feat: support for implicit conversion from raw to refined #19
Conversation
WalkthroughThe pull request introduces several enhancements to the Tuxedo source generator, focusing on refinement type generation and analysis. The changes primarily involve adding a new Changes
Sequence DiagramsequenceDiagram
participant SG as Source Generator
participant RT as Refined Type
participant Attr as RefinementAttribute
SG->>Attr: Check HasImplicitConversionFromRaw
Attr-->>SG: Return conversion flag
SG->>RT: Generate Type
alt Implicit Conversion
SG->>RT: Use Implicit Conversion Operator
else Explicit Conversion
SG->>RT: Use Explicit Conversion Operator
end
Poem
🪧 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 (
|
Test Results36 tests 36 ✅ 10s ⏱️ Results for commit fcf8530. ♻️ This comment has been updated with latest results. |
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 2
🧹 Nitpick comments (6)
Tuxedo.Tests/PasswordStringExampleTests.Case2#PasswordString.g.verified.cs (1)
117-120: Simplify the ToString implementation.The current implementation calls
ToString()on a string value which is redundant. Since_valueis already a string, you can return it directly.public override string? ToString() { - return _value?.ToString(); + return _value; }Tuxedo.Tests/ConfigureRefinementTypesExample.Case2#Case4.g.verified.cs (1)
17-22: Handle default instances ofCase4more explicitlyThe
_valuefield is nullable, and accessingValuewhen_valueis null throws anInvalidOperationException. This could lead to unexpected exceptions if a default instance ofCase4is used inadvertently. Consider makingCase4astructwithout nullable fields or provide a default value to prevent_valuefrom being null.Tuxedo.Tests/SharedTests.Case1#RefinementAttribute.g.verified.cs (1)
Line range hint
39-43: Fix incomplete XML documentation comments for constructorsThe XML documentation comments for the constructors are missing closing
</summary>tags, which can result in documentation warnings and incomplete generated documentation. Ensure all XML comments are properly closed.Apply this diff to correct the XML comments:
/// <summary> /// Initializes a new instance of the <see cref="RefinementAttribute"/> class + /// </summary> public RefinementAttribute(string failureMessage) { FailureMessage = failureMessage; } /// <summary> /// Initializes a new instance of the <see cref="RefinementAttribute"/> class + /// </summary> public RefinementAttribute() { }Tuxedo.Tests/ConfigureRefinementTypesExample.cs (1)
17-22: Add XML documentation for the new method.Consider adding XML documentation to maintain consistency with the codebase's documentation standards.
+ /// <summary> + /// Example refinement method that supports implicit conversion from raw type + /// </summary> + /// <param name="value">The raw value to refine</param> + /// <returns>The refined value</returns> [Refinement( Name = nameof(Case4), HasImplicitConversionFromRaw = true, FailureMessage = "Must be true" )] public static bool ExampleWithImplicitConversion(bool value) => value;Tuxedo.Tests/BoolRefinementsTests.Case5#TrueBool.g.verified.cs (1)
115-120: Consider more specific ToString implementation for boolean refinements.While the current implementation is correct and consistent with other refined types, consider providing a more specific implementation for boolean refinements. This could improve clarity when the value is used in string contexts.
- public override string? ToString() - { - return _value?.ToString(); - } + public override string ToString() + { + return _value?.ToString() ?? "undefined"; + }Tuxedo.SourceGenerator/Analysers/MissingFailureMessageAnalyzer.cs (1)
67-70: Consider extracting and simplifying the string literal check.The string literal check could be more readable and maintainable.
Consider this refactoring:
- .Any(arg => - arg.Expression is LiteralExpressionSyntax literal - && literal.IsKind(SyntaxKind.StringLiteralExpression) - ); + .Any(arg => arg.Expression.IsKind(SyntaxKind.StringLiteralExpression));Or for better readability, extract to a dedicated method:
+ private static bool IsStringLiteralArgument(AttributeArgumentSyntax arg) => + arg.Expression.IsKind(SyntaxKind.StringLiteralExpression); + private static void Analyze(SyntaxNodeAnalysisContext ctx) { // ... existing code ... var hasStringConstructor = ctx .Node.DescendantNodes() .OfType<AttributeArgumentSyntax>() - .Any(arg => - arg.Expression is LiteralExpressionSyntax literal - && literal.IsKind(SyntaxKind.StringLiteralExpression) - ); + .Any(IsStringLiteralArgument);
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (20)
Tuxedo.SourceGenerator/Analysers/MissingFailureMessageAnalyzer.cs(1 hunks)Tuxedo.SourceGenerator/Generators/RefinementSourceGenerator.AttributeSources.cs(1 hunks)Tuxedo.SourceGenerator/Generators/RefinementSourceGenerator.MultiRefinedTypeSource.cs(1 hunks)Tuxedo.SourceGenerator/Generators/RefinementSourceGenerator.RefinedTypeDetails.cs(1 hunks)Tuxedo.SourceGenerator/Generators/RefinementSourceGenerator.RefinementAttributeParts.cs(2 hunks)Tuxedo.SourceGenerator/Generators/RefinementSourceGenerator.SingleRefinedTypeSource.cs(3 hunks)Tuxedo.SourceGenerator/Generators/RefinementSourceGenerator.cs(2 hunks)Tuxedo.Tests/BoolRefinementsTests.Case4#FalseBool.g.verified.cs(1 hunks)Tuxedo.Tests/BoolRefinementsTests.Case5#TrueBool.g.verified.cs(1 hunks)Tuxedo.Tests/ConfigureRefinementTypesExample.Case1#Case3.g.verified.cs(1 hunks)Tuxedo.Tests/ConfigureRefinementTypesExample.Case2#Case4.g.verified.cs(1 hunks)Tuxedo.Tests/ConfigureRefinementTypesExample.cs(2 hunks)Tuxedo.Tests/CustomAccessModifierTests.Case2#WhiteSpaceChar.g.verified.cs(1 hunks)Tuxedo.Tests/CustomTypeRefinementTests.Case3#ValidWidget.g.verified.cs(1 hunks)Tuxedo.Tests/DateOnlyExample.Case3#DateOnlyString.g.verified.cs(1 hunks)Tuxedo.Tests/GuidStringTests.Case3#GuidString.g.verified.cs(1 hunks)Tuxedo.Tests/OddNumberExample.Case4#Odd.g.verified.cs(1 hunks)Tuxedo.Tests/OddNumberExample.Case5#Odd.g.verified.cs(1 hunks)Tuxedo.Tests/PasswordStringExampleTests.Case2#PasswordString.g.verified.cs(1 hunks)Tuxedo.Tests/SharedTests.Case1#RefinementAttribute.g.verified.cs(1 hunks)
⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms (1)
- GitHub Check: Build and analyze
🔇 Additional comments (19)
Tuxedo.Tests/PasswordStringExampleTests.Case2#PasswordString.g.verified.cs (1)
Line range hint
1-120: Well-structured implementation with good practices!The implementation demonstrates several good practices:
- Immutable value type design
- Comprehensive null handling
- Clear validation error messages
- Safe construction methods via Parse/TryParse
- Complete equality implementation
Tuxedo.SourceGenerator/Generators/RefinementSourceGenerator.RefinedTypeDetails.cs (1)
20-21: Addition ofHasImplicitConversionFromRawproperty is appropriateThe inclusion of the
HasImplicitConversionFromRawboolean property in theRefinedTypeDetailsrecord struct extends its functionality to capture implicit conversion capabilities, enhancing the flexibility of type refinements.Tuxedo.Tests/SharedTests.Case1#RefinementAttribute.g.verified.cs (1)
32-36: Addition ofHasImplicitConversionFromRawproperty enhances flexibilityIntroducing the
HasImplicitConversionFromRawproperty to theRefinementAttributeclass allows fine-grained control over the generation of implicit conversions from the raw type to the refined type, improving the usability of refined types.Tuxedo.Tests/ConfigureRefinementTypesExample.cs (1)
34-41: LGTM! Well-structured test case.The test case effectively verifies the new implicit conversion feature.
Tuxedo.SourceGenerator/Generators/RefinementSourceGenerator.MultiRefinedTypeSource.cs (1)
40-41: LGTM! Well-implemented deconstruction support.The addition of the
Deconstructmethod with proper XML documentation enhances the usability of the refined types by supporting tuple-like deconstruction.Also applies to: 42-51
Tuxedo.SourceGenerator/Generators/RefinementSourceGenerator.RefinementAttributeParts.cs (2)
14-14: LGTM! Property declaration is clear and concise.The
HasImplicitConversionFromRawproperty is well-integrated into the attribute parts structure.
46-50: LGTM! Good refactoring of boolean attribute checking.The introduction of the
IsEnabledmethod improves code maintainability by eliminating duplication in boolean attribute checking.Also applies to: 53-55
Tuxedo.SourceGenerator/Generators/RefinementSourceGenerator.AttributeSources.cs (1)
36-41: LGTM! Well-documented attribute property.The
HasImplicitConversionFromRawproperty is properly documented with clear explanation of its purpose and default behavior.Tuxedo.Tests/OddNumberExample.Case4#Odd.g.verified.cs (1)
116-121: LGTM! Clean ToString implementation.The implementation correctly handles the nullable case and follows the standard pattern for ToString implementations.
Tuxedo.Tests/OddNumberExample.Case5#Odd.g.verified.cs (1)
117-122: LGTM! Consistent implementation across cases.The ToString implementation is consistent with Case4, which is good for maintainability.
Tuxedo.Tests/BoolRefinementsTests.Case4#FalseBool.g.verified.cs (1)
115-120: Same enhancement applies as TrueBool.The same suggestion for a more specific ToString implementation applies here as well.
Tuxedo.Tests/ConfigureRefinementTypesExample.Case1#Case3.g.verified.cs (1)
115-120: LGTM! Clean ToString() implementation.The implementation correctly handles the nullable value and follows C# conventions.
Tuxedo.Tests/CustomTypeRefinementTests.Case3#ValidWidget.g.verified.cs (1)
115-120: LGTM! Consistent ToString() implementation.The implementation follows the same pattern as other refined types and correctly handles null values.
Tuxedo.Tests/CustomAccessModifierTests.Case2#WhiteSpaceChar.g.verified.cs (1)
115-120: LGTM! Consistent ToString() implementation.The implementation maintains consistency with other refined types and properly handles null values.
Tuxedo.Tests/GuidStringTests.Case3#GuidString.g.verified.cs (1)
134-138: LGTM! Clean ToString implementation.The implementation correctly handles null values and follows the standard ToString pattern.
Tuxedo.Tests/DateOnlyExample.Case3#DateOnlyString.g.verified.cs (1)
134-138: LGTM! Consistent ToString implementation.The implementation maintains consistency with other refined types and correctly handles null values.
Tuxedo.SourceGenerator/Generators/RefinementSourceGenerator.cs (1)
96-96: LGTM! Clean integration of implicit conversion support.The hasImplicitConversionFromRaw property is well-integrated into the BuildRefinedTypeDetails method and follows the established pattern.
Also applies to: 143-144
Tuxedo.SourceGenerator/Generators/RefinementSourceGenerator.SingleRefinedTypeSource.cs (2)
208-215: LGTM! Clean ToString template implementation.The FormattingMembers constant provides a consistent template for ToString implementation across all refined types.
108-117: LGTM! Well-implemented conversion type handling.The implementation cleanly switches between implicit and explicit conversion operators while maintaining consistent documentation.
Tuxedo.Tests/ConfigureRefinementTypesExample.Case2#Case4.g.verified.cs
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
Tuxedo.Tests/ConfigureRefinementTypesExample.Case2#Case4.g.verified.cs
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
🧹 Nitpick comments (3)
Tuxedo.Tests/BoolRefinementsTests.Case5#TrueBool.g.verified.cs (1)
115-120: Consider adding a comment about the empty string fallback.The
ToString()implementation looks good, but consider documenting why an empty string is returned for null values to improve maintainability./// <inheritdoc /> + /// <remarks>Returns an empty string if the underlying value is null (default struct state)</remarks> public override string ToString() { return _value?.ToString() ?? string.Empty; }Tuxedo.Tests/DateOnlyExample.Case3#DateOnlyString.g.verified.cs (1)
134-138: Consider aligning ToString with Value property behavior.The current implementation returns an empty string for null values, while the
Valueproperty throws. This inconsistency could mask initialization issues. Consider either:
- Aligning with
Valueproperty behavior:public override string ToString() { - return _value?.ToString() ?? string.Empty; + return Value; }
- Or documenting the intentional difference in behavior.
Tuxedo.SourceGenerator/Generators/RefinementSourceGenerator.SingleRefinedTypeSource.cs (1)
209-215: LGTM! Consider future enhancement for custom formatting.The ToString implementation correctly handles null values and follows standard patterns. For future enhancement, consider adding support for custom format strings to handle more complex formatting scenarios.
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (12)
Tuxedo.SourceGenerator/Generators/RefinementSourceGenerator.SingleRefinedTypeSource.cs(4 hunks)Tuxedo.Tests/BoolRefinementsTests.Case4#FalseBool.g.verified.cs(2 hunks)Tuxedo.Tests/BoolRefinementsTests.Case5#TrueBool.g.verified.cs(2 hunks)Tuxedo.Tests/ConfigureRefinementTypesExample.Case1#Case3.g.verified.cs(2 hunks)Tuxedo.Tests/ConfigureRefinementTypesExample.Case2#Case4.g.verified.cs(1 hunks)Tuxedo.Tests/CustomAccessModifierTests.Case2#WhiteSpaceChar.g.verified.cs(2 hunks)Tuxedo.Tests/CustomTypeRefinementTests.Case3#ValidWidget.g.verified.cs(2 hunks)Tuxedo.Tests/DateOnlyExample.Case3#DateOnlyString.g.verified.cs(2 hunks)Tuxedo.Tests/GuidStringTests.Case3#GuidString.g.verified.cs(2 hunks)Tuxedo.Tests/OddNumberExample.Case4#Odd.g.verified.cs(2 hunks)Tuxedo.Tests/OddNumberExample.Case5#Odd.g.verified.cs(2 hunks)Tuxedo.Tests/PasswordStringExampleTests.Case2#PasswordString.g.verified.cs(2 hunks)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (9)
- Tuxedo.Tests/CustomAccessModifierTests.Case2#WhiteSpaceChar.g.verified.cs
- Tuxedo.Tests/BoolRefinementsTests.Case4#FalseBool.g.verified.cs
- Tuxedo.Tests/OddNumberExample.Case5#Odd.g.verified.cs
- Tuxedo.Tests/ConfigureRefinementTypesExample.Case1#Case3.g.verified.cs
- Tuxedo.Tests/OddNumberExample.Case4#Odd.g.verified.cs
- Tuxedo.Tests/PasswordStringExampleTests.Case2#PasswordString.g.verified.cs
- Tuxedo.Tests/CustomTypeRefinementTests.Case3#ValidWidget.g.verified.cs
- Tuxedo.Tests/GuidStringTests.Case3#GuidString.g.verified.cs
- Tuxedo.Tests/ConfigureRefinementTypesExample.Case2#Case4.g.verified.cs
⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms (1)
- GitHub Check: Build and analyze
🔇 Additional comments (5)
Tuxedo.Tests/BoolRefinementsTests.Case5#TrueBool.g.verified.cs (1)
81-81: LGTM! Safer default assignment.The removal of the null-forgiving operator makes the code safer by not suppressing nullability warnings.
Tuxedo.Tests/DateOnlyExample.Case3#DateOnlyString.g.verified.cs (1)
99-99: LGTM! Improved null-safety.The change from
default!todefaultbetter represents the failure state and aligns with nullable reference type best practices.Tuxedo.SourceGenerator/Generators/RefinementSourceGenerator.SingleRefinedTypeSource.cs (3)
30-31: LGTM! Clean integration of formatting members.The placement and integration of the formatting members is well-structured and maintains consistent code organization.
160-160: LGTM! Safer initialization without null-forgiving operator.Good change to use
defaultinstead ofdefault!. This is safer as it properly handles the nullable context without suppressing warnings.
108-117: Verify HasImplicitConversionFromRaw property usage.The conditional operator conversion looks good, but let's verify the HasImplicitConversionFromRaw property implementation and usage.
Let's check the property implementation and its usage:
✅ Verification successful
HasImplicitConversionFromRaw property implementation is correct and properly used.
The property is well-defined with clear documentation, proper default value handling (false), and consistent usage throughout the source generator pipeline. Test cases demonstrate both implicit and explicit conversion scenarios.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify HasImplicitConversionFromRaw property implementation and usage # Find the property definition echo "Property definition:" rg -l "HasImplicitConversionFromRaw" # Check its usage in tests echo -e "\nProperty usage in tests:" rg "HasImplicitConversionFromRaw.*=.*true" -A 2Length of output: 1317
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Check property definition and usage in source generator echo "Property definition and initialization:" rg -A 3 "HasImplicitConversionFromRaw.*{.*get" echo -e "\nSource generator processing:" rg -A 5 "HasImplicitConversionFromRaw.*=.*false" echo -e "\nTest cases (including false cases):" ast-grep --pattern 'Refinement($$$, HasImplicitConversionFromRaw = $_)'Length of output: 572
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Search for property definition and implementation echo "Property definition:" rg "HasImplicitConversionFromRaw" -B 2 -A 2 echo -e "\nRefinement attribute usage:" rg "Refinement.*HasImplicitConversionFromRaw" -B 1 -A 1 echo -e "\nSource generator implementation:" rg "HasImplicitConversionFromRaw" "Tuxedo.SourceGenerator/Generators/RefinementSourceGenerator.RefinedTypeDetails.cs" -B 2 -A 2Length of output: 7414
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
🧹 Nitpick comments (4)
Tuxedo.SourceGenerator/Generators/RefinementSourceGenerator.RefinementAttributeParts.cs (1)
53-55: Consider enhancing boolean parsing robustnessWhile the current implementation works for "true", consider supporting additional boolean string representations for better flexibility.
private static bool IsEnabled(string value, Dictionary<string?, string> nameToArgs) => nameToArgs.TryGetValue(value, out var v) - && string.Equals(v, "true", StringComparison.Ordinal); + && (string.Equals(v, "true", StringComparison.OrdinalIgnoreCase) || + string.Equals(v, "True", StringComparison.Ordinal) || + string.Equals(v, "1", StringComparison.Ordinal));Tuxedo.SourceGenerator/Extensions/SymbolExtensions.cs (2)
18-24: LGTM! Consider adding XML documentation.The implementation is correct and follows good practices with null-safety and proper string comparison. Consider adding XML documentation to improve maintainability.
+ /// <summary> + /// Checks if the type symbol implements the specified interface. + /// </summary> + /// <param name="symbol">The type symbol to check.</param> + /// <param name="interfaceName">The fully qualified interface name.</param> + /// <returns>True if the type implements the interface, false otherwise.</returns> public static bool HasInterface(this ITypeSymbol? symbol, string interfaceName)
20-23: Consider simplifying the boolean expression.The current pattern using
is truecan be simplified.- return symbol?.AllInterfaces.Any(i => - i.ToDisplayString().Equals(interfaceName, StringComparison.Ordinal) - ) - is true; + return symbol?.AllInterfaces.Any(i => + i.ToDisplayString().Equals(interfaceName, StringComparison.Ordinal)) ?? false;Tuxedo.SourceGenerator/Generators/RefinementSourceGenerator.MultiRefinedTypeSource.cs (1)
Line range hint
42-50: Enhance XML documentation for thealtValueparameter.The XML comment for
altValuecould be more descriptive about its purpose and relationship to the refined type.- /// <param name="altValue">alternative {{model.AlternativeType.EscapeXml()}}</param> + /// <param name="altValue">The alternative value produced when the refinement predicate is satisfied</param>
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (18)
Tuxedo.SourceGenerator/Extensions/StringExtensions.cs(1 hunks)Tuxedo.SourceGenerator/Extensions/SymbolExtensions.cs(1 hunks)Tuxedo.SourceGenerator/Generators/RefinementSourceGenerator.MultiRefinedTypeSource.cs(1 hunks)Tuxedo.SourceGenerator/Generators/RefinementSourceGenerator.RefinedTypeDetails.cs(1 hunks)Tuxedo.SourceGenerator/Generators/RefinementSourceGenerator.RefinementAttributeParts.cs(2 hunks)Tuxedo.SourceGenerator/Generators/RefinementSourceGenerator.SingleRefinedTypeSource.cs(5 hunks)Tuxedo.SourceGenerator/Generators/RefinementSourceGenerator.cs(1 hunks)Tuxedo.Tests/BoolRefinementsTests.Case4#FalseBool.g.verified.cs(2 hunks)Tuxedo.Tests/BoolRefinementsTests.Case5#TrueBool.g.verified.cs(2 hunks)Tuxedo.Tests/ConfigureRefinementTypesExample.Case1#Case3.g.verified.cs(2 hunks)Tuxedo.Tests/ConfigureRefinementTypesExample.Case2#Case4.g.verified.cs(1 hunks)Tuxedo.Tests/CustomAccessModifierTests.Case2#WhiteSpaceChar.g.verified.cs(2 hunks)Tuxedo.Tests/CustomTypeRefinementTests.Case3#ValidWidget.g.verified.cs(2 hunks)Tuxedo.Tests/DateOnlyExample.Case3#DateOnlyString.g.verified.cs(2 hunks)Tuxedo.Tests/GuidStringTests.Case3#GuidString.g.verified.cs(2 hunks)Tuxedo.Tests/OddNumberExample.Case4#Odd.g.verified.cs(2 hunks)Tuxedo.Tests/OddNumberExample.Case5#Odd.g.verified.cs(2 hunks)Tuxedo.Tests/PasswordStringExampleTests.Case2#PasswordString.g.verified.cs(2 hunks)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (12)
- Tuxedo.Tests/CustomAccessModifierTests.Case2#WhiteSpaceChar.g.verified.cs
- Tuxedo.Tests/BoolRefinementsTests.Case4#FalseBool.g.verified.cs
- Tuxedo.Tests/BoolRefinementsTests.Case5#TrueBool.g.verified.cs
- Tuxedo.Tests/CustomTypeRefinementTests.Case3#ValidWidget.g.verified.cs
- Tuxedo.Tests/ConfigureRefinementTypesExample.Case1#Case3.g.verified.cs
- Tuxedo.Tests/OddNumberExample.Case4#Odd.g.verified.cs
- Tuxedo.Tests/DateOnlyExample.Case3#DateOnlyString.g.verified.cs
- Tuxedo.Tests/GuidStringTests.Case3#GuidString.g.verified.cs
- Tuxedo.Tests/OddNumberExample.Case5#Odd.g.verified.cs
- Tuxedo.SourceGenerator/Generators/RefinementSourceGenerator.cs
- Tuxedo.Tests/PasswordStringExampleTests.Case2#PasswordString.g.verified.cs
- Tuxedo.Tests/ConfigureRefinementTypesExample.Case2#Case4.g.verified.cs
⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms (1)
- GitHub Check: Build and analyze
🔇 Additional comments (10)
Tuxedo.SourceGenerator/Generators/RefinementSourceGenerator.RefinementAttributeParts.cs (3)
14-14: LGTM! Well-designed property additionThe new
HasImplicitConversionFromRawproperty is well-named and follows immutable design principles, aligning perfectly with the PR's objective of supporting implicit conversions from raw types.
46-50: LGTM! Good refactoring for maintainabilityThe extraction of the boolean parsing logic into
IsEnabledimproves code maintainability and reduces duplication. The multi-line formatting enhances readability.
8-8: Verify performance impact of changing fromref structtosealed recordThe change from
ref structtosealed recordshifts from stack-only allocation to heap allocation. While this improves usability and maintainability, it might impact performance in performance-critical paths.Run this script to analyze usage patterns and potential performance implications:
✅ Verification successful
Change from
ref structtosealed recordis safeThe type is only used during source generation at compile time, with no high-frequency allocations or performance-critical paths. The change improves maintainability without impacting runtime performance.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Check usage patterns of RefinementAttributeParts to assess performance impact # Find all usages of RefinementAttributeParts rg -l "RefinementAttributeParts" | while read -r file; do echo "=== $file ===" # Show context to understand usage patterns (loops, high-frequency operations, etc.) rg -C 5 "RefinementAttributeParts" "$file" doneLength of output: 2539
Tuxedo.SourceGenerator/Extensions/SymbolExtensions.cs (1)
18-24: Verify the usage context for implicit conversions.Let's verify how this method is used in the context of implicit conversions from raw to refined types.
✅ Verification successful
Implementation correctly supports interface preservation for refined types
The HasInterface method is properly used to maintain IConvertible and IFormattable capabilities when generating refined types from raw types that implement these interfaces. This aligns with the PR's objective of supporting implicit conversions while preserving the original type's capabilities.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Search for usages of HasInterface method in the context of implicit conversions rg -l "HasInterface.*IConvertible|IConvertible.*HasInterface" # Search for any usage of the new HasInterface method rg "HasInterface\(" -A 3Length of output: 2031
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Get more context around the usage of HasInterface in the source generator rg "HasInterface" Tuxedo.SourceGenerator/Generators/RefinementSourceGenerator.SingleRefinedTypeSource.cs -B 5 -A 10Length of output: 1715
Tuxedo.SourceGenerator/Extensions/StringExtensions.cs (1)
46-49: LGTM!The new
RenderIfTrueextension method is well-designed, following the established patterns in the class and maintaining consistency with existing methods likeRenderIfNotNull.Tuxedo.SourceGenerator/Generators/RefinementSourceGenerator.RefinedTypeDetails.cs (1)
9-22: LGTM! Well-structured record with improved type safety.The changes enhance the type safety and maintainability of the
RefinedTypeDetailsrecord:
- Sealing prevents unintended inheritance
- Adding
ITypeSymbolfields provides stronger typing for code generation- Consolidating attribute details reduces fragmentation
Tuxedo.SourceGenerator/Generators/RefinementSourceGenerator.MultiRefinedTypeSource.cs (1)
40-40: LGTM! Good addition of formatting support.Adding formatting members ensures consistent string representation of the refined type.
Tuxedo.SourceGenerator/Generators/RefinementSourceGenerator.SingleRefinedTypeSource.cs (3)
109-118: LGTM! Well-implemented conversion operator support.The operator generation properly handles both implicit and explicit conversions based on the
HasImplicitConversionFromRawproperty, with appropriate documentation.
161-162: LGTM! Improved null handling in TryParse.The changes improve null safety by:
- Using
defaultinstead ofdefault!- Properly handling failure messages through the attribute details
210-255: Verify interface casts in formatting members.The implementation of formatting members looks good, but the direct casts to
IConvertibleandIFormattablecould throw at runtime if the interface check is incorrect.✅ Verification successful
Interface casts in formatting members are properly protected
The implementation is safe because HasInterface performs compiler-verified interface checks using ITypeSymbol.AllInterfaces before any casting occurs. The null-safe operators and exact interface name matching provide additional safety guarantees.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Verify that the interface checks are consistent with the casts ast-grep --pattern 'interface IConvertible { $$$ string ToString(IFormatProvider?) $$$ }' ast-grep --pattern 'interface IFormattable { $$$ string ToString(string?, IFormatProvider?) $$$ }'Length of output: 200
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Find HasInterface implementation ast-grep --pattern 'HasInterface($_) { $$$ }' # Find similar casting patterns rg "HasInterface.*IConvertible|HasInterface.*IFormattable" -A 2 # Look for direct casts to these interfaces rg "\(\(IConvertible\)|IFormattable\)\)" -A 2 # Find any extension methods related to interface checking fd "Extensions?.cs" --exec grep -l "HasInterface"Length of output: 1646
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Check HasInterface implementation cat "./Tuxedo.SourceGenerator/Extensions/SymbolExtensions.cs" # Look for any test files related to interface checking fd ".*Tests?.cs" --exec grep -l "HasInterface"Length of output: 816
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 13
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: ASSERTIVE
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (13)
Tuxedo.SourceGenerator/Extensions/SymbolExtensions.cs(1 hunks)Tuxedo.SourceGenerator/Generators/RefinementSourceGenerator.MultiRefinedTypeSource.cs(1 hunks)Tuxedo.Tests/BoolRefinementsTests.Case4#FalseBool.g.verified.cs(2 hunks)Tuxedo.Tests/BoolRefinementsTests.Case5#TrueBool.g.verified.cs(2 hunks)Tuxedo.Tests/ConfigureRefinementTypesExample.Case1#Case3.g.verified.cs(2 hunks)Tuxedo.Tests/ConfigureRefinementTypesExample.Case2#Case4.g.verified.cs(1 hunks)Tuxedo.Tests/CustomAccessModifierTests.Case2#WhiteSpaceChar.g.verified.cs(3 hunks)Tuxedo.Tests/DateOnlyExample.Case3#DateOnlyString.g.verified.cs(5 hunks)Tuxedo.Tests/Extensions/GeneratorDriverExtensions.cs(2 hunks)Tuxedo.Tests/GuidStringTests.Case3#GuidString.g.verified.cs(5 hunks)Tuxedo.Tests/OddNumberExample.Case6#OddInt.g.verified.cs(1 hunks)Tuxedo.Tests/OddNumberExample.cs(1 hunks)Tuxedo.Tests/PasswordStringExampleTests.Case2#PasswordString.g.verified.cs(2 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
📓 Learnings (2)
Tuxedo.Tests/ConfigureRefinementTypesExample.Case1#Case3.g.verified.cs (1)
Learnt from: bmazzarol
PR: bmazzarol/Tuxedo#19
File: Tuxedo.Tests/ConfigureRefinementTypesExample.Case2#Case4.g.verified.cs:117-120
Timestamp: 2025-01-08T13:37:48.329Z
Learning: When implementing ToString() methods that need to handle null values, prefer using string.Empty as the default value instead of custom strings like "Undefined".
Tuxedo.Tests/ConfigureRefinementTypesExample.Case2#Case4.g.verified.cs (1)
Learnt from: bmazzarol
PR: bmazzarol/Tuxedo#19
File: Tuxedo.Tests/ConfigureRefinementTypesExample.Case2#Case4.g.verified.cs:117-120
Timestamp: 2025-01-08T13:37:48.329Z
Learning: When implementing ToString() methods that need to handle null values, prefer using string.Empty as the default value instead of custom strings like "Undefined".
⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms (1)
- GitHub Check: Build and analyze
🔇 Additional comments (16)
Tuxedo.Tests/GuidStringTests.Case3#GuidString.g.verified.cs (3)
12-12: Documentation improvements look good!The updates to use fully qualified type names (
System.Guidinstead ofGuid) in the documentation improve clarity and consistency.Also applies to: 37-38, 42-45
134-148: Well-implemented ToString methods!The new ToString implementations:
- Handle null cases gracefully
- Provide culture-aware formatting support
- Maintain consistent behavior
99-99: Good safety improvement in TryParse!Removing the null-forgiving operator (
!) in favor ofdefaultis a better approach as it:
- Properly represents the method's contract
- Maintains type safety without forcing non-null assertion
- Aligns with the method's failure path behavior
Tuxedo.SourceGenerator/Generators/RefinementSourceGenerator.MultiRefinedTypeSource.cs (1)
40-40: LGTM! Good addition of formatting support.Adding
ToStringmethods throughRenderFormattingMembersimproves the usability of the generated refined types by providing proper string representations.Tuxedo.Tests/Extensions/GeneratorDriverExtensions.cs (1)
14-19: LGTM! Verify C# 12 compatibility.The added metadata references are essential for the compilation to work correctly. However, the collection expression syntax
[]on line 14 requires C# 12.Let's verify the project's language version:
✅ Verification successful
Collection expression syntax is compatible with project settings
The project uses
<LangVersion>latest</LangVersion>, which supports C# 12 features including collection expressions.🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Check C# language version in project files fd -e csproj | xargs cat | grep -A 1 "<LangVersion"Length of output: 116
Tuxedo.Tests/BoolRefinementsTests.Case5#TrueBool.g.verified.cs (2)
81-81: LGTM! Safer initialization in TryParseThe change from
default!todefaultis a good improvement that avoids unnecessary null-forgiving operators while maintaining type safety.
115-130: LGTM! Well-implemented ToString methodsThe ToString implementations follow best practices:
- Properly handles null values using string.Empty
- Provides culture-aware formatting support via IFormatProvider
Tuxedo.Tests/ConfigureRefinementTypesExample.Case1#Case3.g.verified.cs (1)
81-81: LGTM! Consistent implementationThe changes follow the same safe patterns as in TrueBool:
- Safe default initialization in TryParse
- Proper ToString implementations with null handling and culture support
Also applies to: 115-130
Tuxedo.Tests/DateOnlyExample.Case3#DateOnlyString.g.verified.cs (1)
12-12: LGTM! Improved type clarityGood improvement in fully qualifying System.DateOnly to prevent any ambiguity with custom DateOnly types.
Also applies to: 34-34, 37-37, 39-39, 42-42, 45-45, 46-46, 51-51, 80-80, 99-99, 154-155
Tuxedo.Tests/BoolRefinementsTests.Case4#FalseBool.g.verified.cs (1)
81-81: LGTM! Improved null safetyThe change from
default!todefaultis a better approach as it properly handles the invalid state without suppressing nullable warnings.Tuxedo.Tests/OddNumberExample.Case6#OddInt.g.verified.cs (4)
14-22: LGTM! Well-structured type declarationThe struct is correctly marked as readonly and partial, implementing appropriate interfaces. The nullable backing field with validation in the Value property is a good practice.
24-48: Consider supporting implicit conversion from raw typeAccording to the PR objective "support for implicit conversion from raw to refined", consider changing the explicit operator to implicit for converting from int to OddInt.
However, this change needs careful consideration:
- Implicit conversion could silently fail at runtime
- Explicit conversion makes the validation more visible
Would you like to discuss the tradeoffs of implicit vs explicit conversion in this context?
50-84: LGTM! Well-implemented parsing methodsThe Parse and TryParse methods follow .NET conventions and provide good error handling.
86-114: LGTM! Complete equality implementationThorough implementation of equality members following all best practices for value types.
Tuxedo.Tests/CustomAccessModifierTests.Case2#WhiteSpaceChar.g.verified.cs (1)
15-15: Implementation ofIFormattableinterfaceAdding the
IFormattableinterface toWhiteSpaceCharenhances its formatting capabilities and allows for custom string representations. Good addition.Tuxedo.Tests/ConfigureRefinementTypesExample.Case2#Case4.g.verified.cs (1)
121-122: 🧹 Nitpick (assertive)Simplify
ToString()methods by removing unnecessary null-coalescing operatorIn both
ToString()methods, the null-coalescing operator?? string.Emptyis unnecessary becauseValue.ToString()for a non-nullableboolcannot returnnull. You can simplify the code by removing the?? string.Empty.Apply this diff to simplify the
ToString()methods:public override string ToString() { - return Value.ToString() ?? string.Empty; + return Value.ToString(); } public string ToString(IFormatProvider? provider) { - return ((IConvertible)Value).ToString(provider) ?? string.Empty; + return ((IConvertible)Value).ToString(provider); }Also applies to: 129-130
⛔ Skipped due to learnings
Learnt from: bmazzarol PR: bmazzarol/Tuxedo#19 File: Tuxedo.Tests/ConfigureRefinementTypesExample.Case2#Case4.g.verified.cs:117-120 Timestamp: 2025-01-08T13:37:48.329Z Learning: When implementing ToString() methods that need to handle null values, prefer using string.Empty as the default value instead of custom strings like "Undefined".
Tuxedo.SourceGenerator/Generators/RefinementSourceGenerator.MultiRefinedTypeSource.cs
Show resolved
Hide resolved
Tuxedo.Tests/PasswordStringExampleTests.Case2#PasswordString.g.verified.cs
Show resolved
Hide resolved
Tuxedo.Tests/CustomAccessModifierTests.Case2#WhiteSpaceChar.g.verified.cs
Show resolved
Hide resolved
Tuxedo.Tests/CustomAccessModifierTests.Case2#WhiteSpaceChar.g.verified.cs
Show resolved
Hide resolved
Tuxedo.Tests/CustomAccessModifierTests.Case2#WhiteSpaceChar.g.verified.cs
Show resolved
Hide resolved
Summary by CodeRabbit
New Features
ToString()method for various refined type structs.Deconstructmethod for multi-refined types.HasImplicitConversionFromRawadded to multiple classes for enhanced conversion control.RenderIfTruefor conditional string rendering.OddIntwith validation and conversion operators.Improvements
HasInterfacefor checking interface implementations.Tests
OddIntrefined type.