Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
feat: add workflow and script to check edit links on docs #3557
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
feat: add workflow and script to check edit links on docs #3557
Changes from all commits
dd0d3ee
05a2fe4
6cf369a
9675b46
c3c8266
689a861
c13eb87
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I have added the new script to ignore Jest coverage to pass CI. Will create a new good first issue for other contributors to add test
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think we should have a practice to add test along with the code, so don't add the file here. Instead add the relevant tests for the file.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
uhm okay. will add it
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Consider refactoring to avoid 'await' inside a loop
Static analysis tools have flagged the use of
await
inside a loop on lines 58-59. Usingawait
in a loop can lead to sequential execution and potential performance issues. Consider refactoring the code to process batches concurrently.Apply this diff to refactor the code:
📝 Committable suggestion
🧰 Tools
🪛 eslint
[error] 58-58: Unexpected
await
inside a loop.(no-await-in-loop)
[error] 59-59: Unexpected
await
inside a loop.(no-await-in-loop)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
We already use such a logic inside our Dashboard script and it works great. let's keep a uniform style
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@anshgoyalevil Understood, I'll respect the existing pattern used in the Dashboard script. Thanks for the clarification!
(`・ω・´)ゞ
✏️ Learnings added
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@anshgoyalevil The pattern used in the dashboard script is not appropriate. I think CodeRabbitAI has suggested a more configurable approach where you can change the size of the batch, using a variable. Try to implement this suggestion.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@akshatnema I don't get it. The coderrabit is not suggesting adding a variable for configurable batch size. In fact, we have it already
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
We shouldn't use process.exit functions like this. Make the conditional rendering more appropriate. Like, make this if block for
invalidUrls
only.