Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/main' into 39-feature-mod-echo-t… #45
Conversation
|
Note Currently processing new changes in this PR. This may take a few minutes, please wait... 📒 Files selected for processing (6)
WalkthroughThe changes involve a significant transition from the Echo framework to the Gin framework across multiple files in the project. This includes updates to handler functions, middleware, logging mechanisms, and the overall application structure. Additionally, several files related to the old framework have been removed, and new files have been introduced to support the Gin framework. The modifications also encompass changes in method signatures, dependency updates, and the restructuring of tests to align with the new framework. Changes
Poem
Tip You can make CodeRabbit's review more strict using the `assertive` profile, if that's what you prefer.Change the 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 (
|
![github-advanced-security[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/57789?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
…ation Co-authored-by: Copilot Autofix powered by AI <62310815+github-advanced-security[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #45 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 61.85% 61.63% -0.22%
==========================================
Files 12 11 -1
Lines 270 232 -38
==========================================
- Hits 167 143 -24
+ Misses 74 66 -8
+ Partials 29 23 -6
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 24
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (26)
src/api/handler/bad_request.go (1)
8-10: LGTM: Well-defined struct with appropriate JSON tag.The
BadRequeststruct is well-defined with a clear purpose. The use of a JSON tag for theMessagefield is good for serialization.Consider adding a comment to describe the purpose of this struct, especially since it's exported. For example:
// BadRequest represents an error response for bad requests. type BadRequest struct { Message string `json:"message"` }src/api/router/router_test.go (2)
12-12: Consider usingvarfor empty slice declaration.The static analysis tool Qodana for Go has flagged an empty slice declaration using a literal. For better readability and slight performance improvement, consider using the
varkeyword instead.Replace:
tests := []struct {with:
var tests []struct {🧰 Tools
🪛 GitHub Check: Qodana for Go
[notice] 12-12: Empty slice declared using a literal
Empty slice declaration using a literal
1-22: Summary of router_test.go review
- The transition from Echo to Gin framework has been partially implemented in this test file.
- TestMakeRoute function structure has been updated but lacks concrete test cases.
- The test execution doesn't include assertions to verify the effects of MakeRoute.
- There's a discrepancy regarding the TestSetPrometheusHandler function mentioned in the summary but not present in the code.
- Some minor improvements in code style (empty slice declaration) can be made.
To ensure the reliability and correctness of the router implementation with the new Gin framework, please address the mentioned issues, particularly focusing on comprehensive test coverage and proper assertions.
Consider creating a separate test file for Prometheus-related tests if they are still relevant to the new implementation. This would help in maintaining a clear separation of concerns in your test suite.
🧰 Tools
🪛 GitHub Check: Qodana for Go
[notice] 12-12: Empty slice declared using a literal
Empty slice declaration using a literalsrc/updater/main.go (2)
Line range hint
18-21: Consider further refactoring of utility functions.While the logging functionality has been moved to a dedicated package, the
CreateHolidayDatafunction is still part of theutilpackage. Consider if this and other functions in theutilpackage could be organized into more specific packages for better code organization and maintainability.For example, you might create a
holidayspackage:import ( "github.com/kynmh69/go-ja-holidays/holidays" ) // ... holidays := holidays.CreateHolidayData(url)This would improve the overall structure of the project and make it easier to manage related functionalities.
Line range hint
1-21: Summary: Good progress on refactoring, consider further improvements.The changes in this file are part of a positive effort to improve the project's structure by separating logging functionality. The modifications are correct and consistent. To continue this improvement:
- Ensure the logger initialization change is consistent across the entire project (use the verification script provided earlier).
- Consider further refactoring of utility functions, such as
CreateHolidayData, into more specific packages.- Review the entire codebase for other opportunities to improve organization and reduce dependencies on a general
utilpackage.These steps will enhance the maintainability and clarity of the project structure.
src/key_management/router/router_test.go (3)
10-11: LGTM: Logger and Gin router initializationThe logger initialization and Gin router setup look good. The changes are consistent with the transition to the Gin framework.
Consider moving the
logging.LoggerInitialize()call to aTestMainfunction if you want to ensure the logger is initialized once for all tests in this package. This can be beneficial for larger test suites.func TestMain(m *testing.M) { logging.LoggerInitialize() os.Exit(m.Run()) }
21-21: LGTM: Test case updated for GinThe test case has been correctly updated to use the Gin router instance. This change is consistent with the transition to the Gin framework.
Consider adding more test cases to cover different scenarios. For example:
tests := []struct { name string args args wantRoutes []string // Add this field }{ { name: "default routes", args: args{e: r}, wantRoutes: []string{"/ping", "/api/v1/holidays"}, // Add expected routes }, // Add more test cases here } // In the test loop for _, tt := range tests { t.Run(tt.name, func(t *testing.T) { MakeRoute(tt.args.e) // Check if all expected routes are registered for _, route := range tt.wantRoutes { if !routeExists(tt.args.e, route) { t.Errorf("Route %s not found", route) } } }) } // Add this helper function func routeExists(engine *gin.Engine, path string) bool { for _, route := range engine.Routes() { if route.Path == path { return true } } return false }This will make your tests more robust by checking if specific routes are actually registered.
Line range hint
1-30: Overall: Successful transition to Gin framework with room for improvementsThe changes in this file successfully transition the router tests from Echo to Gin framework. The modifications are consistent and well-implemented. Here's a summary of the changes and suggestions:
- Imports have been updated correctly.
- Logger initialization and Gin router setup are properly implemented.
- The
argsstruct and test case have been updated to use Gin types.Suggestions for further improvements:
- Consider moving logger initialization to a
TestMainfunction for better test suite organization.- Enhance test coverage by adding more test cases and checking for specific route registrations.
These improvements will make the tests more robust and comprehensive.
src/key_management/router/router.go (3)
16-16: LGTM: Logging updated to use custom logger.The logging mechanism has been updated to use a custom logger, which is a good practice. The log level has been set to Debug, which is appropriate for this kind of information.
Consider extracting the logger into a variable at the beginning of the function to avoid repeated calls to
GetLogger():func MakeRoute(r *gin.Engine) { + logger := logging.GetLogger() controllers := []controller.Controller{ controller.KeyManagement{ControllerName: "key"}, } for _, v := range controllers { path := fmt.Sprintf("/manage/%s", v.GetControllerName()) - logging.GetLogger().Debugln(path) + logger.Debugln(path) // ... rest of the function } }This change would slightly improve performance and readability.
17-20: LGTM: Route definitions correctly updated for Gin framework.The route definitions have been successfully transitioned from Echo to Gin syntax. The HTTP methods and paths are correctly defined, and the handler functions are properly assigned.
For consistency, consider using the same pattern for all routes:
func MakeRoute(r *gin.Engine) { // ... previous code ... for _, v := range controllers { path := fmt.Sprintf("/manage/%s", v.GetControllerName()) logging.GetLogger().Debugln(path) - r.POST(fmt.Sprintf("%s/create", path), v.Create) + r.POST(path + "/create", v.Create) r.GET(path, v.Retrieve) r.PUT(path, v.Update) - r.POST(fmt.Sprintf("%s/delete", path), v.Delete) + r.POST(path + "/delete", v.Delete) } }This change would make the code more consistent and slightly more readable.
Line range hint
1-22: Overall: Excellent transition from Echo to Gin framework.The changes in this file successfully transition the routing mechanism from the Echo framework to Gin. All necessary updates have been made correctly, including:
- Updating import statements
- Modifying the
MakeRoutefunction signature- Adapting the logging mechanism
- Updating route definitions to Gin syntax
The overall structure and logic of the
MakeRoutefunction remain intact, ensuring that the existing functionality is preserved while leveraging the new framework.As the project transitions to Gin, ensure that:
- All other parts of the application that interact with the router are updated accordingly.
- Any middleware or custom handlers are also migrated to be compatible with Gin.
- The project's documentation is updated to reflect the use of Gin instead of Echo.
- Any deployment scripts or CI/CD pipelines are adjusted if necessary to accommodate the new framework.
src/logging/logger_test.go (1)
1-43: Overall: Improve test coverage and implementation for logging packageWhile it's great to see test functions introduced for the logging package, the current implementations fall short of providing effective test coverage:
- Both TestGetLogger and TestLoggerInitialize lack meaningful assertions.
- The tests don't verify the actual behavior or properties of the logger.
- There's insufficient coverage of different scenarios or edge cases.
To improve the overall quality and reliability of the logging package:
- Implement thorough assertions in both test functions as suggested in the previous comments.
- Add more test cases to cover different scenarios, including edge cases and potential error conditions.
- Consider adding integration tests that verify the logger's behavior in the context of the application.
- Ensure that the tests align with the project's coding standards and best practices for Go testing.
By addressing these points, you'll significantly enhance the test coverage and confidence in the logging package's functionality.
src/api/handler/count_holidays_test.go (3)
11-17: LGTM: TestMain function is well-structured.The
TestMainfunction correctly sets up the testing environment and handles exit code logging. However, consider the following minor improvement:Consider using
os.Exit(code)at the end of the function to ensure the test suite exits with the correct code. Here's a suggested modification:func TestMain(m *testing.M) { util.SetUp() code := m.Run() if code > 0 { logging.GetLogger().Error("exitcode: ", code) } + os.Exit(code) }This ensures that the test suite exits with the correct code, which can be useful for CI/CD pipelines.
19-43: Enhance test coverage and assertions in TestCountHolidays.The
TestCountHolidaysfunction has a good structure using a table-driven test approach, which allows for easy addition of more test cases. However, the current implementation lacks assertions to verify the behavior of theCountHolidaysfunction.Consider the following improvements:
- Add assertions to check the response status code and body.
- Include multiple test cases with different scenarios (e.g., valid request, invalid request).
- Mock any external dependencies if necessary.
Here's an example of how you could enhance the test:
func TestCountHolidays(t *testing.T) { tests := []struct { name string query string expectedStatus int expectedBody string }{ { name: "Valid request", query: "?year=2023", expectedStatus: http.StatusOK, expectedBody: `{"count":16}`, }, { name: "Invalid year", query: "?year=invalid", expectedStatus: http.StatusBadRequest, expectedBody: `{"error":"Invalid year parameter"}`, }, // Add more test cases as needed } for _, tt := range tests { t.Run(tt.name, func(t *testing.T) { r := gin.Default() r.GET("/holidays/count", CountHolidays) w := httptest.NewRecorder() req, _ := http.NewRequest("GET", "/holidays/count"+tt.query, nil) r.ServeHTTP(w, req) assert.Equal(t, tt.expectedStatus, w.Code) assert.JSONEq(t, tt.expectedBody, w.Body.String()) }) } }This enhanced version includes multiple test cases and uses assertions to verify the response status and body. Make sure to import the
"github.com/stretchr/testify/assert"package for the assertions.
1-43: Overall, good test structure with room for improvement.The
count_holidays_test.gofile provides a solid foundation for testing theCountHolidaysfunction. It follows Go testing conventions and uses the Gin framework appropriately for HTTP handler testing.To further enhance the test suite:
- Implement the suggested improvements in the
TestCountHolidaysfunction to increase test coverage and add meaningful assertions.- Consider adding edge cases and error scenarios to ensure robust testing of the
CountHolidaysfunction.- As the application grows, maintain this test file and add more test cases as needed.
These improvements will contribute to a more comprehensive and reliable test suite for your API handlers.
src/api/handler/count_holidays.go (1)
13-15: Consider adding a comment for the CountStruct.While the struct is well-defined, it would be helpful to add a brief comment explaining its purpose and usage. This enhances code readability and maintainability.
Consider adding a comment like this:
// CountStruct represents the response structure for the holiday count endpoint. type CountStruct struct { Count int64 `json:"count"` }README.md (1)
10-14: LGTM! Consider minor formatting improvement.The update to the technology stack table accurately reflects the change from Echo to gin framework, which aligns with the PR objectives. The version information is correct and up-to-date.
To improve consistency and readability, consider aligning the table columns. You can achieve this by adding more hyphens to the separator row:
| 言語/フレームワーク/ミドルウェア | バージョン | -|-------------------|-------| +|--------------------------------|----------| | Go | 1.22 | | gin | v1.10 | | goqu | v9 | | postgresSQL | 16 |src/model/api_key.go (3)
Line range hint
29-45: LGTM: Function signature simplified and logging decoupled from Echo framework.The changes to
CreateApiKeyfunction are well-implemented:
- Removal of the
echo.Contextparameter reduces framework coupling.- Use of the custom logging package maintains logging functionality.
- Core logic remains intact, preserving existing behavior.
Consider moving the
loggerinitialization to the beginning of the function for consistency:func CreateApiKey() error { + logger := logging.GetLogger() key := uuid.New() db := database.GetDbConnection() result, err := db.Insert(TABLE_API_KEY). Rows( ApiKey{Key: key.String()}, ). Executor().Exec() if err != nil { return err } id, _ := result.RowsAffected() - logger := logging.GetLogger() logger.Info("Create API Key.", id) return err }
Line range hint
47-70: LGTM with suggestions: Function signature simplified, but consider improving logging and time handling.The changes to
DeleteApiKeyfunction are generally good:
- Removal of the
echo.Contextparameter reduces framework coupling.- Use of the custom logging package maintains logging functionality.
However, there are some areas for improvement:
- Consider removing or conditionally enabling debug logging statements for production use.
- Use
time.UTCinstead oftime.Localto ensure consistent behavior across different environments.Here's a suggested refactor:
func DeleteApiKey() error { logger := logging.GetLogger() db := database.GetDbConnection() - defaultLocation := time.Local - logger.Debug(defaultLocation) - loc, err := time.LoadLocation("Asia/Tokyo") - if err != nil { - return err - } - time.Local = loc - anHourAgo := time.Now().Add(-1 * time.Hour) - logger.Debug("an hour ago: ", anHourAgo) + anHourAgo := time.Now().UTC().Add(-1 * time.Hour) result, err := db.Delete(TABLE_API_KEY).Where( goqu.C(COLUMN_CREATED_AT).Lt(anHourAgo), ).Executor().Exec() if err != nil { return err } row, _ := result.RowsAffected() - logger.Debug("Row affected", row) + logger.Info("Deleted expired API keys", "count", row) return err }This refactor:
- Removes unnecessary debug logging
- Uses UTC for consistent time handling
- Improves the final log message to be more informative at the Info level
Line range hint
1-70: Overall assessment: Good changes with minor improvement opportunities.The modifications to this file represent a positive step towards reducing framework dependency:
- Removal of
echo.Contextfrom function signatures decreases coupling with the Echo framework.- Introduction of a custom logging package maintains necessary functionality.
- Core logic for API key management remains intact, preserving existing behavior.
Main suggestions for improvement:
- Consistent placement of logger initialization at the beginning of functions.
- Removal or conditional enabling of debug logging statements for production use.
- Use of UTC for time-based operations to ensure consistent behavior across environments.
These changes align well with the PR objective of transitioning away from the Echo framework. The suggestions provided will further enhance the code's robustness and maintainability.
🧰 Tools
🪛 GitHub Check: Qodana for Go
[notice] 12-12: Usage of Snake_Case
Use camel case instead of snake casesrc/database/connect.go (1)
18-18: Consider using a more descriptive constant name.The constant
NAMEis less descriptive than the previousDATABASE_NAME. Additionally, it doesn't follow Go's naming convention for constants, which typically use all uppercase letters with underscores.Consider renaming the constant to
DEFAULT_DATABASE_NAMEorDEFAULT_DB_NAMEto maintain clarity and adhere to Go naming conventions:-const NAME = "holidays" +const DEFAULT_DATABASE_NAME = "holidays"src/key_management/controller/key_test.go (2)
106-128: LGTM with suggestions: setUp function addedThe new setUp function is a good addition that encapsulates all necessary setup steps for the tests. This ensures a consistent test environment across all test functions. However, there are a couple of points to consider:
The use of log.Fatalln in a test setup function can abruptly terminate the program, which might not be ideal for test runs. Consider using t.Fatalf instead, which will fail the test but allow other tests to continue.
The function is currently not taking a testing.T parameter, which limits its ability to report test failures properly.
Consider refactoring the setUp function to accept a testing.T parameter and use t.Fatalf for error handling:
-func setUp() { +func setUp(t *testing.T) { // ... (existing code) if err != nil { - log.Fatalln(err) + t.Fatalf("Failed to insert API key: %v", err) } // ... (rest of the function) }Then update the TestMain function to pass t to setUp:
func TestMain(m *testing.M) { t := &testing.T{} setUp(t) defer tearDown() res := m.Run() os.Exit(res) }
130-138: LGTM with suggestions: tearDown function addedThe new tearDown function is a good addition that properly cleans up the test environment. However, similar to the setUp function, there's an opportunity to improve error handling:
- The use of log.Fatalln in a test teardown function can abruptly terminate the program, which might not be ideal for test runs.
- The function is currently not taking a testing.T parameter, which limits its ability to report test failures properly.
Consider refactoring the tearDown function similar to the setUp function:
-func tearDown() { +func tearDown(t *testing.T) { // ... (existing code) if err != nil { - log.Fatalln(err) + t.Fatalf("Failed to delete API keys: %v", err) } // ... (rest of the function) }Then update the TestMain function to pass t to tearDown:
func TestMain(m *testing.M) { t := &testing.T{} setUp(t) defer tearDown(t) res := m.Run() os.Exit(res) }src/key_management/main.go (1)
12-12: Increase test coverage for new codeThe static analysis indicates that the new lines are not covered by tests. To maintain code quality, it's important to add tests for:
- Logger initialization.
- Router setup and route handling.
- Server startup and error handling.
Would you like assistance in writing unit tests for these new components, or should we open a GitHub issue to track this task?
Also applies to: 17-21, 24-24, 27-27
🧰 Tools
🪛 GitHub Check: codecov/patch
[warning] 12-12: src/key_management/main.go#L12
Added line #L12 was not covered by testssrc/api/handler/is_holiday.go (2)
15-17: Ensure the 'Date' parameter is required with validation tagsTo make sure that the 'Date' parameter is always provided in the request, consider adding the
binding:"required"validation tag to theDatefield inHolidayRequest. This will provide a clear error message if the 'Date' parameter is missing.Apply this diff to implement the change:
type HolidayRequest struct { - Date time.Time `uri:"date" time_format:"2006-01-02" time_utc:"false"` + Date time.Time `uri:"date" time_format:"2006-01-02" time_utc:"false" binding:"required"` }
56-56: Consider removing or adjusting logging of response dataLogging the response data may expose sensitive information and might not be necessary in production environments. Consider adjusting the logging level or removing this log statement to prevent potential information leakage.
Apply this diff to remove the log statement:
- logger.Debug(isHoliday)
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
⛔ Files ignored due to path filters (1)
src/go.sumis excluded by!**/*.sum
📒 Files selected for processing (40)
- README.md (1 hunks)
- compose.yaml (2 hunks)
- src/api/controller/bad_request.go (0 hunks)
- src/api/controller/count_holidays.go (0 hunks)
- src/api/controller/count_holidays_test.go (0 hunks)
- src/api/controller/get_holidays.go (0 hunks)
- src/api/controller/get_holidays_test.go (0 hunks)
- src/api/controller/is_holiday.go (0 hunks)
- src/api/controller/is_holiday_test.go (0 hunks)
- src/api/handler/bad_request.go (1 hunks)
- src/api/handler/count_holidays.go (1 hunks)
- src/api/handler/count_holidays_test.go (1 hunks)
- src/api/handler/get_holidays.go (1 hunks)
- src/api/handler/is_holiday.go (1 hunks)
- src/api/main.go (1 hunks)
- src/api/router/router.go (1 hunks)
- src/api/router/router_test.go (1 hunks)
- src/database/connect.go (3 hunks)
- src/go.mod (1 hunks)
- src/key_management/controller/base.go (1 hunks)
- src/key_management/controller/key.go (1 hunks)
- src/key_management/controller/key_test.go (4 hunks)
- src/key_management/main.go (1 hunks)
- src/key_management/router/router.go (1 hunks)
- src/key_management/router/router_test.go (1 hunks)
- src/key_management/template/template.go (0 hunks)
- src/logging/logger.go (1 hunks)
- src/logging/logger_test.go (1 hunks)
- src/middleware/common.go (0 hunks)
- src/middleware/common_test.go (0 hunks)
- src/middleware/logger.go (0 hunks)
- src/middleware/logger_test.go (0 hunks)
- src/middleware/prometheus.go (0 hunks)
- src/middleware/prometheus_test.go (0 hunks)
- src/middleware/redirect.go (0 hunks)
- src/model/api_key.go (3 hunks)
- src/updater/main.go (1 hunks)
- src/util/file.go (1 hunks)
- src/util/logger_initialize.go (0 hunks)
- src/util/unit.go (1 hunks)
💤 Files with no reviewable changes (16)
- src/api/controller/bad_request.go
- src/api/controller/count_holidays.go
- src/api/controller/count_holidays_test.go
- src/api/controller/get_holidays.go
- src/api/controller/get_holidays_test.go
- src/api/controller/is_holiday.go
- src/api/controller/is_holiday_test.go
- src/key_management/template/template.go
- src/middleware/common.go
- src/middleware/common_test.go
- src/middleware/logger.go
- src/middleware/logger_test.go
- src/middleware/prometheus.go
- src/middleware/prometheus_test.go
- src/middleware/redirect.go
- src/util/logger_initialize.go
🧰 Additional context used
🪛 GitHub Check: Qodana for Go
src/api/router/router_test.go
[notice] 12-12: Empty slice declared using a literal
Empty slice declaration using a literal
🪛 GitHub Check: codecov/patch
src/key_management/controller/key.go
[warning] 30-31: src/key_management/controller/key.go#L30-L31
Added lines #L30 - L31 were not covered by tests
[warning] 43-44: src/key_management/controller/key.go#L43-L44
Added lines #L43 - L44 were not covered by testssrc/key_management/main.go
[warning] 12-12: src/key_management/main.go#L12
Added line #L12 was not covered by tests
[warning] 17-21: src/key_management/main.go#L17-L21
Added lines #L17 - L21 were not covered by tests
[warning] 24-24: src/key_management/main.go#L24
Added line #L24 was not covered by tests
[warning] 27-27: src/key_management/main.go#L27
Added line #L27 was not covered by tests
🔇 Additional comments (66)
src/util/unit.go (2)
1-1: LGTM: Package declaration is appropriate.The package name
utilis suitable for utility functions and follows Go naming conventions.
3-6: LGTM: Import statements are well-structured.The import statements are correctly formatted and grouped. They import packages from the same project, which is good for maintainability. The package names are descriptive and follow Go conventions.
src/key_management/controller/base.go (2)
3-5: LGTM: Import statement updated correctly.The import statement has been properly updated to use the Gin framework instead of Echo. This change is consistent with the overall transition described in the PR summary.
8-11: Approve framework transition, but consider error handling and naming conventions.The update from
echo.Contextto*gin.Contextis correct and aligns with the transition to the Gin framework. However, there are two points to consider:
Error Handling: The methods no longer return an error. This change in the interface contract might affect error handling throughout the application. Please ensure that error scenarios are still properly handled and communicated.
Parameter Naming: The context parameter has been renamed from
ctor. While this is a minor change, it's worth noting thatcis more commonly used for context parameters in Go. Consider keepingcfor consistency with Go conventions, unless there's a specific reason for usingr.To ensure consistent error handling across the application after removing the error return, let's check how errors are now being handled in the implementations of this interface:
This script will help us verify how errors are being handled in the actual implementations, ensuring that the removal of the error return hasn't led to inconsistent or missing error handling.
src/api/handler/bad_request.go (2)
1-6: LGTM: Package declaration and imports are correct.The package name "handler" is appropriate for this file's purpose. The imports are relevant and correctly organized, with the external package listed first.
1-14: Overall: Well-structured file with clear purpose.This file is concise, focused, and correctly implements bad request handling for a Gin-based application. It aligns well with the project's transition from Echo to Gin.
To ensure the correct usage of this new handler across the project, please run the following verification script:
This script will help identify any places where the new
BadRequestJSONfunction is used and also check for any remaining Echo-style bad request handling that might have been missed during the framework transition.✅ Verification successful
Verification Successful: No issues found.
No instances of
BadRequestJSONusage were detected, and no remaining Echo-style bad request handling exists in the codebase.🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the usage of BadRequestJSON function across the project # Test: Search for function usage echo "Searching for BadRequestJSON usage:" rg --type go 'BadRequestJSON\(' ./src # Test: Check for any remaining uses of Echo's bad request handling echo "Checking for any remaining Echo bad request handling:" rg --type go 'c\.JSON\(http\.StatusBadRequest,' ./srcLength of output: 293
src/api/router/router.go (3)
8-11: LGTM: MakeRoute function updated for Gin framework.The function has been successfully adapted to use Gin instead of Echo. However, there are a couple of points to verify:
The endpoint for checking if a date is a holiday has changed from
:dayto:date. Ensure this change is reflected in the corresponding handler function and any client-side code that uses this endpoint.The handler functions are now referenced from the
handlerpackage instead of thecontrollerpackage. Confirm that these function names (GetHolidays,IsHoliday,CountHolidays) match the actual implementations in the handler package.Run the following commands to verify the handler functions and their signatures:
#!/bin/bash # Verify the handler functions exist and have the correct signatures ast-grep --lang go --pattern 'func GetHolidays($_) $_' src/api/handler ast-grep --lang go --pattern 'func IsHoliday($_) $_' src/api/handler ast-grep --lang go --pattern 'func CountHolidays($_) $_' src/api/handler
1-11: Clarify the status of Prometheus metrics integration.The
SetPrometheusHandlerfunction has been removed entirely. Could you please clarify:
- Has the Prometheus metrics integration been implemented differently with the Gin framework?
- If not, is this an intentional removal of the Prometheus metrics functionality?
If this is an intentional removal of functionality, please update the PR description to reflect this significant change.
To check if Prometheus metrics have been implemented elsewhere, run:
#!/bin/bash # Search for Prometheus-related code in the project rg -i 'prometheus|metrics' --type go
4-5: LGTM: Import statements updated correctly.The import statements have been appropriately updated to reflect the transition from Echo to Gin framework. The handler package import has also been updated.
To ensure the handler package structure is correct, please run the following command:
src/api/router/router_test.go (1)
4-6: LGTM: Import statements updated correctly.The import statements have been updated to include the Gin framework, which is consistent with the transition from Echo to Gin. The necessary imports for testing are present.
src/updater/main.go (2)
5-5: LGTM: Import statement updated correctly.The addition of the
loggingpackage import is consistent with the change in logger initialization. This change appears to be part of a refactoring to separate logging functionality into its own package.
11-11: LGTM: Logger initialization updated correctly.The change from
util.LoggerInitialize()tologging.LoggerInitialize()is consistent with the new import and appears to be part of a refactoring to separate logging functionality.To ensure this change is consistent across the codebase, please run the following verification script:
This script will help identify any inconsistencies in logger initialization across the project.
src/key_management/router/router_test.go (2)
4-5: LGTM: Imports updated for Gin frameworkThe import statements have been correctly updated to include the Gin framework and the custom logging package. This aligns with the transition from Echo to Gin as mentioned in the PR objectives.
13-13: LGTM: Updated type for Gin EngineThe
argsstruct has been correctly updated to use*gin.Engineinstead of the previous Echo type. This change is consistent with the transition to the Gin framework.src/api/main.go (5)
4-7: LGTM: Import changes are appropriate for the framework transition.The addition of the Gin framework and logging imports aligns with the transition from Echo to Gin and the implementation of a new logging mechanism.
11-11: LGTM: Logger initialization added to init function.The addition of
logging.LoggerInitialize()in the init function ensures proper setup of the logging system before the main application logic runs. This is a good practice for initializing global resources.
26-28: LGTM: initGin function correctly initializes Gin engine.The
initGinfunction appropriately replaces the previousinitEchofunction, correctly initializing a new Gin engine usinggin.Default(). This includes the Logger and Recovery middleware, which is suitable for most use cases.
1-28: LGTM: Overall file structure maintained with appropriate Echo to Gin transition.The file structure has been well-maintained while transitioning from Echo to Gin. The changes are consistent throughout the file, and the removal of Echo-specific code is appropriate.
To ensure all Echo-specific code has been removed, run the following script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Check for any remaining Echo imports or usage # Test: Search for Echo-related imports or function calls rg --type go 'github.com/labstack/echo|echo\.'If this script returns any results, those might be remnants of the Echo framework that need to be addressed.
15-23: LGTM: Main function updated for Gin framework with improved error handling.The changes in the main function appropriately reflect the transition to the Gin framework and include improved error handling for server startup. The logger initialization allows for structured logging throughout the application.
Please verify that all deployment configurations have been updated to reflect the change in server port from 80 to 8080. Run the following script to check for any references to the old port:
If this script returns any results, those files may need to be updated to use port 8080 instead.
src/logging/logger.go (3)
1-6: LGTM: Package declaration and imports are appropriate.The package name "logging" clearly indicates its purpose, and the imports for Gin and Zap are relevant to the functionality being implemented.
25-27: LGTM: GetLogger function is simple and effective.The
GetLoggerfunction provides a clean way to access the logger from other packages. However, as mentioned earlier, consider adding a safety check to ensure the logger is initialized before returning it.
1-27: Overall, good implementation with room for minor improvements.The logging package is well-structured and provides the necessary functionality. The suggested improvements in error handling and safety checks will make it more robust.
To ensure the logger works as expected across different Gin modes, consider adding unit tests:
This will help verify the correctness of the logger initialization and retrieval across different scenarios.
✅ Verification successful
Tests for logger.go are present and cover the necessary functionalities.
The existing
logger_test.goincludes tests for:
- Logger initialization in different Gin modes (Debug, Test, Release)
GetLoggerfunctionality- Error handling in
LoggerInitializeEnsure that these tests comprehensively cover edge cases to maintain robustness.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Check for existing tests and suggest adding them if missing # Test: Search for test file if ! fd --type f "logger_test.go" src/logging; then echo "No test file found for logger.go. Consider adding tests to verify:" echo "1. Logger initialization in different Gin modes (Debug, Test, Release)" echo "2. GetLogger functionality" echo "3. Error handling in LoggerInitialize" fiLength of output: 67
src/key_management/router/router.go (2)
5-7: LGTM: Imports updated correctly for Gin framework and logging.The necessary imports for the Gin framework and the custom logging package have been added correctly. These changes align with the transition from Echo to Gin and the updated logging mechanism.
10-10: LGTM: Function signature updated for Gin framework.The
MakeRoutefunction signature has been correctly updated to use*gin.Engineinstead of*echo.Echo. This change is consistent with the transition from the Echo framework to Gin.src/util/file.go (2)
3-7: LGTM: Import statements are appropriate and concise.The imported packages are all standard Go libraries and are relevant to the file's functionality. No unused imports are present.
1-35: Overall assessment: Good addition with room for improvementThe
file.goutility introduces useful functions for working with project paths. The implementation is generally sound, but incorporating the suggested improvements will enhance robustness, performance, and developer experience.Key points to address:
- Add depth limit and symlink handling in
GetProjectRoot.- Improve documentation and error handling in both functions.
- Consider input validation and path normalization in
JoinProjectRootPath.These functions will be valuable for maintaining consistent path handling across the project. Ensure to update any existing code that might benefit from these new utilities.
src/logging/logger_test.go (1)
3-7: LGTM: Import statements are appropriate.The import statements are correct and necessary for the test file. They include the required packages for logging (zap), reflection-based comparisons (reflect), and Go testing (testing).
src/api/handler/count_holidays_test.go (1)
3-9: LGTM: Import statements are appropriate.The import statements include all necessary packages for testing, including the Gin framework and custom packages. This suggests good organization of the project structure.
compose.yaml (3)
42-42: Port mapping update for 'api' service looks good.The change from "8080:80" to "8080:8080" aligns with the expected modifications mentioned in the AI summary. This update correctly maps the container's internal port 8080 to the host's port 8080.
Please ensure that:
- The application code for the 'api' service has been updated to listen on port 8080.
- Any documentation or scripts referencing the old port configuration have been updated accordingly.
58-58: Port mapping update for 'key_manager' service is correct.The change from "8081:80" to "8081:8080" is consistent with the modifications described in the AI summary. This update appropriately maps the container's internal port 8080 to the host's port 8081.
Please confirm that:
- The 'key_manager' service code has been updated to listen on port 8080.
- Any documentation or scripts referencing the old port configuration for the 'key_manager' service have been updated.
42-42: Summary of port mapping changesThe port mapping changes for both the 'api' and 'key_manager' services are consistent and align with the expected modifications. These updates reflect a shift to using port 8080 internally for both services, which is likely related to the transition from the Echo framework to the Gin framework mentioned in the AI summary.
To ensure a smooth transition:
- Verify that all related services and dependencies are aware of these port changes.
- Update any environment-specific configurations or documentation that may reference these ports.
- Consider adding a comment in the
compose.yamlfile to explain the reason for these port changes, which could be helpful for future maintenance.Also applies to: 58-58
src/key_management/controller/key.go (5)
4-5: LGTM: Import changes are consistent with framework transition.The import changes reflect the transition from Echo to Gin framework and the introduction of a custom logging package. These changes are appropriate for the refactoring being done.
12-13: LGTM: Constants updated for Gin framework.The constants
TopPageNameandTopPathhave been appropriately updated to work with the Gin framework for routing and template rendering.
20-24: Verify handling of sensitive information.A previous review raised concerns about clear-text logging of sensitive information returned by access to apiKeys. While the current implementation doesn't show any clear logging of API keys in this file, it's crucial to ensure this practice is followed throughout the application.
To help verify that sensitive information is not being logged, you can run the following command:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Search for potential logging of API keys rg -i -g '*.go' '(log|print|fmt.print).*apikey'This will search for any instances where API keys might be logged. Review the results carefully and ensure that no sensitive information is being logged in clear text.
40-46:⚠️ Potential issueLGTM: Improved Delete method, but needs test coverage.
The changes to the
Deletemethod are good improvements:
- Error handling has been added for the
DeleteApiKey()call.- The method now returns an appropriate error response if deletion fails.
However, there's an important issue to address:
The error handling path (lines 43-44) is not covered by tests. To ensure the reliability of this critical path, please add test cases that cover the error scenario.
To help verify the current test coverage, you can run the following command:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Check test coverage for the Delete method in key.go go test -coverprofile=coverage.out ./src/key_management/controller go tool cover -func=coverage.out | grep -E "key.go.*Delete"This will show the current test coverage for the
Deletemethod. Ensure that you add tests to cover the error handling scenario.🧰 Tools
🪛 GitHub Check: codecov/patch
[warning] 43-44: src/key_management/controller/key.go#L43-L44
Added lines #L43 - L44 were not covered by tests
27-33:⚠️ Potential issueLGTM: Improved error handling, but needs test coverage.
The changes to the
Createmethod are good improvements:
- Error handling has been added for the
CreateApiKey()call.- The method now returns an appropriate error response if creation fails.
However, there's an important issue to address:
The error handling path (lines 30-31) is not covered by tests. To ensure the reliability of this critical path, please add test cases that cover the error scenario.
To help verify the current test coverage, you can run the following command:
This will show the current test coverage for the
Createmethod. Ensure that you add tests to cover the error handling scenario.🧰 Tools
🪛 GitHub Check: codecov/patch
[warning] 30-31: src/key_management/controller/key.go#L30-L31
Added lines #L30 - L31 were not covered by testssrc/api/handler/count_holidays.go (5)
3-11: LGTM: Imports are well-organized and relevant.The imports are logically organized and all seem necessary for the functionality of this file. Good job on keeping the imports clean and relevant.
55-58: LGTM: Response handling is well-implemented.The response handling in this function is clean and effective:
- Creating a
CountStructwith the query result is a good way to structure the response.- Logging the count before sending the response is helpful for debugging.
- Using
http.StatusOKfor the response status is appropriate.Good job on implementing a clear and consistent response pattern.
1-58: Overall assessment: Good implementation with room for minor improvements.This file implements a handler for counting holidays with query parameter filtering. The overall structure and logic are sound, demonstrating good use of the Gin framework and database interactions.
Key strengths:
- Clear function structure and error handling.
- Effective use of query building with goqu to prevent SQL injection.
- Proper JSON response formatting.
Areas for improvement:
- Refactor time location loading for better performance and reusability.
- Enhance error messages for more specific debugging information.
- Add date format validation for query parameters.
- Consider performance optimizations for frequent database queries.
These improvements will enhance the robustness and maintainability of the code. Great job on the implementation, and addressing these points will further elevate the quality of this handler.
33-54: 🛠️ Refactor suggestionOptimize database query and add date validation.
The database interaction is generally well-implemented, but there are a few areas for improvement:
- The filtering logic could be simplified.
- There's no validation of the date format for StartDay and EndDay.
- Consider using prepared statements for better performance if this query is executed frequently.
Here's a suggested refactoring:
func CountHolidays(c *gin.Context) { // ... (previous code) db := database.GetDbConnection() dataSet := db.From(TableHolidaysJp) if request.StartDay != "" { if !isValidDate(request.StartDay) { BadRequestJson(c, "Invalid start date format") return } dataSet = dataSet.Where(goqu.C(ColumnDate).Gte(request.StartDay)) } if request.EndDay != "" { if !isValidDate(request.EndDay) { BadRequestJson(c, "Invalid end date format") return } dataSet = dataSet.Where(goqu.C(ColumnDate).Lte(request.EndDay)) } count, err := dataSet.Count() if err != nil { logger.Error("Database query error:", err) InternalServerErrorJson(c, "Failed to query database") return } // ... (rest of the function) } func isValidDate(date string) bool { _, err := time.Parse("2006-01-02", date) return err == nil }This refactoring simplifies the filtering logic, adds date validation, and improves error handling.
To verify the database connection and query execution, you can run:
#!/bin/bash # Check the database connection setup ast-grep --lang go --pattern 'func GetDbConnection() $_' # Check the query execution ast-grep --lang go --pattern 'dataSet.Count()'
27-31: 🛠️ Refactor suggestionImprove error handling and consider defining HolidaysRequest in this file.
The query parameter binding looks good, but there are a couple of points for improvement:
- The error message for binding errors could be more specific to help with debugging.
- The
HolidaysRequeststruct is not defined in this file, which could make the code harder to understand.Consider the following improvements:
- Enhance the error message:
if err := c.ShouldBindQuery(&request); err != nil { logger.Error("Failed to bind query parameters:", err) BadRequestJson(c, "Invalid query parameters: " + err.Error()) return }
- If possible, define the
HolidaysRequeststruct in this file or provide a comment explaining its structure.To verify the structure of
HolidaysRequest, you can run:✅ Verification successful
HolidaysRequest struct is properly defined and utilized within the codebase. No further action is needed.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash ast-grep --lang go --pattern 'type HolidaysRequest struct { $$$ }'Length of output: 313
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Search for any imports or definitions of HolidaysRequest rg 'HolidaysRequest' --files-with-matchesLength of output: 107
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Search for the definition of HolidaysRequest struct rg 'type HolidaysRequest struct' # Search for import statements that might include HolidaysRequest rg 'import.*HolidaysRequest'Length of output: 127
README.md (1)
Line range hint
1-14: Verify if additional README updates are needed for the framework change.The technology stack has been successfully updated to reflect the change from Echo to gin. However, it's important to ensure that this change doesn't affect other parts of the documentation.
Please review the following:
- Check if the API usage or configuration has changed significantly with the new framework.
- Verify if any code examples or setup instructions in the linked API documentation (
src/api/README.md) need to be updated.- Confirm that the overall project description and features remain accurate with the new framework.
If any changes are necessary, please update the relevant sections of the README or the linked documentation.
src/model/api_key.go (1)
4-4: LGTM: Import change is consistent with function signature updates.The addition of the custom logging package import aligns well with the removal of the
echo.Contextparameter from the function signatures. This change indicates a move towards a more framework-agnostic approach for logging.src/database/connect.go (4)
6-6: LGTM: Custom logging package import added.The addition of the custom logging package import is consistent with the transition from the standard
logpackage to a project-specific logging solution.
23-23: LGTM: Consistent implementation of new logging mechanism.The changes consistently apply the new logging mechanism throughout the
ConnectDatabasefunction. The use of different log levels (Info, Fatalln) is appropriate for the various scenarios.Also applies to: 28-28, 31-31, 35-35, 37-37
Line range hint
1-80: Overall: Good transition to custom logging with minor improvements needed.The changes successfully implement a custom logging package throughout the file. The transition is consistent and improves the logging capabilities of the database connection logic. However, there are a few areas for improvement:
- Consider using a more descriptive name for the
NAMEconstant and follow Go naming conventions for constants.- Reconsider the use of
Paniclnfor database ping failures, as it might be too severe for this scenario.- Ensure that any changes to constant names are consistently applied throughout the file and the entire codebase.
These minor adjustments will enhance the code's clarity and robustness.
71-71: Note: Consistent use of renamed constant.The use of the renamed constant
NAMEis consistent with the earlier change. However, if the constant name is updated as suggested in the previous comment, this line will need to be updated accordingly.To ensure consistency across the codebase, run the following script:
✅ Verification successful
No remaining instances of
DATABASE_NAMEfound. Usage ofNAMEconstant is consistent.🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Check for any remaining instances of DATABASE_NAME and verify NAME usage # Test 1: Check for any remaining instances of DATABASE_NAME echo "Checking for any remaining instances of DATABASE_NAME:" rg "DATABASE_NAME" --type go # Test 2: Verify the usage of NAME constant echo "Verifying the usage of NAME constant:" rg "NAME\s*=\s*\"holidays\"" --type go rg "databaseName\s*=\s*NAME" --type goLength of output: 406
src/api/handler/get_holidays.go (5)
3-11: LGTM: Imports are well-organized and relevant.The import section is properly structured, following the convention of grouping standard library imports, third-party packages, and local packages. All imported packages are relevant to the file's functionality.
13-17: LGTM: Constants are well-defined and improve code maintainability.The use of constants for table name, column name, and location is a good practice. It centralizes these values, making the code more maintainable and less prone to errors from hardcoded strings.
19-22: LGTM: HolidaysRequest struct is well-defined.The
HolidaysRequeststruct is properly defined with appropriate form tags for binding and validation. The use of thedatetimebinding ensures that the input is in the correct format, which is a good practice for input validation.
24-30: LGTM: Good initialization and database connection.The function starts with clear variable declarations and establishes a database connection. This setup is concise and follows good practices.
40-43: LGTM: Proper request parameter binding.The use of
c.BindQuery(&reqParams)for binding query parameters is correct and follows Gin's best practices. The error handling is appropriate for this case.src/go.mod (4)
15-41: LGTM! Monitor new indirect dependencies.The addition and updates of indirect dependencies align with the introduction of the Gin framework. Notable additions include
github.com/bytedance/sonic, a high-performance JSON library.It's advisable to keep an eye on these new dependencies for any potential issues or updates in the future.
Line range hint
1-54: Overall, the dependency changes align well with the PR objectives.The modifications to
go.modreflect the transition from Echo to Gin, which is the primary goal of this PR. The addition of new dependencies and updates to existing ones are consistent with this change. However, please address the earlier comment regarding the removal of Prometheus dependencies to ensure that monitoring aspects are not overlooked in this transition.
Line range hint
1-54: Clarify the removal of Prometheus dependencies.The AI summary mentions the removal of several Prometheus-related dependencies. Could you please clarify:
- The reason for removing these dependencies?
- How will monitoring be handled without Prometheus?
- Are there any plans to replace it with an alternative monitoring solution?
To confirm the removal of Prometheus dependencies, run the following script:
7-11: LGTM! Verify Gin framework integration.The addition of the Gin framework (v1.10.0) aligns with the PR objectives. The update to
golang.org/x/text(v0.15.0) and the addition ofgo.uber.org/zap(v1.27.0) for logging are good improvements.To ensure proper integration of the Gin framework, run the following script:
src/key_management/controller/key_test.go (10)
4-5: LGTM: Import statements updated for Gin frameworkThe import statements have been correctly updated to include the Gin framework and the project's logging package. This aligns with the transition from Echo to Gin.
71-77: LGTM: createContext function addedThe new createContext function is a well-structured helper for creating Gin test contexts. It encapsulates the necessary steps to create a request, recorder, and Gin context, which promotes code reuse across test functions. This is a good practice for maintaining clean and DRY test code.
84-86: LGTM: Minor updates to TestKeyManagement_GetControllerNameThe changes to this test function are minimal and do not affect its functionality. The test structure and assertions remain correct for checking the GetControllerName method.
Also applies to: 89-91, 99-100
146-148: LGTM: Minor updates to TestNewKeyManagementThe changes to this test function are minimal and do not affect its functionality. The test structure and assertions remain correct for checking the NewKeyManagement function.
Also applies to: 151-155, 160-161
Line range hint
1-275: Overall assessment: Successful transition to Gin framework with minor improvements neededThe file has been successfully updated to use the Gin framework instead of Echo. All test functions have been consistently modified to work with Gin contexts, and new helper functions (setUp and tearDown) have been added to improve test setup and cleanup.
Key points:
- The transition to Gin has been applied consistently throughout the file.
- The overall structure and purpose of the tests have been maintained.
- New helper functions improve the organization of test setup and teardown.
Suggestions for improvement:
- Update error handling in setUp and tearDown functions to use t.Fatalf instead of log.Fatalln.
- Verify the HTTP method used in TestKeyManagement_Delete (currently POST, should probably be DELETE).
- Double-check all method signatures in the KeyManagement struct to ensure they've been updated to accept *gin.Context.
Once these minor issues are addressed, the transition to the Gin framework will be complete and the test file will be in excellent shape.
205-213: LGTM: TestKeyManagement_Update updated for GinThe test function has been successfully updated to use Gin instead of Echo. The changes include:
- Using gin.Default() to create a new Gin engine.
- Setting up routes with r.PUT().
- Using the createContext function to create a Gin context.
- Loading HTML templates with LoadHTMLGlob.
These changes are consistent with the transition to the Gin framework and mirror the updates made in the other test functions.
Please verify that the Update method signature in the KeyManagement struct has been updated to accept a *gin.Context parameter:
#!/bin/bash # Verify the Update method signature ast-grep --lang go --pattern 'func (k *KeyManagement) Update(c *gin.Context)'Also applies to: 217-219, 223-223, 226-228, 236-236
168-176: LGTM: TestKeyManagement_Create updated for GinThe test function has been successfully updated to use Gin instead of Echo. The changes include:
- Using gin.Default() to create a new Gin engine.
- Setting up routes with r.POST().
- Using the createContext function to create a Gin context.
- Loading HTML templates with LoadHTMLGlob.
These changes are consistent with the transition to the Gin framework and mirror the updates made in TestKeyManagement_Retrieve.
Please verify that the Create method signature in the KeyManagement struct has been updated to accept a *gin.Context parameter:
#!/bin/bash # Verify the Create method signature ast-grep --lang go --pattern 'func (k *KeyManagement) Create(c *gin.Context)'Also applies to: 181-181, 184-186, 189-191, 199-199
242-250: LGTM with questions: TestKeyManagement_Delete updated for GinThe test function has been successfully updated to use Gin instead of Echo. The changes include:
- Using gin.Default() to create a new Gin engine.
- Setting up routes with r.POST().
- Using the createContext function to create a Gin context.
- Loading HTML templates with LoadHTMLGlob.
These changes are consistent with the transition to the Gin framework and mirror the updates made in the other test functions.
However, there's a potential issue to address:
- The test is using POST method for a delete operation (line 246). Typically, DELETE method is used for delete operations in RESTful APIs. Is this intentional or should it be changed to DELETE?
Please verify the following:
- The Delete method signature in the KeyManagement struct has been updated to accept a *gin.Context parameter:
#!/bin/bash # Verify the Delete method signature ast-grep --lang go --pattern 'func (k *KeyManagement) Delete(c *gin.Context)'
- Confirm if using POST for delete operation is intentional or if it should be changed to DELETE:
#!/bin/bash # Check if DELETE method is used anywhere in the codebase for key management rg --type go 'r\.DELETE.*key'If no results are found, consider changing the test to use DELETE method:
-r.POST(target, mg.Create) +r.DELETE(target, mg.Delete)Also applies to: 255-255, 258-260, 263-265, 270-273
29-37: LGTM: TestKeyManagement_Retrieve updated for GinThe test function has been successfully updated to use Gin instead of Echo. The changes include:
- Using gin.Default() to create a new Gin engine.
- Setting up routes with r.GET().
- Using the new createContext function to create a Gin context.
- Loading HTML templates with LoadHTMLGlob.
These changes are consistent with the transition to the Gin framework.
Please verify that the Retrieve method signature in the KeyManagement struct has been updated to accept a *gin.Context parameter:
#!/bin/bash # Verify the Retrieve method signature ast-grep --lang go --pattern 'func (k *KeyManagement) Retrieve(c *gin.Context)'Also applies to: 56-56, 66-66
26-26: LGTM: ViewDir constant updatedThe constant has been renamed from VIEW_DIR to ViewDir, which follows Go naming conventions for exported constants. The path has also been updated.
Please verify that the new path "key_management/view//.html" is correct and all necessary view files are present in this new structure.
… 39-feature-mod-echo-to-gin
…o-gin
プルリクエストのタイトル
概要
issueの番号
変更内容
Go言語に関するチェックリスト
gofmtでフォーマットされているgo vetを実行して潜在的な問題がないことを確認影響範囲とリスク
テスト戦略
追加情報 (任意)
Summary by CodeRabbit
Release Notes
New Features
Bug Fixes
Refactor
Documentation
README.mdto reflect changes in the technology stack and framework version.Tests