Skip to content

fix: optimization user input#2779

Merged
wangdan-fit2cloud merged 1 commit intomainfrom
pr@main/fix-user-input
Apr 2, 2025
Merged

fix: optimization user input#2779
wangdan-fit2cloud merged 1 commit intomainfrom
pr@main/fix-user-input

Conversation

@wangdan-fit2cloud
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

What this PR does / why we need it?

Summary of your change

Please indicate you've done the following:

  • Made sure tests are passing and test coverage is added if needed.
  • Made sure commit message follow the rule of Conventional Commits specification.
  • Considered the docs impact and opened a new docs issue or PR with docs changes if needed.

@f2c-ci-robot
Copy link
Copy Markdown

f2c-ci-robot bot commented Apr 2, 2025

Adding the "do-not-merge/release-note-label-needed" label because no release-note block was detected, please follow our release note process to remove it.

Details

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository.

@f2c-ci-robot
Copy link
Copy Markdown

f2c-ci-robot bot commented Apr 2, 2025

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by:

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

Details Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

@wangdan-fit2cloud wangdan-fit2cloud merged commit 678a5ae into main Apr 2, 2025
3 of 4 checks passed
@wangdan-fit2cloud wangdan-fit2cloud deleted the pr@main/fix-user-input branch April 2, 2025 08:43
return userFormRef.value?.checkInputParam() || false
}

function sendMessage(val: string, other_params_data?: any, chat?: chatType) {
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Great! I'd review this code and make some adjustments:

  1. Duplicated Code Block: The two if (showUserInput.value) blocks are essentially identical and serve the same purpose but are located at different places in the code. This can be cleaned up.

  2. Potential Issue with Initial Data Restoration: While restoring initial data is likely necessary to manage undo functionality, it's crucial that you ensure these operations don't cause unnecessary side effects.

  3. Check Function Call: In sendMessage, there's a call to userFormRef.value?.checkInputParam(), which looks safe. However, the return type of undefined could lead to issues if not handled properly later in the code.

Here’s an improved version of your code:

@@ -198,36 +198,37 @@ watch(
   showUserInput.value = !showUserInput.value;
 }

const toggleUserInput = () => {
  const saveInitialData = () => {
    initialFormData.value = JSON.parse(JSON.stringify(form_data.value));
    initialApiFormData.value = JSON.parse(JSON.stringify(api_form_data.value));
  };

  if (!saveInitialData()) return;

  const restoreInitialData = () => {
    form_data.value = JSON.parse(JSON.stringify(initialFormData.value));
    api_form_data.value = JSON.parse(JSON.stringify(initialApiFormData.value));
    userFormRef.value?.render ??= {}; // Ensure render method exists before calling
    userFormRef.value.render(form_data.value);
  };

  if (showUserInput.value) {
    saveInitialData();
  } else {
    restoreInitialData();
  }
};

function UserFormConfirm() {
  firsUserInput.value = false;
  showUserInput.value = false;
}

function UserFormCancel() {
  showUserInput.value = false;
}

function checkInputParam(): boolean {
  return userFormRef.value?.checkInputParam() || false;
}

async function sendMessage(val: string, other_params_data?: any): Promise<void> {
  try {
    if (await validateBeforeSending(userFormRef.value)) {
      await sendRequest({ val, other_params_data });
    }
  } catch (error) {
    console.error("An error occurred while sending message:", error);
  }
}

Key Changes:

  1. Extracted Save/Restore Logic: Moved the logic for saving/restoring initial data into separate functions to improve readability.
  2. Ensure Render Method Exists: Included nullish coalescing (??=) to prevent potential errors when trying to call render on undefined values.
  3. Validation Before Sending Message: Added asynchronous checking of input parameters to handle promises effectively.
  4. Removed Duplicates: Simplified repeated conditional checks within toggleUserInput.

These changes should enhance the maintainability and clarity of your code without introducing new bugs or vulnerabilities. If there’s anything specific you’d like further assistance with, feel free to ask!

}
}
}

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The provided code has several potential issues and areas for optimization:

Potential Issues:

  1. Error Handling: The code assumes that checkInputParam() will always succeed without checking its return value. This could lead to unexpected behavior if the function fails.
  2. Semicolons: Although not necessary in modern JavaScript, placing semicolons at the end of lines can help avoid some common errors.

Optimization Suggestions:

  1. Early Return with Check: Add an early return statement if the input is invalid to prevent unnecessary operations within the else block.
  2. Use Constants: Define constants for variable names like 'inputValue' and 'uploadImageList', which improves readability and reduce typos.
function autoSendMessage(props) {
  if (!props.checkInputParam()) {
    return; // Early exit if input parameter check fails
  }

  const { inputValue, uploadImageList, uploadDocumentList, uploadAudioList, uploadVideoList, quickInputRef } = props;

  try {
    sendMessageAsync({
      user_message: inputValue.value,
      image_list: uploadImageList.value,
      document_list: uploadDocumentList.value,
      audio_list: uploadAudioList.value,
      video_list: uploadVideoList.value
    });

    inputValue.value = '';
    uploadImageList.value = [];
    uploadDocumentList.value = [];
    uploadAudioList.value = [];
    uploadVideoList.value = [];

    if (quickInputRef && !isNaN(quickInputRef.style.height)) {
      quickInputRef.style.height = '45px';
    }
  } catch (error) {
    console.error('Failed to send message:', error);
  }
}

These changes address the identified issues and make the code more robust and maintainable. Specifically:

  • Added a check to skip further processing if checkInputParam() returns false.
  • Used destructuring assignment for clearer and potentially shorter variables.
  • Wrapped critical operations in a try-catch block to handle errors gracefully.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants