♻️ refactor: Update loop syntax for retry mechanism #3516
Conversation
|
Thanks for opening this pull request! 🎉 Please check out our contributing guidelines. If you need help or want to chat with us, join us on Discord https://gofiber.io/discord |
WalkthroughThe changes replace traditional indexed for-loops with range-based loops over integer values in both the exponential backoff implementation and its corresponding test. This adjustment modifies only the loop syntax, preserving the original iteration count and logic in both the main and test code. Changes
Poem
📜 Recent review detailsConfiguration used: CodeRabbit UI 📒 Files selected for processing (2)
✨ Finishing Touches
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. 🪧 TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
SupportNeed help? Create a ticket on our support page for assistance with any issues or questions. 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 (
|
![gemini-code-assist[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/956858?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Summary of Changes
Hello @MonkyMars, 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!
This pull request focuses on improving the readability and consistency of the retry mechanism's loop syntax by adopting the for range construct in Go. The change is applied to the core Retry function and its corresponding unit test, simplifying the code where the loop index is not explicitly needed or used.
Highlights
- Code Clarity: Updated the
Retrymethod inaddon/retry/exponential_backoff.goto use afor rangeloop instead of a traditionalforloop with an index (i := 0; i < count; i++). This improves readability as the loop index was not used. - Test Alignment: Modified the
Test_ExponentialBackoff_Nexttest inaddon/retry/exponential_backoff_test.goto also use afor rangeloop (for i := range count) to align with the change in the main retry logic, ensuring consistency.
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 configureGemini 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 updates the retry logic in the ExponentialBackoff implementation to use a range-based loop for clarity and consistency. It also updates the corresponding unit tests to align with the new loop implementation.
- Updated the loop syntax in the retry method of ExponentialBackoff.
- Adjusted the unit test iteration to match the new loop style.
Reviewed Changes
Copilot reviewed 2 out of 2 changed files in this pull request and generated no comments.
| File | Description |
|---|---|
| addon/retry/exponential_backoff.go | Changed the loop in the Retry method to use range syntax. |
| addon/retry/exponential_backoff_test.go | Updated the test loop to use range iteration over MaxRetryCount. |
Comments suppressed due to low confidence (2)
addon/retry/exponential_backoff_test.go:110
- Looping over an integer using range is not valid since 'tt.expBackoff.MaxRetryCount' is an integer; consider reverting to a traditional index-based loop or wrapping the integer in an iterable construct.
for i := range tt.expBackoff.MaxRetryCount {
addon/retry/exponential_backoff.go:48
- Using range directly on an integer 'e.MaxRetryCount' is invalid; revert to an index-based loop or construct an iterable (e.g. by using make([]struct{}, e.MaxRetryCount)) to iterate the correct number of times.
for range e.MaxRetryCount {
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Code Review
This pull request updates loop syntax in ExponentialBackoff and its tests to use for range <integer>, a feature introduced in Go 1.22. The stated goal is to improve clarity and consistency.
My primary review comments focus on the Go 1.22+ dependency introduced by this change:
- Go Version Compatibility: Both modified loops now require Go 1.22 or newer. If the project's minimum Go version is lower, these changes will cause compilation errors. I've suggested reverting to the original loop syntax in such a case. Please confirm the project's Go version compatibility.
- Clarity (if Go 1.22+ is used): Assuming Go 1.22+ is the target, the change in
exponential_backoff.go(where the loop index was unused) is a good simplification. The change inexponential_backoff_test.go(where the index is used) is also a valid and modern way to write the loop.
Additionally, the pull request description includes a template with several checklist items that are currently unchecked. It would be beneficial to update these to reflect the status of benchmarks, documentation updates, etc., as applicable to these changes, before merging.
|
Hi! I think this PR should have the "enhancement" label instead of "bug" - could someone update it? I accidentally marked the wrong label, my bad. |
nickajacks1
changed the title
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #3516 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 83.91% 83.84% -0.07%
==========================================
Files 120 120
Lines 12281 12281
==========================================
- Hits 10305 10297 -8
- Misses 1553 1559 +6
- Partials 423 425 +2
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
gaby
changed the title
|
Congrats on merging your first pull request! 🎉 We here at Fiber are proud of you! If you need help or want to chat with us, join us on Discord https://gofiber.io/discord |
This pull request modifies the retry logic in the
ExponentialBackoffimplementation and updates the corresponding unit tests to align with the changes. The most important updates include replacing theforloop's iteration style to userangefor better readability and consistency.Changes to
ExponentialBackoffretry logic:Retrymethod inaddon/retry/exponential_backoff.goto use arangeloop instead of a traditionalforloop with an index. This change simplifies the loop structure and improves code readability.Updates to unit tests:
Test_ExponentialBackoff_Nexttest inaddon/retry/exponential_backoff_test.goto reflect the updatedrangeloop in theRetrymethod. This ensures the test logic remains consistent with the updated implementation.# DescriptionPlease provide a clear and concise description of the changes you've made and the problem they address. Include the purpose of the change, any relevant issues it solves, and the benefits it brings to the project. If this change introduces new features or adjustments, highlight them here.
Fixes # (issue)
Changes introduced
List the new features or adjustments introduced in this pull request. Provide details on benchmarks, documentation updates, changelog entries, and if applicable, the migration guide.
Type of change
Please delete options that are not relevant.
Checklist
Before you submit your pull request, please make sure you meet these requirements:
/docs/directory for Fiber's documentation.Commit formatting
Please use emojis in commit messages for an easy way to identify the purpose or intention of a commit. Check out the emoji cheatsheet here: CONTRIBUTING.md