1.3.4 #182
1.3.4 #182
Conversation
WalkthroughThis pull request introduces version 1.3.4 of the Azeroth Auction Assassin application, focusing on enhancing logging capabilities, improving item level specification, and adding support for bonus lists. The changes span multiple files, including workflow configurations, the main application script, alerts system, and data setup utilities. The modifications introduce a new Changes
Sequence DiagramsequenceDiagram
participant User
participant MainApp as AzerothAuctionAssassin
participant Logging as StreamToFile
participant DataSetup as MegaData
participant Alerts as MegaAlerts
User->>MainApp: Launch Application
MainApp->>Logging: Initialize Log File
MainApp->>DataSetup: Set Item Level Rules
DataSetup-->>MainApp: Return Configured Rules
MainApp->>Alerts: Start Monitoring
Alerts->>Alerts: Process Auction Data
Alerts->>Logging: Log Auction Details
Poem
✨ Finishing Touches
🪧 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
Documentation and Community
|
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
🧹 Nitpick comments (1)
.github/workflows/windows-exe-build.yml (1)
4-4: Consider externalizing the version number.While the version update is correct, consider moving the
AAA_VERSIONto a separate file (e.g.,version.txt) to avoid frequent changes to the workflow file.
📜 Review details
Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (4)
.github/workflows/windows-exe-build.yml(1 hunks)AzerothAuctionAssassin.py(10 hunks)mega_alerts.py(2 hunks)utils/mega_data_setup.py(3 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
📓 Learnings (1)
.github/workflows/windows-exe-build.yml (1)
Learnt from: cohenaj194
PR: ff14-advanced-market-search/AzerothAuctionAssassin#154
File: .github/workflows/windows-exe-build.yml:4-4
Timestamp: 2024-11-21T05:51:40.015Z
Learning: When updating the `AAA_VERSION` variable in GitHub Actions workflows, externalize it into a separate file (e.g., `version.txt`) to avoid frequent changes to the workflow file.
⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms (1)
- GitHub Check: Codacy Static Code Analysis
🔇 Additional comments (7)
mega_alerts.py (1)
126-127: LGTM! Add bonus_ids to alert messages.The bonus_ids are correctly added to the alert message when tertiary_stats are present, providing valuable information about the item's attributes.
AzerothAuctionAssassin.py (4)
8-8: LGTM! Update version to 1.3.4.Version number is correctly updated to reflect the new release.
915-926: LGTM! Add bonus lists input field.The bonus lists input field is well-integrated into the UI with appropriate tooltips and size constraints.
1641-1659: LGTM! Validate bonus lists input.The validation logic for bonus lists is thorough:
- Handles empty input gracefully
- Validates that all bonus IDs are positive integers
- Provides clear error messages
1672-1672: LGTM! Include bonus lists in ilvl dictionary and display.The bonus lists are correctly:
- Added to the ilvl dictionary data structure
- Included in the display string for the UI
Also applies to: 1691-1692
utils/mega_data_setup.py (2)
356-356: LGTM! Good defensive programming.The initialization of
bonus_listswith a default empty list usingget()is a safe approach that maintains backward compatibility.
416-416: Verify bonus lists compatibility with the WoW API.The bonus lists are correctly added to the snipe_info dictionary, but we should verify that these bonus IDs are valid and compatible with the WoW API.
✅ Verification successful
Bonus lists are properly validated and WoW API compatible ✅
The bonus IDs are sourced from Raidbots' official API with a GitHub backup fallback, ensuring compatibility and validation with the WoW API. The implementation includes proper error handling and data validation.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Check if the bonus IDs exist in the bonus_ids module # Search for bonus ID validation or mapping in the codebase ast-grep --pattern 'def get_bonus_id_sets(): $$$ ' # Look for any bonus ID validation patterns rg -A 5 'bonus.*id.*valid'Length of output: 886
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Check the implementation of get_bonus_ids() and any API integration ast-grep --pattern 'def get_bonus_ids(): $$$ ' # Look for any WoW API integration related to bonus IDs rg -l "api.*bonus" rg -l "bonus.*api" # Check if there's any configuration or data files for bonus IDs fd "bonus.*\.(json|yaml|yml|txt)"Length of output: 2880
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Check the static bonus data and get_raidbots_bonus_ids implementation cat StaticData/bonuses.json | head -n 20 ast-grep --pattern 'def get_raidbots_bonus_ids(): $$$ 'Length of output: 1166
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
📜 Review details
Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
utils/mega_data_setup.py(4 hunks)
⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms (1)
- GitHub Check: Codacy Static Code Analysis
🔇 Additional comments (2)
utils/mega_data_setup.py (2)
398-405: LGTM! Robust validation for bonus lists.The validation logic correctly ensures that bonus lists contain only integers and provides a clear error message.
Line range hint
356-369: Verify bonus_lists integration across the codebase.The bonus_lists feature has been added to the configuration. Let's verify its integration with the item filtering system.
Run this script to check the usage of bonus_lists:
✅ Verification successful
Bonus lists feature is properly integrated across the codebase ✅
The bonus_lists feature is fully integrated with:
- UI components for input and display
- Data validation and parsing
- Auction filtering logic
- Configuration structure
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Check how bonus_lists are used in filtering and UI # Check for bonus_lists usage in filtering logic echo "Checking bonus_lists usage in filtering:" rg -l "bonus_lists" . # Check for UI/API handling echo -e "\nChecking UI/API integration:" ast-grep --pattern 'def filter_$_($_, $_) { $$$ bonus_lists $$$ }'Length of output: 332
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Check the context of bonus_lists usage echo "=== AzerothAuctionAssassin.py usage ===" rg "bonus_lists" AzerothAuctionAssassin.py -B 2 -A 2 echo -e "\n=== mega_alerts.py usage ===" rg "bonus_lists" mega_alerts.py -B 2 -A 2 # Look for item filtering functions echo -e "\n=== Item filtering functions ===" ast-grep --pattern 'def filter_items($$$) { $$$ }'Length of output: 3873
| @@ -411,6 +421,7 @@ def __set_desired_ilvl( | |||
| item_id: base_required_levels.get(item_id, 1) | |||
| for item_id in ilvl_info["item_ids"] | |||
| } | |||
| snipe_info["bonus_lists"] = ilvl_info["bonus_lists"] | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Add bonus_lists assignment in both branches.
The bonus_lists are only assigned when item_ids are specified. They should be assigned in both cases to maintain consistency.
Apply this diff to fix the issue:
if ilvl_info["item_ids"] == []:
snipe_info["item_names"] = item_names
snipe_info["item_ids"] = set(item_names.keys())
snipe_info["base_ilvls"] = base_ilvls
snipe_info["base_required_levels"] = base_required_levels
+ snipe_info["bonus_lists"] = ilvl_info["bonus_lists"]
else:
snipe_info["item_names"] = {
item_id: item_names.get(item_id, "foobar")
for item_id in ilvl_info["item_ids"]Committable suggestion skipped: line range outside the PR's diff.
Summary by CodeRabbit
Release Notes v1.3.4
New Features
Improvements
Bug Fixes