Add CLI topic pages#3526
Conversation
|
Warning Review limit reached
Next review available in: 5 minutes Enable usage-based reviews in Billing to review now. Otherwise, wait until the next included review is available. How can I continue?After more reviews become available, a review can be triggered using the To avoid repeated limits, reduce automatic review volume by pausing incremental auto-reviews earlier, using label-based review opt-in, excluding WIP or generated PR titles, or requesting reviews manually when the PR is ready. If your team needs uninterrupted high-volume reviews, an organization admin can enable usage-based reviews. How do review limits work?CodeRabbit enforces per-developer PR review limits for each organization. Most developers receive the normal plan review availability. For paid Pro and Pro+ PR reviews, CodeRabbit uses adaptive limits for sustained high-volume activity. When a developer's recent PR review activity reaches the 95th percentile or higher among CodeRabbit users, additional reviews become available more gradually as earlier reviews age out of the rolling window. Please refer docs for additional details. Review details⚙️ Run configurationConfiguration used: Path: .coderabbit.yaml Review profile: CHILL Plan: Pro Run ID: 📒 Files selected for processing (8)
✨ Finishing Touches🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out. Comment |
|
📚 Docs Preview: https://pr-3526.datamodel-code-generator.pages.dev |
![github-advanced-security[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/57789?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
Codecov Report✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests. Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #3526 +/- ##
=========================================
Coverage 100.00% 100.00%
=========================================
Files 158 158
Lines 34254 34254
Branches 4001 4001
=========================================
Hits 34254 34254
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. ☔ View full report in Codecov by Harness. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
koxudaxi
force-pushed
the
docs-cli-topic-pages
branch
from
a237356 to
1696406
Compare
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🧹 Nitpick comments (1)
zensical.toml (1)
24-29: 📐 Maintainability & Code Quality | 🔵 Trivial | ⚡ Quick winNav entries are correct but unguarded against future enum drift.
This block correctly mirrors
OptionTopic(order and slugs matchdocs/cli-reference/topics/*.md). However, nothing ties this hardcoded list to theOptionTopicenum —build_docs(check=True)validates generated markdown content but not this nav config. Adding/removing a topic later could silently leave a stale or missing nav entry.Consider a lightweight test that parses
zensical.toml's "Focused Topics" nav and asserts its entries matchOptionTopicmembers, to catch drift automatically.🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate. In `@zensical.toml` around lines 24 - 29, The “Focused Topics” nav in zensical.toml is currently a hardcoded mirror of OptionTopic and can drift silently. Add a lightweight test that parses the “Focused Topics” section from zensical.toml and asserts its entries exactly match the OptionTopic enum members and slugs, so additions/removals fail fast. Use OptionTopic as the source of truth and keep the test focused on the nav entry list order and values.
🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents
Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the
rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate.
Nitpick comments:
In `@zensical.toml`:
- Around line 24-29: The “Focused Topics” nav in zensical.toml is currently a
hardcoded mirror of OptionTopic and can drift silently. Add a lightweight test
that parses the “Focused Topics” section from zensical.toml and asserts its
entries exactly match the OptionTopic enum members and slugs, so
additions/removals fail fast. Use OptionTopic as the source of truth and keep
the test focused on the nav entry list order and values.
ℹ️ Review info
⚙️ Run configuration
Configuration used: Path: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
Run ID: b7a608d0-c7a7-4338-ad32-07bf6d40fcae
📒 Files selected for processing (8)
docs/cli-reference/index.mddocs/cli-reference/topics/model-customization.mddocs/cli-reference/topics/openapi.mddocs/cli-reference/topics/template-customization.mddocs/cli-reference/topics/typing-customization.mdscripts/build_cli_docs.pytests/cli_doc/test_cli_options_sync.pyzensical.toml
Merging this PR will degrade performance by 16.65%
|
| Mode | Benchmark | BASE |
HEAD |
Efficiency | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ❌ | WallTime | test_perf_deep_nested |
4.1 s | 5.1 s | -18.1% |
| ❌ | WallTime | test_perf_all_options_enabled |
4.3 s | 5.3 s | -17.74% |
| ❌ | WallTime | test_perf_kubernetes_style_pydantic_v2 |
2.1 s | 2.5 s | -16.79% |
| ❌ | WallTime | test_perf_openapi_large |
2.4 s | 2.9 s | -16.75% |
| ❌ | WallTime | test_perf_large_models_pydantic_v2 |
2.9 s | 3.5 s | -16.71% |
| ❌ | WallTime | test_perf_stripe_style_pydantic_v2 |
1.6 s | 2 s | -16.56% |
| ❌ | WallTime | test_perf_duplicate_names |
851 ms | 1,018 ms | -16.4% |
| ❌ | WallTime | test_perf_complex_refs |
1.6 s | 1.9 s | -16.38% |
| ❌ | WallTime | test_perf_aws_style_openapi_pydantic_v2 |
1.6 s | 1.9 s | -16.2% |
| ❌ | WallTime | test_perf_multiple_files_input |
2.9 s | 3.4 s | -15.91% |
| ❌ | WallTime | test_perf_graphql_style_pydantic_v2 |
648 ms | 767.2 ms | -15.54% |
Tip
Investigate this regression by commenting @codspeedbot fix this regression on this PR, or directly use the CodSpeed MCP with your agent.
Comparing docs-cli-topic-pages (ef13200) with main (0f09aee)
Footnotes
-
98 benchmarks were skipped, so the baseline results were used instead. If they were deleted from the codebase, click here and archive them to remove them from the performance reports. ↩
koxudaxi
force-pushed
the
docs-cli-topic-pages
branch
from
1696406 to
52a963e
Compare
koxudaxi
force-pushed
the
docs-cli-topic-pages
branch
from
52a963e to
ef13200
Compare
Breaking Change AnalysisResult: No breaking changes detected Reasoning: PR #3526 is purely additive documentation tooling. It adds new CLI-reference "Focused Topics" markdown pages, extends scripts/build_cli_docs.py to generate them, adds corresponding tests, and registers the new pages in zensical.toml nav. No changes touch the generator's runtime code, CLI options, Python API, default values/behavior, generated code output, Jinja2 templates, error handling, or supported Python versions. The deleted-lines file is empty and the diff contains no removals of any option, parameter, class, enum value, or function that users rely on. Therefore there are no breaking changes. This analysis was performed by Claude Code Action |
|
🎉 Released in 0.67.0 This PR is now available in the latest release. See the release notes for details. |
2 participants
Summary by CodeRabbit