fix: had cursor review tests and find discrepancies #133
Conversation
![gemini-code-assist[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/956858?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hello @koblas, I'm Gemini Code Assist1! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed!
Summary of Changes
Hello! Gemini here, providing a summary of this pull request to help everyone get up to speed quickly.
This PR, titled "chore: had cursor review tests and find discrepancies", appears to be a maintenance task focused on cleaning up and correcting existing test files. Based on the changes, it seems a review process (potentially a "cursor review" as mentioned in the title, though the exact nature isn't detailed) identified several minor discrepancies, primarily typos in test descriptions and inputs, across various test suite files.
Highlights
- Test File Cleanup: The core of this PR is the cleanup of several test files (
.spec.ts) across different modules. - Typo Corrections: Multiple typos in
describeblocks and test case descriptions (itblocks) have been fixed. - Test Input Fixes: At least one test case had its input corrected to match the test description and intended validation check.
- Duplicate Test Removal: A duplicate test case was identified and removed in one file.
- Standardize Test Descriptions: Parameterized test descriptions were standardized in one file for consistency.
Changelog
Click here to see the changelog
- src/al/nipt.spec.ts
- Corrected a typo in the
describeblock from 'al/nibt' to 'al/nipt' (line 4).
- Corrected a typo in the
- src/gh/tin.spec.ts
- Corrected a typo in the
describeblock from 'gn/tin' to 'gh/tin' (line 4). - Fixed the input value in the
validate:C000080356test case from '12345678' to 'C000080356' to match the test description and intended length validation check (line 32).
- Corrected a typo in the
- src/lk/nic.spec.ts
- Removed a duplicate test case
it('validate:942R81632b', ...)(lines 29-33). - Corrected the test description in the remaining
validate:942R81632btest case from '942R81632b' to '942281632b' to match the input value (line 23).
- Removed a duplicate test case
- src/pe/ce.spec.ts
- Corrected a typo in the
describeblock from 'pe/cui' to 'pe/ce' (line 4).
- Corrected a typo in the
- src/tw/natid.spec.ts
- Standardized the test description format for parameterized tests using
test.each, changing 'not-valid:' to 'validate:%s' (line 30). - Standardized the test description format for parameterized tests using
test.each, changing 'valid:' to 'validate:%s' (line 38).
- Standardized the test description format for parameterized tests using
Using Gemini Code Assist
The full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips.
Invoking Gemini
You can request assistance from Gemini at any point in your pull request via creating an issue comment (i.e. comment on the pull request page) using either /gemini <command> or @gemini-code-assist <command>. Below is a summary of the supported commands.
| Feature | Command | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Code Review | /gemini review |
Performs a code review for the current pull request in its current state. |
| Pull Request Summary | /gemini summary |
Provides a summary of the current pull request in its current state. |
| Comment | @gemini-code-assist | Responds in comments when explicitly tagged, both in issue comments and review comments. |
| Help | /gemini help |
Displays a list of available commands. |
Customization
To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a .gemini/ folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.
Limitations & Feedback
Gemini Code Assist is currently in preview and may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments to provide feedback.
You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension.
Footnotes
-
Review the Privacy Notices, Generative AI Prohibited Use Policy, Terms of Service, and learn how to configure Gemini Code Assist in GitHub here. Gemini can make mistakes, so double check it and use code with caution. ↩
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Pull Request Overview
This PR refines test suite descriptions and parameters for various country–specific validation tests to improve clarity and accuracy. Key changes include standardizing test case naming in tw/natid.spec.ts, correcting test suite names in pe/ce.spec.ts, gh/tin.spec.ts, and al/nipt.spec.ts, and adjusting validation inputs in lk/nic.spec.ts and gh/tin.spec.ts.
Reviewed Changes
Copilot reviewed 5 out of 5 changed files in this pull request and generated 1 comment.
Show a summary per file
| File | Description |
|---|---|
| src/tw/natid.spec.ts | Updated test name patterns and maintained existing tests; consider reviewing duplicate test input values. |
| src/pe/ce.spec.ts | Corrected describe block name from "pe/cui" to "pe/ce". |
| src/lk/nic.spec.ts | Updated test descriptions to accurate validation identifiers and removed a duplicate test case. |
| src/gh/tin.spec.ts | Corrected describe block name and fixed validation input in test case. |
| src/al/nipt.spec.ts | Corrected describe block name from "al/nibt" to "al/nipt". |
src/tw/natid.spec.ts
Outdated
| const result = validate(value); | ||
| expect(result.isValid).toEqual(false); | ||
| }); | ||
| test.each(['A200501503', 'A800501509', 'A800501509'])( |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
[nitpick] Consider removing the duplicate test value 'A800501509' to maintain clarity and ensure each test case is distinct.
| test.each(['A200501503', 'A800501509', 'A800501509'])( | |
| test.each(['A200501503', 'A800501509'])( |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Code Review
This pull request focuses on cleaning up test files by correcting typos, refining test cases, and improving test descriptions. These are all positive changes that enhance the maintainability and clarity of the test suite. Great job on proactively reviewing and addressing these discrepancies!
For future pull requests, consider adding a brief description to the PR body, even for smaller changes. This can help provide context for reviewers and for future reference.
No style guide was provided, so this review assumes adherence to common TypeScript and Jest best practices, which these changes generally follow.
Summary of Findings
- Test Suite Description Typos: Corrected typos in test suite descriptions across multiple files (e.g.,
al/nibttoal/niptinsrc/al/nipt.spec.ts,gn/tintogh/tininsrc/gh/tin.spec.ts,pe/cuitope/ceinsrc/pe/ce.spec.ts). This improves the clarity and correctness of test metadata. (Severity: Low. Not commented directly due to review settings.) - Test Case Input Value Refinement: Test case input values were refined for better relevance while still achieving the test's objective. For instance, in
src/gh/tin.spec.ts, the input for anInvalidLengthtest was updated from a generic string to one that more closely resembles the expected format but with incorrect length. A similar refinement was made insrc/lk/nic.spec.tsfor anInvalidFormattest. (Severity: Low. Not commented directly due to review settings.) - Redundant Test Case Removal: A duplicate test case was removed from
src/lk/nic.spec.ts. This is a good cleanup step that improves test suite conciseness. (Severity: Low. Not commented directly due to review settings.) - Parameterized Test Naming Improvement: In
src/tw/natid.spec.ts, the names for parameterized tests (test.each) were improved from generic labels like 'not-valid:' or 'valid:' to the more descriptive 'validate:%s'. This enhances the readability of test outputs, as Jest will substitute '%s' with the actual test input. (Severity: Low. Not commented directly due to review settings.) - Duplicate Test Data in Parameterized Test: In
src/tw/natid.spec.ts(line 29), the array for a parameterized testtest.each(['A200501503', 'A800501509', 'A800501509'])contains a duplicate entry'A800501509'. While this doesn't cause functional issues, removing the duplicate would make the test definition slightly cleaner and more concise. (Severity: Low. Not commented directly due to review settings.)
Merge Readiness
The changes in this pull request are beneficial, addressing minor issues and improving the overall quality of the test suite. There are no critical or high-severity issues identified in the changed code. Therefore, from a code quality perspective, this PR appears ready for merging.
Please note that I am an AI assistant and not authorized to approve pull requests. Ensure that other human reviewers inspect and approve these changes before merging.
koblas
changed the title
No description provided.