Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

♻️ refactor parsing logic in qs.dart for improved readability and efficiency #29

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Mar 4, 2025

Conversation

techouse
Copy link
Owner

@techouse techouse commented Mar 4, 2025

This pull request includes several improvements to the QS class in the lib/src/qs.dart file. The main focus of these changes is to enhance code readability and efficiency by refactoring existing code and simplifying logic.

Code readability and efficiency improvements:

  • Refactored the merging logic within the loop to directly assign the merged result to obj, reducing unnecessary intermediate variables.
  • Simplified the initialization of the obj variable using a switch expression, making the code more concise and easier to understand.
  • Removed the redundant commaRoundTrip variable and integrated its logic directly into the relevant method call.
  • Combined multiple conditions within the loop into a single if statement to streamline the code.
  • Replaced string concatenation with StringBuffer for building the query string, improving performance and readability.

@techouse techouse self-assigned this Mar 4, 2025
Copy link

coderabbitai bot commented Mar 4, 2025

Walkthrough

The pull request refactors the logic in the QS class within lib/src/qs.dart. In the decode method, an intermediate object creation is removed and replaced with an inline call using Utils.merge. The encode method now employs a switch expression instead of an if-else chain for object type determination and utilises a StringBuffer for constructing the output string. Additionally, unnecessary variables such as commaRoundTrip have been eliminated.

Changes

File(s) Change Summary
lib/src/qs.dart Refactored decode: removed intermediate variable and integrated _parseKeys call into Utils.merge. Refactored encode: replaced multi-step conditional with a switch expression, removed commaRoundTrip, and employed StringBuffer for managing the prefix and charset logic.

Sequence Diagram(s)

sequenceDiagram
    participant Client
    participant QS
    participant Utils

    Client->>QS: decode(queryString)
    QS->>Utils: merge(_parseKeys(queryString))
    Utils-->>QS: mergedObject
    QS-->>Client: return mergedObject
Loading
sequenceDiagram
    participant Client
    participant QS

    Client->>QS: encode(object, options)
    QS->>QS: Determine type using switch expression
    QS->>QS: Build output string using StringBuffer 
    QS->>QS: Call _encode with embedded comma logic & charset sentinel
    QS-->>Client: return encoded string
Loading

Possibly related PRs

Suggested labels

enhancement

Poem

I'm a little rabbit, quick on my feet,
Hopping through refactored code, oh so neat!
Variables reduced, logic now flows,
With StringBuffer magic, the output clearly shows.
Here in the code garden, improvements bloom—
A refactored QS class makes the day go zoom!
🐇✨


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?

❤️ Share
🪧 Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

  • Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
    • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
    • Generate unit testing code for this file.
    • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
  • Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
    • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
  • PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
    • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
    • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
    • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

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)

  • @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
  • @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
  • @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
  • @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
  • @coderabbitai generate docstrings to generate docstrings for this PR.
  • @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
  • @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

  • Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
  • Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
  • Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

CodeRabbit Configuration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

  • You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
  • Please see the configuration documentation for more information.
  • If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json

Documentation and Community

  • Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
  • Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
  • Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

Copy link

Coverage summary from Codacy

See diff coverage on Codacy

Coverage variation Diff coverage
+0.02% (target: -1.00%) 100.00%
Coverage variation details
Coverable lines Covered lines Coverage
Common ancestor commit (76253f3) 689 671 97.39%
Head commit (8914ad5) 693 (+4) 675 (+4) 97.40% (+0.02%)

Coverage variation is the difference between the coverage for the head and common ancestor commits of the pull request branch: <coverage of head commit> - <coverage of common ancestor commit>

Diff coverage details
Coverable lines Covered lines Diff coverage
Pull request (#29) 20 20 100.00%

Diff coverage is the percentage of lines that are covered by tests out of the coverable lines that the pull request added or modified: <covered lines added or modified>/<coverable lines added or modified> * 100%

See your quality gate settings    Change summary preferences

Codacy stopped sending the deprecated coverage status on June 5th, 2024. Learn more

Copy link

codecov bot commented Mar 4, 2025

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 97.40%. Comparing base (76253f3) to head (8914ad5).
Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main      #29      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   97.38%   97.40%   +0.01%     
==========================================
  Files          14       14              
  Lines         689      693       +4     
==========================================
+ Hits          671      675       +4     
  Misses         18       18              

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

Copy link

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Actionable comments posted: 0

🧹 Nitpick comments (2)
lib/src/qs.dart (2)

49-57: Elegant refactoring by removing the intermediate variable.

This change elegantly eliminates an unnecessary intermediate variable by directly passing the result of _parseKeys to Utils.merge. This improves code conciseness without sacrificing readability.


145-150: Performance improvement using StringBuffer.

Replacing string concatenation with StringBuffer is a performance best practice in Dart, especially when building strings incrementally. This change improves efficiency while maintaining clear intent.

📜 Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 76253f3 and 8914ad5.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • lib/src/qs.dart (5 hunks)
⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms (2)
  • GitHub Check: Test (chrome)
  • GitHub Check: Codacy Static Code Analysis
🔇 Additional comments (5)
lib/src/qs.dart (5)

75-82: Excellent use of switch expression pattern matching.

The switch expression is a modern and more elegant approach compared to traditional if-else chains. This refactoring improves readability while also providing explicit typing for obj as Map<String, dynamic> rather than the previous implicit dynamic type, enhancing type safety.


107-109: Good simplification of conditional logic.

Combining two separate conditions with individual continue statements into a single condition with logical OR makes the code more concise and easier to follow.


117-120: Clean removal of unnecessary variable.

Eliminating the redundant commaRoundTrip variable and directly embedding its logic in the parameter list is a good simplification. Since the expression is used only once and remains readable inline, this change enhances code clarity.


152-161: Elegant use of switch expression for charset handling.

The switch expression here is more elegant and concise than nested if-else statements. The addition of a catch-all case with _ ensures robustness, handling any unexpected charset values gracefully.


163-167: Clear and concise string assembly logic.

The condition to only append the joined string when it's not empty is explicit and clear. The final toString() call on the StringBuffer nicely completes the refactoring pattern.

@techouse techouse merged commit fe945f2 into main Mar 4, 2025
14 checks passed
@techouse techouse deleted the chore/refactor branch March 4, 2025 22:49
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant