well with the PR objectives for implementing the room lifecycle spec. The new error codes,
ChatErrorcases, and supporting methods are well-organized and consistently implemented. The enhancements to error reporting, including the addition of thecauseproperty and its integration withARTErrorInfo, will greatly assist in debugging and error resolution.A few minor suggestions have been made to further improve documentation and maintainability. Consider addressing the TODO comments by creating tracking issues to ensure these points are not overlooked in future development.
Great work on enhancing the error handling system!
lawrence-forooghian
force-pushed
the
28-start-implementing-room-lifecycle-spec
branch
from
30cd397 to
4c9eb86
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 2
Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Files selected for processing (9)
- CONTRIBUTING.md (1 hunks)
- Sources/AblyChat/Errors.swift (2 hunks)
- Sources/AblyChat/RoomFeature.swift (1 hunks)
- Sources/AblyChat/RoomLifecycleManager.swift (1 hunks)
- Sources/AblyChat/SimpleClock.swift (1 hunks)
- Tests/AblyChatTests/Helpers/Helpers.swift (1 hunks)
- Tests/AblyChatTests/Mocks/MockRoomLifecycleContributorChannel.swift (1 hunks)
- Tests/AblyChatTests/Mocks/MockSimpleClock.swift (1 hunks)
- Tests/AblyChatTests/RoomLifecycleManagerTests.swift (1 hunks)
Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (8)
- Sources/AblyChat/Errors.swift
- Sources/AblyChat/RoomFeature.swift
- Sources/AblyChat/RoomLifecycleManager.swift
- Sources/AblyChat/SimpleClock.swift
- Tests/AblyChatTests/Helpers/Helpers.swift
- Tests/AblyChatTests/Mocks/MockRoomLifecycleContributorChannel.swift
- Tests/AblyChatTests/Mocks/MockSimpleClock.swift
- Tests/AblyChatTests/RoomLifecycleManagerTests.swift
Additional context used
LanguageTool
CONTRIBUTING.md
[grammar] ~41-~41: In American English, the usual prepositions after ‘different’ are “from” or “than”.
Context: ...ted in the spec item. This is different to@specOneOfin that it implies that th...(DIFFERENT_TO)
[uncategorized] ~43-~43: Possible missing comma found.
Context: ...em-id>parameter should be a spec item identifier such asCHA-RL3g`. Each of the above ...(AI_HYDRA_LEO_MISSING_COMMA)
Additional comments not posted (2)
CONTRIBUTING.md (2)
31-32: Excellent addition for maintaining spec traceabilityThis guideline ensures that developers explicitly link code implementations to the Chat SDK features specification. This practice will greatly enhance code maintainability and help in future audits or updates to the specification.
31-73: Excellent enhancements to contribution guidelinesThe additions to the CONTRIBUTING.md file significantly improve the project's documentation and testing practices. These changes:
- Establish clear guidelines for referencing spec items in code implementation.
- Introduce a comprehensive system for attributing tests to spec points, enhancing traceability.
- Provide a mechanism for documenting implemented but untested spec points.
These enhancements align perfectly with the PR objectives, particularly in implementing and tracking the room lifecycle specification. They will greatly facilitate the development process, improve code maintainability, and ensure comprehensive coverage of the Chat SDK features specification.
Great job on these additions! They will undoubtedly have a positive impact on the project's development and maintenance processes.
Tools
LanguageTool
[grammar] ~41-~41: In American English, the usual prepositions after ‘different’ are “from” or “than”.
Context: ...ted in the spec item. This is different to@specOneOfin that it implies that th...(DIFFERENT_TO)
[uncategorized] ~43-~43: Possible missing comma found.
Context: ...em-id>parameter should be a spec item identifier such asCHA-RL3g`. Each of the above ...(AI_HYDRA_LEO_MISSING_COMMA)
lawrence-forooghian
force-pushed
the
28-start-implementing-room-lifecycle-spec
branch
from
4c9eb86 to
c70ee44
Compare
Done. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 26
Outside diff range and nitpick comments (1)
CONTRIBUTING.md (1)
31-67: LGTM! Clear and comprehensive test attribution guidelines.The new section on attributing tests to spec points is well-structured and provides clear guidance for developers. The three types of tags (@SPEC, @specOneOf, and @specPartial) offer flexibility in describing test coverage, and the examples are particularly helpful for understanding the usage of each tag.
One minor suggestion for improvement:
Consider adding a brief explanation of why attributing tests to spec points is important at the beginning of the section. This could help motivate developers to follow these guidelines consistently.You could add a brief introductory sentence like:
### Testing guidelines +Attributing tests to spec points helps maintain traceability between the implementation and the specification, ensuring comprehensive test coverage and facilitating future updates or audits of the SDK. + #### Attributing tests to a spec pointTools
LanguageTool
[grammar] ~41-~41: In American English, the usual prepositions after ‘different’ are “from” or “than”.
Context: ...ted in the spec item. This is different to@specOneOfin that it implies that th...(DIFFERENT_TO)
[uncategorized] ~43-~43: Possible missing comma found.
Context: ...em-id>parameter should be a spec item identifier such asCHA-RL3g`. Each of the above ...(AI_HYDRA_LEO_MISSING_COMMA)
Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Files selected for processing (9)
- CONTRIBUTING.md (1 hunks)
- Sources/AblyChat/Errors.swift (2 hunks)
- Sources/AblyChat/RoomFeature.swift (1 hunks)
- Sources/AblyChat/RoomLifecycleManager.swift (1 hunks)
- Sources/AblyChat/SimpleClock.swift (1 hunks)
- Tests/AblyChatTests/Helpers/Helpers.swift (1 hunks)
- Tests/AblyChatTests/Mocks/MockRoomLifecycleContributorChannel.swift (1 hunks)
- Tests/AblyChatTests/Mocks/MockSimpleClock.swift (1 hunks)
- Tests/AblyChatTests/RoomLifecycleManagerTests.swift (1 hunks)
Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (7)
- Sources/AblyChat/Errors.swift
- Sources/AblyChat/RoomFeature.swift
- Sources/AblyChat/RoomLifecycleManager.swift
- Sources/AblyChat/SimpleClock.swift
- Tests/AblyChatTests/Helpers/Helpers.swift
- Tests/AblyChatTests/Mocks/MockRoomLifecycleContributorChannel.swift
- Tests/AblyChatTests/Mocks/MockSimpleClock.swift
Additional context used
LanguageTool
CONTRIBUTING.md
[grammar] ~41-~41: In American English, the usual prepositions after ‘different’ are “from” or “than”.
Context: ...ted in the spec item. This is different to@specOneOfin that it implies that th...(DIFFERENT_TO)
[uncategorized] ~43-~43: Possible missing comma found.
Context: ...em-id>parameter should be a spec item identifier such asCHA-RL3g`. Each of the above ...(AI_HYDRA_LEO_MISSING_COMMA)
Additional comments not posted (2)
CONTRIBUTING.md (2)
69-73: LGTM! Clear guidelines for marking untested spec points.The introduction of the @specUntested tag is a valuable addition to the testing guidelines. It provides a way to acknowledge implemented spec points that cannot be automatically tested, ensuring comprehensive tracking of the specification implementation. The emphasis on sparing use and the requirement for an explanation are appropriate safeguards against overuse.
75-79: LGTM! Excellent example of @specUntested usage.The provided example effectively demonstrates the proper use of the @specUntested tag. The explanation is thorough and clearly justifies why the spec point cannot be tested automatically. This example will be valuable for developers in understanding when and how to use this tag appropriately.
lawrence-forooghian
force-pushed
the
28-start-implementing-room-lifecycle-spec
branch
2 times, most recently
from
311b0ff to
cffc6bf
Compare
lawrence-forooghian
force-pushed
the
28-start-implementing-room-lifecycle-spec
branch
from
608f43e to
764797a
Compare
This is based on [1] at b4a495e. It’s generated some questions, which I’ve asked on that PR. Note that the spec has been through a few revisions since I started implementing this; I’ve tried to keep everything in sync but some older stuff might still be accidentally there. I’ve implemented most of the specified behaviour for the ATTACH, DETACH, and RELEASE operations. I have not yet implemented RETRY since it’s quite different to those three and I wanted to get eyes on this first chunk of work; have created #51 for implementing it. Of the operations that I have implemented, I have not implemented the following (this is accurately reflected by the @SPEC… tags in the tests): - Lifecycle behaviour that relates to another ongoing operation (created #52) - Lifecycle behaviour relating to “transient disconnect timeouts” (created #48) - Lifecycle behaviour that occurs “asynchronously” outside an operation (created #50) - CHA-RL1g2, which refers to emitting “discontinuity events” which are a concept not yet implemented; this will come in #53. The room lifecycle manager introduced by this commit is currently a standalone object, which is not integrated with the rest of the SDK. I’ve created #47 for doing this integration work. The @SPEC… tags are based on the on the JS rules [2] @ 8c9ce8b, but I camel-cased them and also decided that: - if a test doesn't relate to a spec point, it doesn't need any markers - there should be a way to know that a spec point is tested across multiple tests - there should be a way of marking a spec point as implemented but not tested (so that can show up differently in reporting; important given that we’re also going to use this report as a to-do list of what still needs to be implemented) Part of #28. [1] ably/specification#200 [2] https://github.com/ably/ably-js/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md#tests-alignment-with-the-ably-features-specification
lawrence-forooghian
force-pushed
the
28-start-implementing-room-lifecycle-spec
branch
from
764797a to
25e5052
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 2
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (4)
CONTRIBUTING.md (3)
31-31: Excellent addition for code-spec traceabilityThis guideline is a valuable addition that will enhance the connection between the code implementation and the specification. It will greatly assist in code reviews and future maintenance.
To further improve clarity, consider providing a brief example of how such a comment should look. This will ensure consistent usage across the codebase.
Example addition:
// Implements CHA-EX1a: Handling user join events func handleUserJoin(user: User) { // Implementation details... }
56-88: Well-structured guidelines for test attributionThis new section provides clear and comprehensive guidelines for attributing tests to spec points. The three types of tags (@SPEC, @specOneOf, and @specPartial) offer flexibility in describing test coverage, and the examples are particularly helpful.
To further enhance clarity:
Consider adding a brief explanation of why attributing tests to spec points is important at the beginning of this section. This could help motivate developers to follow these guidelines consistently.
In the
@specPartialdescription, there's a minor grammatical point to address:-This is different to `@specOneOf` in that it implies that the test suite does not fully test this spec item. +This is different from `@specOneOf` in that it implies that the test suite does not fully test this spec item.This change aligns with common English usage and improves clarity.
🧰 Tools
🪛 LanguageTool
[grammar] ~62-~62: In American English, the usual prepositions after ‘different’ are “from” or “than”.
Context: ...ted in the spec item. This is different to@specOneOfin that it implies that th...(DIFFERENT_TO)
[uncategorized] ~64-~64: Possible missing comma found.
Context: ...em-id>parameter should be a spec item identifier such asCHA-RL3g`. Each of the above ...(AI_HYDRA_LEO_MISSING_COMMA)
90-100: Valuable addition for documenting untested spec pointsThe introduction of the @specUntested tag and its associated guidelines is an excellent addition to the testing documentation. It provides a structured way to acknowledge implemented spec points that cannot be automatically tested, which is crucial for maintaining a comprehensive overview of the specification implementation.
To further enhance this section:
Consider adding a note about periodically reviewing @specUntested items to see if they can be tested in the future as the testing infrastructure evolves.
In the example, the explanation is quite long. While it's detailed, it might be beneficial to demonstrate a more concise explanation as well.
Example of a more concise explanation:
// @specUntested CHA-EX5g - This spec point involves system-level interactions that cannot be reliably simulated in our current test environment.This provides a clear reason for the lack of tests without going into excessive detail.
Tests/AblyChatTests/RoomLifecycleManagerTests.swift (1)
664-669: Address TODO regarding wait and retry behaviorThere is a TODO comment questioning the interpretation of the specification about waiting even when no retry occurs (lines 666-668). Clarifying this behavior is important to ensure the test accurately reflects the specification.
I can help investigate the specification and confirm whether the wait should occur without a subsequent retry. Would you like me to provide further details or open a GitHub issue to address this?
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (9)
- CONTRIBUTING.md (2 hunks)
- Sources/AblyChat/Errors.swift (2 hunks)
- Sources/AblyChat/RoomFeature.swift (1 hunks)
- Sources/AblyChat/RoomLifecycleManager.swift (1 hunks)
- Sources/AblyChat/SimpleClock.swift (1 hunks)
- Tests/AblyChatTests/Helpers/Helpers.swift (1 hunks)
- Tests/AblyChatTests/Mocks/MockRoomLifecycleContributorChannel.swift (1 hunks)
- Tests/AblyChatTests/Mocks/MockSimpleClock.swift (1 hunks)
- Tests/AblyChatTests/RoomLifecycleManagerTests.swift (1 hunks)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (7)
- Sources/AblyChat/Errors.swift
- Sources/AblyChat/RoomFeature.swift
- Sources/AblyChat/RoomLifecycleManager.swift
- Sources/AblyChat/SimpleClock.swift
- Tests/AblyChatTests/Helpers/Helpers.swift
- Tests/AblyChatTests/Mocks/MockRoomLifecycleContributorChannel.swift
- Tests/AblyChatTests/Mocks/MockSimpleClock.swift
🧰 Additional context used
📓 Learnings (1)
Tests/AblyChatTests/RoomLifecycleManagerTests.swift (1)
Learnt from: lawrence-forooghian PR: ably-labs/ably-chat-swift#54 File: Tests/AblyChatTests/RoomLifecycleManagerTests.swift:335-335 Timestamp: 2024-09-23T19:56:39.435Z Learning: In Swift Testing, test method names do not need to start with `test`.
🪛 LanguageTool
CONTRIBUTING.md
[grammar] ~62-~62: In American English, the usual prepositions after ‘different’ are “from” or “than”.
Context: ...ted in the spec item. This is different to@specOneOfin that it implies that th...(DIFFERENT_TO)
[uncategorized] ~64-~64: Possible missing comma found.
Context: ...em-id>parameter should be a spec item identifier such asCHA-RL3g`. Each of the above ...(AI_HYDRA_LEO_MISSING_COMMA)
🔇 Additional comments (2)
CONTRIBUTING.md (1)
Line range hint
31-100: Comprehensive improvements to contribution guidelinesThe additions to the CONTRIBUTING.md file significantly enhance the project's documentation and testing practices. These changes will:
- Improve traceability between code implementation and specifications.
- Provide clear guidelines for attributing tests to spec points.
- Ensure comprehensive documentation of test coverage, including untested spec points.
These improvements will greatly benefit both current and future contributors to the project, leading to more maintainable and well-documented code.
Great work on these additions! They demonstrate a strong commitment to code quality and maintainability.
🧰 Tools
🪛 LanguageTool
[grammar] ~62-~62: In American English, the usual prepositions after ‘different’ are “from” or “than”.
Context: ...ted in the spec item. This is different to@specOneOfin that it implies that th...(DIFFERENT_TO)
[uncategorized] ~64-~64: Possible missing comma found.
Context: ...em-id>parameter should be a spec item identifier such asCHA-RL3g`. Each of the above ...(AI_HYDRA_LEO_MISSING_COMMA)
Tests/AblyChatTests/RoomLifecycleManagerTests.swift (1)
5-5:⚠️ Potential issueConvert
structtofinal classand inherit fromXCTestCaseIn Swift, test cases are typically defined as classes that inherit from
XCTestCase. DefiningRoomLifecycleManagerTestsas astructmay prevent test methods from being discovered and executed correctly.Apply this diff to fix the issue:
-struct RoomLifecycleManagerTests { +final class RoomLifecycleManagerTests: XCTestCase {⛔ Skipped due to learnings
Learnt from: lawrence-forooghian PR: ably-labs/ably-chat-swift#54 File: Tests/AblyChatTests/RoomLifecycleManagerTests.swift:335-335 Timestamp: 2024-09-23T19:56:39.435Z Learning: In Swift Testing, test method names do not need to start with `test`.
lawrence-forooghian
deleted the
28-start-implementing-room-lifecycle-spec
branch
This is based on ably/specification#200 at
b4a495e. It’s generated some questions, which I’ve asked on that PR.Note that the spec has been through a few revisions since I started implementing this; I’ve tried to keep everything in sync but some older stuff might still be accidentally there.
I’ve implemented most of the specified behaviour for the
ATTACH,DETACH, andRELEASEoperations. I have not yet implementedRETRYsince it’s quite different to those three and I wanted to get eyes on this first chunk of work; have created #51 for implementing it.Of the operations that I have implemented, I have not implemented the following (this is accurately reflected by the
@spec…tags in the tests):RETRYoperation where spec says to #50)The room lifecycle manager introduced by this commit is currently a standalone object, which is not integrated with the rest of the SDK. I’ve created #47 for doing this integration work.
The
@spec…tags are based on the on the JS rules @8c9ce8b, but I camel-cased them and also decided that:Part of #28.
Summary by CodeRabbit
Summary by CodeRabbit
New Features
RoomLifecycleManagerto manage chat room contributor states effectively.SimpleClockprotocol to facilitate asynchronous task management in testing.RoomLifecycleContributorChannelfor testing purposes.Bug Fixes
Tests
RoomLifecycleManagerto ensure robust lifecycle management of chat rooms.