🧹 chore: Improve Accept* compliance with RFC 9110 #3548
Conversation
WalkthroughThe changes update the handling of HTTP Accept headers in the context implementation to aggregate and process all header values, not just the first. New helper functions are introduced for joining and unescaping header values. Tests are added to verify correct behavior when multiple Accept headers are present. Changes
Sequence Diagram(s)sequenceDiagram
participant Client
participant Context
participant Helpers
Client->>Context: Send HTTP request with multiple Accept* headers
Context->>Helpers: joinHeaderValues(all Accept* headers)
Helpers-->>Context: Combined header string
Context->>Helpers: getOffer(combined header string, offers)
Helpers->>Helpers: unescapeHeaderValue(parameter values)
Helpers-->>Context: Best matching offer
Context-->>Client: Return selected offer
Possibly related PRs
Suggested reviewers
Poem
📜 Recent review detailsConfiguration used: CodeRabbit UI 📒 Files selected for processing (1)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)
⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms (7)
✨ 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 @gaby, 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 enhances the HTTP Accept* header parsing logic to align more closely with RFC 9110. It addresses scenarios where multiple Accept* headers are present and ensures correct handling of escaped characters within header parameter values, improving the robustness and compliance of the application's content negotiation.
Highlights
- RFC 9110 Compliance: I've improved the handling of
Accept*headers to correctly process multiple instances of the same header field, aligning with RFC 9110 specifications for content negotiation. - Parameter Unescaping: I've implemented logic to properly unescape quoted parameter values within
Accept*headers, ensuring accurate comparison and matching of client preferences. - Consolidated Header Processing: The
Accept*helper functions now merge all occurrences of a givenAccept*header into a single string before parsing, providing a comprehensive view of client preferences. - Enhanced Test Coverage: I've added new test cases specifically for multi-field
Acceptheaders across allAccept*methods to validate the new parsing behavior and ensure robustness.
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. ↩
gaby
changed the title
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #3548 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 90.61% 90.56% -0.06%
==========================================
Files 110 110
Lines 10912 10955 +43
==========================================
+ Hits 9888 9921 +33
- Misses 773 780 +7
- Partials 251 254 +3
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:
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Code Review
The pull request enhances the application's compliance with RFC 9110 by improving the handling of Accept* headers. The changes include handling multiple header fields and unescaping quoted parameter values. Additional tests and simplification of the joinHeaderValues function are suggested.
|
Pls share benchmark before and after |
Will do after updating the PR with bot eview comments |
main: PR: |
![github-actions[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/15368?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
⚠️ Performance Alert ⚠️
Possible performance regression was detected for benchmark.
Benchmark result of this commit is worse than the previous benchmark result exceeding threshold 1.50.
| Benchmark suite | Current: 3197539 | Previous: 43ad9f7 | Ratio |
|---|---|---|---|
Benchmark_Fiberlog_SetLevel_Parallel/Test_case_1_Parallel |
13.32 ns/op 0 B/op 0 allocs/op |
6.371 ns/op 0 B/op 0 allocs/op |
2.09 |
Benchmark_Fiberlog_SetLevel_Parallel/Test_case_1_Parallel - ns/op |
13.32 ns/op |
6.371 ns/op |
2.09 |
Benchmark_Fiberlog_SetLevel_Parallel/Test_case_2_Parallel |
13.32 ns/op 0 B/op 0 allocs/op |
6.44 ns/op 0 B/op 0 allocs/op |
2.07 |
Benchmark_Fiberlog_SetLevel_Parallel/Test_case_2_Parallel - ns/op |
13.32 ns/op |
6.44 ns/op |
2.07 |
Benchmark_Fiberlog_SetLevel_Parallel/Test_case_3_Parallel |
13.34 ns/op 0 B/op 0 allocs/op |
6.546 ns/op 0 B/op 0 allocs/op |
2.04 |
Benchmark_Fiberlog_SetLevel_Parallel/Test_case_3_Parallel - ns/op |
13.34 ns/op |
6.546 ns/op |
2.04 |
Benchmark_Fiberlog_SetLevel_Parallel/Test_case_4_Parallel |
13.32 ns/op 0 B/op 0 allocs/op |
6.403 ns/op 0 B/op 0 allocs/op |
2.08 |
Benchmark_Fiberlog_SetLevel_Parallel/Test_case_4_Parallel - ns/op |
13.32 ns/op |
6.403 ns/op |
2.08 |
Benchmark_Fiberlog_SetLevel_Parallel/Test_case_5_Parallel |
12.88 ns/op 0 B/op 0 allocs/op |
6.416 ns/op 0 B/op 0 allocs/op |
2.01 |
Benchmark_Fiberlog_SetLevel_Parallel/Test_case_5_Parallel - ns/op |
12.88 ns/op |
6.416 ns/op |
2.01 |
This comment was automatically generated by workflow using github-action-benchmark.
|
Adding missing code coverage in a bit. |
Summary
Related #3383