Add support for more field types #51
Conversation
WalkthroughThe changes in this pull request involve enhancements to the Changes
Poem
Warning Rate limit exceeded@bodhish has exceeded the limit for the number of commits or files that can be reviewed per hour. Please wait 20 minutes and 43 seconds before requesting another review. ⌛ How to resolve this issue?After the wait time has elapsed, a review can be triggered using the We recommend that you space out your commits to avoid hitting the rate limit. 🚦 How do rate limits work?CodeRabbit enforces hourly rate limits for each developer per organization. Our paid plans have higher rate limits than the trial, open-source and free plans. In all cases, we re-allow further reviews after a brief timeout. Please see our FAQ for further information. Warning There were issues while running some tools. Please review the errors and either fix the tool’s configuration or disable the tool if it’s a critical failure. 🔧 rubocopGemfileThere was an error parsing app/models/form_field.rbThere was an error parsing config/initializers/cors.rbThere was an error parsing
Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media? 🪧 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 (
|
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 5
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (23)
app/views/fields/string_array/_index.html.erb (1)
1-1: Consider adding nil handling and HTML structure.While the implementation is functionally correct, consider these improvements for better robustness and presentation:
-<%= field.to_s %> +<div class="string-array-field"> + <%= field&.to_s || "Not specified" %> +</div>app/views/fields/string_array/_show.html.erb (1)
1-1: Replace map with each for better performanceUsing
mapcreates an unnecessary array that's not being used since we're only interested in the side effects (rendering).-<% field.data.map do |item| %> +<% field.data.each do |item| %>lib/administrate/field/string_array.rb (3)
10-12: Document the purpose of permitted attributes.Please add documentation to clarify:
- The purpose of the
_rawsuffix in"#{attr}_raw"- The expected format and usage of the optional
_optionsparameter- How these permitted attributes are used in strong parameters
+# Defines the permitted parameters for strong parameter checking in Rails. +# @param attr [String] The base attribute name +# @param _options [Hash, nil] Optional configuration (currently unused) +# @return [Array] An array of permitted parameter definitions def self.permitted_attribute(attr, _options = nil) ["#{attr}_raw", attr => []] end
14-16: Consider namespacing the HTML class.To avoid potential CSS class conflicts and improve maintainability:
- Add documentation explaining where this class is used in views
- Consider namespacing the class name (e.g., "administrate-string-array")
+# @return [String] The CSS class name used in the field's HTML representation def self.html_class - "string_array" + "administrate-string-array" end
1-19: Add comprehensive test coverage.This new field type should include tests to verify:
- Data handling edge cases (nil values, non-array data, empty arrays)
- Integration with Administrate's field rendering
- Strong parameter behavior
- HTML class usage in views
Would you like me to help generate a test suite for this class?
app/views/fields/string_array/_form.html.erb (2)
5-9: Consider adding validation feedback and constraintsThe text area implementation could benefit from additional features:
- The
_rawsuffix suggests special handling - ensure this is properly documented- Consider adding validation feedback mechanisms (e.g., error messages)
- Consider adding data attributes for client-side validation
Here's a suggested enhancement:
<%= f.text_area "#{field.attribute}_raw", value: field.data&.join("\n"), class: "string-array-input", rows: 5, - placeholder: "Enter one option per line" %> + placeholder: "Enter one option per line", + data: { + controller: "string-array-validator", + max-items: field.maximum, + min-items: field.minimum + }, + "aria-describedby": "#{field.attribute}-hint #{field.attribute}-error" %> +<% if f.object.errors[field.attribute].any? %> + <div id="<%= field.attribute %>-error" class="field-unit__error"> + <%= f.object.errors[field.attribute].join(", ") %> + </div> +<% end %>
10-14: Enhance accessibility for hint textWhile the hint implementation is clean, it should be properly associated with the input field for better accessibility.
Here's a suggested enhancement:
<% if field.options.key?(:hint) %> - <p class="field-unit__hint"> + <p class="field-unit__hint" id="<%= field.attribute %>-hint"> <%= field.options[:hint] %> </p> <% end %>This change adds an ID to the hint paragraph, which can be referenced by the text area's
aria-describedbyattribute (as shown in the previous suggestion).db/migrate/20241113130440_add_validation_fields_to_form_fields.rb (2)
3-4: Consider using PostgreSQL enum type for field_typeInstead of using a string column with a default value, consider using a PostgreSQL enum type for
field_type. This provides better type safety and performance.- add_column :form_fields, :field_type, :string, null: false, default: 'string' + execute <<-SQL + CREATE TYPE form_field_type AS ENUM ('string', 'number', 'select'); + SQL + add_column :form_fields, :field_type, :form_field_type, null: false, default: 'string'
11-11: Consider adding array constraintsWhile the array implementation is correct, consider adding constraints to prevent potential issues:
- Maximum array length to prevent memory issues
- Check constraint to ensure non-empty values
- add_column :form_fields, :enum_options, :string, array: true, default: [] + add_column :form_fields, :enum_options, :string, array: true, default: [] + execute <<-SQL + ALTER TABLE form_fields + ADD CONSTRAINT check_enum_options_length + CHECK (array_length(enum_options, 1) <= 100); + + ALTER TABLE form_fields + ADD CONSTRAINT check_enum_options_values + CHECK (array_position(enum_options, '') IS NULL); + SQLapp/dashboards/form_field_dashboard.rb (4)
18-19: Add validation hints for minimum/maximum fieldsConsider adding hints to clarify the expected format and validation rules for these fields, similar to how enum_options has a hint.
- minimum: Field::String, - maximum: Field::String, + minimum: Field::String.with_options( + hint: "Enter the minimum value for numeric fields" + ), + maximum: Field::String.with_options( + hint: "Enter the maximum value for numeric fields" + ),
14-16: Consider sorting field_type options for better UXThe field types collection could benefit from being sorted alphabetically for easier selection.
field_type: Field::Select.with_options( - collection: FormField.field_types.keys.map { |t| [ t.humanize, t ] } + collection: FormField.field_types.keys.sort.map { |t| [ t.humanize, t ] } ),
47-56: Consider grouping related attributes togetherThe show page attributes could be organized better by grouping related fields together.
SHOW_PAGE_ATTRIBUTES = %i[ id title friendly_name - field_type description page + field_type metadata minimum maximum enum_options created_at updated_at ].freeze
64-72: Consider implementing conditional field visibilityFields like
minimum,maximum, andenum_optionsare only relevant for specific field types. Consider implementing conditional visibility based on the selected field_type.This could be implemented using JavaScript in the admin interface to show/hide fields based on the selected field_type. Would you like me to provide an example implementation?
app/helpers/openai_helper.rb (1)
74-77: Consider safer context access patternWhile the refactor improves readability, accessing context with
context[form_field.title]could raise an error if context is a non-hash object.Consider using dig or try for safer access:
- context_info = context[form_field.title] if context.present? + context_info = context.try(:[], form_field.title)db/schema.rb (1)
89-93: Consider adding indexes for frequently queried columnsThe new columns might be used in search or filtering operations, especially
field_typewhich has a default value suggesting it's used for categorization.Consider adding indexes if these columns are frequently queried:
+ t.index ["field_type"], name: "index_form_fields_on_field_type"Also, consider adding a composite index if you often query combinations of these fields together.
app/models/form_field.rb (1)
59-59: Style Issue: Add spaces inside array bracketsAccording to the style guidelines, include spaces inside array brackets for better readability and consistency.
Apply this diff to fix the style issue:
-return unless ["single_select", "multi_select"].include?(field_type) +return unless [ "single_select", "multi_select" ].include?(field_type)🧰 Tools
🪛 GitHub Check: lint
[failure] 59-59:
Layout/SpaceInsideArrayLiteralBrackets: Use space inside array brackets.
[failure] 59-59:
Layout/SpaceInsideArrayLiteralBrackets: Use space inside array brackets.db/seeds.rb (7)
64-64: Complete the description for 'history_of_present_illness'.The description seems incomplete, ending with "including when". Please complete the sentence to provide full information.
70-70: Complete the description for 'examination_details'.The description seems incomplete, ending with "and clinic". Please complete the sentence to provide full clarity.
76-76: Complete the description for 'weight'.The description seems incomplete, ending with "in kilogram". Please complete the sentence to provide full information.
98-98: Complete the description for 'special_instruction'.The description seems incomplete, ending with "or other". Please complete the sentence to provide full clarity.
126-126: Complete the description for 'other_details'.The description seems incomplete, ending with "Advice". Please complete the sentence to provide full information.
186-186: Adjust array literal formatting inenum_options.According to the coding style guidelines, use spaces inside array brackets. Change
["Male", "Female", "Other"]to[ "Male", "Female", "Other" ].Apply this diff to correct the formatting:
- enum_options: ["Male", "Female", "Other"] + enum_options: [ "Male", "Female", "Other" ]🧰 Tools
🪛 GitHub Check: lint
[failure] 186-186:
Layout/SpaceInsideArrayLiteralBrackets: Use space inside array brackets.
[failure] 186-186:
Layout/SpaceInsideArrayLiteralBrackets: Use space inside array brackets.
193-193: Adjust array literal formatting inenum_options.According to the coding style guidelines, use spaces inside array brackets. Change
["Headache", "Fever", "Cough", "Cold", "Body Pain"]to[ "Headache", "Fever", "Cough", "Cold", "Body Pain" ].Apply this diff to correct the formatting:
- enum_options: ["Headache", "Fever", "Cough", "Cold", "Body Pain"] + enum_options: [ "Headache", "Fever", "Cough", "Cold", "Body Pain" ]🧰 Tools
🪛 GitHub Check: lint
[failure] 193-193:
Layout/SpaceInsideArrayLiteralBrackets: Use space inside array brackets.
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (10)
app/dashboards/form_field_dashboard.rb(4 hunks)app/helpers/openai_helper.rb(3 hunks)app/models/form_field.rb(1 hunks)app/views/fields/string_array/_form.html.erb(1 hunks)app/views/fields/string_array/_index.html.erb(1 hunks)app/views/fields/string_array/_show.html.erb(1 hunks)db/migrate/20241113130440_add_validation_fields_to_form_fields.rb(1 hunks)db/schema.rb(2 hunks)db/seeds.rb(1 hunks)lib/administrate/field/string_array.rb(1 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
🪛 GitHub Check: lint
app/models/form_field.rb
[failure] 59-59:
Layout/SpaceInsideArrayLiteralBrackets: Use space inside array brackets.
[failure] 59-59:
Layout/SpaceInsideArrayLiteralBrackets: Use space inside array brackets.
db/seeds.rb
[failure] 186-186:
Layout/SpaceInsideArrayLiteralBrackets: Use space inside array brackets.
[failure] 186-186:
Layout/SpaceInsideArrayLiteralBrackets: Use space inside array brackets.
[failure] 193-193:
Layout/SpaceInsideArrayLiteralBrackets: Use space inside array brackets.
🔇 Additional comments (16)
app/views/fields/string_array/_index.html.erb (1)
1-1: Verify StringArray class implementation.
Let's verify that the StringArray class properly implements the to_s method that this view depends on.
lib/administrate/field/string_array.rb (1)
1-5: LGTM! Well-structured class definition.
The class is properly organized within the Administrate::Field namespace and correctly inherits from the base class.
app/views/fields/string_array/_form.html.erb (2)
1-3: LGTM: Field label implementation follows Rails conventions
The label implementation is clean and follows Rails form builder conventions.
1-15: Verify integration with form field system
Please ensure the following components are in place:
- JavaScript controller for string array validation
- CSS styles for
.string-array-inputand.field-unit__hint - Form field type registration for string arrays
db/migrate/20241113130440_add_validation_fields_to_form_fields.rb (1)
19-19: Validate data before adding NOT NULL constraint
Consider validating the data quality before adding the NOT NULL constraint to prevent migration failures.
app/dashboards/form_field_dashboard.rb (2)
37-38: LGTM! Good choice of columns for the index view
The addition of friendly_name and field_type to the collection view provides valuable information at a glance.
20-22: Verify StringArray field implementation
The code uses a custom Field::StringArray type for enum_options. Let's verify its implementation.
app/helpers/openai_helper.rb (2)
17-17: Improved system prompt clarity and correctness
The updated prompt fixes a typo and provides clearer instructions about data handling requirements, which should lead to more accurate form filling.
91-93: Verify FormField schema generation implementation
The code assumes the existence of to_json_schema_for_ai method on FormField model. This is crucial for supporting new field types.
Let's verify the implementation:
✅ Verification successful
FormField schema generation implementation verified
The to_json_schema_for_ai method is implemented in the FormField model and supports the defined field types.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check FormField model implementation
# Expected: Find the to_json_schema_for_ai method implementation and supported field types
# Search for FormField model and its schema generation method
echo "Searching for FormField model definition..."
rg -A 10 "class FormField" app/models/
echo "Searching for to_json_schema_for_ai implementation..."
rg -A 15 "def to_json_schema_for_ai" app/models/
echo "Searching for field type definitions..."
rg "field_type" app/models/form_field.rb
Length of output: 2136
db/schema.rb (2)
13-13: LGTM: Schema version update
The schema version has been properly updated to reflect the new migration.
89-90: Review the relationship between title and friendly_name
The schema now has both title and friendly_name columns, which seems redundant. Additionally, friendly_name is non-nullable without a default value.
Let's verify the usage of these fields:
Consider:
- Deprecating the
titlefield if it's being replaced - Adding a database constraint to ensure field_type values are valid
- Adding a default value for friendly_name if needed
app/models/form_field.rb (5)
5-11: LGTM: Proper use of string enums for field_type
Defining field_type as a string enum enhances code clarity and maintainability. It allows for easily adding new field types in the future and improves readability across the codebase.
13-18: Validations are appropriately defined
The presence validations for title, friendly_name, and field_type ensure essential attributes are provided. Custom validation methods validate_select_options and validate_number_constraints correctly enforce field-specific constraints.
20-25: Effective handling of enum_options_raw virtual attribute
The implementation of the enum_options_raw virtual attribute allows for user-friendly input of enumeration options. The getter method provides a seamless way to process raw options before validation.
28-43: Dynamic JSON schema generation
The to_json_schema_for_ai method effectively generates a JSON schema based on the field_type, correctly including enums for select types and number constraints for numeric types. This enhances the interoperability with AI functionalities.
74-83: Efficient processing in process_enum_options
The process_enum_options method efficiently processes the raw enumeration options by splitting, stripping whitespace, removing blanks, and ensuring uniqueness. This ensures that enum_options is clean and ready for validation.
| <% field.data.map do |item| %> | ||
| <div> | ||
| - <%= item %> | ||
| </div> | ||
| <% end %> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Add nil check to prevent potential errors
The current implementation might raise an error if field.data is nil.
Apply this diff to add nil protection:
-<% field.data.map do |item| %>
+<% if field.data.present? %>
+ <ul class="string-array-list">
+ <% field.data.each do |item| %>
+ <li><%= item %></li>
+ <% end %>
+ </ul>
+<% end %>
- <div>
- - <%= item %>
- </div>
-<% end %>This change:
- Adds nil protection with
present?check - Uses semantic
<ul>and<li>tags for list structure - Replaces
mapwitheachsince we're not collecting results - Adds a CSS class for styling
📝 Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| <% field.data.map do |item| %> | |
| <div> | |
| - <%= item %> | |
| </div> | |
| <% end %> | |
| <% if field.data.present? %> | |
| <ul class="string-array-list"> | |
| <% field.data.each do |item| %> | |
| <li><%= item %></li> | |
| <% end %> | |
| </ul> | |
| <% end %> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 3
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (2)
db/seeds.rb (2)
61-66: Consider using "text" field type for detailed medical information.The
history_of_present_illnessandexamination_detailsfields typically contain lengthy medical narratives. Consider usingfield_type: "text"instead of"string"to better accommodate longer content and provide appropriate UI elements.Also applies to: 67-72
64-64: Fix truncated description fields.Several description fields appear to be truncated (ending with commas). Please complete these descriptions to provide clear guidance for users.
Also applies to: 70-70, 76-76, 84-84, 92-92, 98-98, 104-104, 110-110
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (7)
.github/workflows/ci.yml(2 hunks)Gemfile(1 hunks)app/models/form_field.rb(1 hunks)app/views/fields/string_array/_show.html.erb(1 hunks)config/initializers/cors.rb(1 hunks)db/seeds.rb(1 hunks)lib/administrate/field/string_array.rb(1 hunks)
✅ Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (2)
- Gemfile
- config/initializers/cors.rb
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (3)
- app/models/form_field.rb
- app/views/fields/string_array/_show.html.erb
- lib/administrate/field/string_array.rb
🔇 Additional comments (5)
.github/workflows/ci.yml (2)
6-6: Formatting change looks good
The branch specification formatting change maintains valid YAML syntax.
92-98: Verify database configuration consistency and security
While adding granular database configuration is good, there are a few points to consider:
- You have both
DATABASE_URLand individualDB_*variables. This could lead to confusion about which takes precedence. - The credentials match the postgres service configuration, but using 'postgres' as both username and password, even in CI, should be documented as a CI-only practice.
Let's verify the database configuration usage:
Consider:
- Adding a comment in the workflow file to explicitly state these are CI-only credentials
- Documenting the precedence between
DATABASE_URLand individualDB_*variables
✅ Verification successful
Let me gather more information to better understand the database configuration usage.
Let me check the database configuration file content to understand how these variables are being used.
Database configuration is properly structured and secure
The database configuration is well-organized and follows Rails best practices:
- The
DB_*environment variables are correctly used indatabase.ymlfor development and test environments DATABASE_URLis documented as an override mechanism, which is the standard Rails behavior- Production environment uses separate credentials, not the CI variables
- The CI credentials are isolated to the test environment and don't affect production
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check for database configuration usage patterns
# Check if these variables are used consistently across the codebase
rg -l "DB_(NAME|HOST|USERNAME|PASSWORD|PORT)" --type ruby
# Check for any potential hardcoded database credentials in the codebase
# that might conflict with these environment variables
rg -l "(postgres|5432)" --type ruby
Length of output: 105
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check the Gemfile content for postgres references
cat Gemfile
# Look for database configuration files
fd -e yml -e rb config/database
# Check for environment configuration files
fd -e yml -e rb config/environments
# Search for DATABASE_URL usage
rg "DATABASE_URL" -A 2
Length of output: 4053
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check the database configuration
cat config/database.yml
# Look for any database initialization or configuration in test files
fd -e rb test/
rg "DB_" test/ -A 2
Length of output: 3942
db/seeds.rb (3)
130-144: Consider adding blood pressure validation rules.
The diastolic BP should always be lower than systolic BP. Consider adding a cross-field validation rule to ensure this medical constraint is enforced.
#!/bin/bash
# Check if there are any cross-field validations for blood pressure
rg -A 5 "validate.*blood.*pressure|validate.*systolic|validate.*diastolic" app/models/217-221: Add email format validation.
The email field should include format validation to ensure valid email addresses are stored.
#!/bin/bash
# Check if there are any email validation patterns
rg -A 5 "validates.*email" app/models/108-112: Consider adding format validation for patient number.
The patient_no field might benefit from a specific format validation to ensure consistency. Consider adding a regex pattern or custom validation rules if there's a standard format for patient numbers in your system.
For better querying lets add support for more field types
Summary by CodeRabbit
Release Notes
New Features
friendly_name,field_type,minimum,maximum, andenum_options.StringArrayclass for improved handling of string array fields.Bug Fixes
Chores