OpenWF/SpaceNinjaServer
12
6
Fork 14
Code Issues 42 Pull Requests Actions Packages Projects Releases Activity

chore: handle resource being rolled as mission reward #545

Merged
Sainan merged 1 commits from resource-reward into main 2024-10-12 14:49:06 -07:00
Conversation 1 Commits 1 Files Changed 1 +5 -1
Sainan commented 2024-10-11 17:11:55 -07:00
Owner
Copy Link

closes #544

closes #544
coderabbitai[bot] commented 2024-10-11 17:12:01 -07:00 (Migrated from github.com)
Author
Owner
Copy Link

Walkthrough

The changes in the pull request involve modifications to the missionInventoryUpdateService.ts file, specifically the introduction of a new export, ExportResources, from the warframe-public-export-plus module. Additionally, the logic within the formatRewardsToInventoryType function has been updated to accommodate this new export. The function's condition that previously checked for the ExportRelics type has been expanded to include ExportResources, allowing items of this new type to be processed in a manner similar to relics. Consequently, rewards categorized as ExportResources will now be classified under "MiscItems" in the inventory system. The overall structure and control flow of the existing functions remain unchanged, with the primary focus being the handling of the new resource type.

Assessment against linked issues

Objective Addressed Explanation
Address the issue of broken weapon parts in mission rewards. ❓ It is unclear if the new export directly resolves the issue.
📜 Recent review details

Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL

📥 Commits

Files that changed from the base of the PR and between de6c1da55d and f3c2674ad7860d50df4ae68273873144627e9c7e.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • src/services/missionInventoryUpdateService.ts (2 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
🔇 Additional comments (3)
src/services/missionInventoryUpdateService.ts (3)

10-10: LGTM: Import addition for ExportResources

The addition of ExportResources to the imports is appropriate and aligns with the PR objective to handle resource rewards. This import is necessary for the changes made in the formatRewardsToInventoryType function.

Line range hint 1-214: Summary: Changes address the issue but may benefit from further refinement

The modifications in this file successfully address the core issue of handling resource rewards, particularly the MiterHandle problem mentioned in the linked issue. The changes are minimal but significant, demonstrating a good understanding of the problem.

However, there are a few areas that might benefit from further consideration:

  1. Resource Categorization: Consider if "MiscItems" is the most appropriate category for all resources, or if a more specific category would be beneficial.
  2. Resource-Specific Handling: Evaluate if certain resources (like MiterHandle) require any special processing beyond what's currently implemented.
  3. Code Clarity: It might be helpful to add a comment explaining why resources are being handled similarly to relics, to improve code maintainability.

These suggestions aim to enhance the robustness and clarity of the implementation. Overall, the changes effectively solve the immediate problem while leaving room for potential future improvements.

168-169: Approved with suggestions: Resource handling in formatRewardsToInventoryType

The modification to include ExportResources in the condition alongside ExportRelics addresses the PR objective of handling resource rewards. This change ensures that resources are processed similarly to relics, which appears to be the intended behavior.

However, I have a few questions and suggestions:

  1. Is it appropriate to treat all resources exactly like relics? Some resources might require different handling.
  2. Is "MiscItems" the most suitable category for all types of resources? It might be worth considering a more specific category for certain resources.
  3. The issue mentioned problems specifically with the MiterHandle. Is there any need for special handling of this particular resource?

To ensure this change doesn't introduce any unintended side effects, could you provide more context on how resources are typically handled in the game? Additionally, it would be helpful to run the following verification:

This will help us understand if there are any other places in the codebase where resources or the MiterHandle are handled differently.

✅ Verification successful

To address the issues with the previous shell script, please run the following updated scripts:

Verification Successful: Resource Handling Confirmed

The inclusion of ExportResources alongside ExportRelics in the formatRewardsToInventoryType function has been verified. ExportResources is consistently handled across the codebase, and there are no special cases or additional handling required for MiterHandle.

🏁 Scripts executed

The following scripts were executed for the analysis:

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check for any special handling of resources or MiterHandle in the codebase

# Search for any special handling of resources
echo "Searching for special resource handling:"
rg --type typescript "ExportResources" -C 5

# Search for any mentions of MiterHandle
echo "Searching for MiterHandle mentions:"
rg --type typescript "MiterHandle" -C 5

Length of output: 325

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check for any special handling of resources or MiterHandle in the codebase

# Search for any special handling of resources
echo "Searching for special resource handling:"
rg --type ts "ExportResources" -C 5

# Search for any mentions of MiterHandle
echo "Searching for MiterHandle mentions:"
rg --type ts "MiterHandle" -C 5

Length of output: 7596

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 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.

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.
<!-- This is an auto-generated comment: summarize by coderabbit.ai --> <!-- walkthrough_start --> ## Walkthrough The changes in the pull request involve modifications to the `missionInventoryUpdateService.ts` file, specifically the introduction of a new export, `ExportResources`, from the `warframe-public-export-plus` module. Additionally, the logic within the `formatRewardsToInventoryType` function has been updated to accommodate this new export. The function's condition that previously checked for the `ExportRelics` type has been expanded to include `ExportResources`, allowing items of this new type to be processed in a manner similar to relics. Consequently, rewards categorized as `ExportResources` will now be classified under "MiscItems" in the inventory system. The overall structure and control flow of the existing functions remain unchanged, with the primary focus being the handling of the new resource type. ## Assessment against linked issues | Objective | Addressed | Explanation | |--------------------------------------------------------------|-----------|--------------------------------------------------------------| | Address the issue of broken weapon parts in mission rewards. | ❓ | It is unclear if the new export directly resolves the issue. | <!-- walkthrough_end --><!-- This is an auto-generated comment: raw summary by coderabbit.ai --> <!-- src/services/missionInventoryUpdateService.ts: """ ## AI-generated summary of changes The diff introduces a new export, `ExportResources`, from the `warframe-public-export-plus` module and modifies the logic in the `formatRewardsToInventoryType` function to include this new export. Specifically, the condition that checks if the `type` is in `ExportRelics` has been expanded to also check if it is in `ExportResources`. This change allows rewards of type `ExportResources` to be processed similarly to those of type `ExportRelics`, categorizing them under "MiscItems" in the inventory. The overall structure and flow of the functions remain unchanged, with the primary modification being the addition of the new resource type handling. ## Alterations to the declarations of exported or public entities - New export added: `ExportResources` from `warframe-public-export-plus` in `src/services/missionInventoryUpdateService.ts` """ --> <!-- end of auto-generated comment: raw summary by coderabbit.ai --><!-- This is an auto-generated comment: pr objectives by coderabbit.ai --> <!-- ## PR Summary The pull request titled "chore: handle resource being rolled as mission reward" was submitted by user Sainan and is identified by the number 545. The primary purpose of this PR is to address an issue related to mission rewards in the Space Ninja Server project. Specifically, it aims to resolve a problem where weapon parts, which are intended to be part of mission rewards, are not being processed correctly. The PR closes issue #544, which reported that the system encountered errors when attempting to roll weapon parts as rewards. The description of the issue indicated that there were repeated error messages related to the MiterHandle weapon part, suggesting that the system was unsure how to allocate these rewards to players. The PR is intended to fix this functionality to ensure that weapon parts can be properly awarded as mission rewards. ## Objectives from Linked Issues The linked issue #544, titled "Weapon Parts as part of mission rewards seem to be broken?", outlines a specific problem encountered in the game. The issue describes error messages logged during gameplay, indicating that the system was unable to process the allocation of weapon parts as rewards. The error messages specifically mention the MiterHandle weapon part, highlighting that the system rolled this reward but did not know how to deliver it to the player. The objective of the linked issue is to identify and resolve the underlying problem that prevents weapon parts from being correctly awarded as mission rewards, ensuring that players receive their intended rewards without errors. The resolution of this issue is critical for maintaining a smooth gameplay experience and enhancing player satisfaction with the reward system. --> <!-- end of auto-generated comment: pr objectives by coderabbit.ai --> --- <details> <summary>📜 Recent review details</summary> **Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml** **Review profile: CHILL** <details> <summary>📥 Commits</summary> Files that changed from the base of the PR and between de6c1da55d9679014473fc95c5a020f5df1c7315 and f3c2674ad7860d50df4ae68273873144627e9c7e. </details> <details> <summary>📒 Files selected for processing (1)</summary> * src/services/missionInventoryUpdateService.ts (2 hunks) </details> <details> <summary>🧰 Additional context used</summary> </details> <details> <summary>🔇 Additional comments (3)</summary><blockquote> <details> <summary>src/services/missionInventoryUpdateService.ts (3)</summary><blockquote> `10-10`: **LGTM: Import addition for ExportResources** The addition of `ExportResources` to the imports is appropriate and aligns with the PR objective to handle resource rewards. This import is necessary for the changes made in the `formatRewardsToInventoryType` function. --- Line range hint `1-214`: **Summary: Changes address the issue but may benefit from further refinement** The modifications in this file successfully address the core issue of handling resource rewards, particularly the MiterHandle problem mentioned in the linked issue. The changes are minimal but significant, demonstrating a good understanding of the problem. However, there are a few areas that might benefit from further consideration: 1. Resource Categorization: Consider if "MiscItems" is the most appropriate category for all resources, or if a more specific category would be beneficial. 2. Resource-Specific Handling: Evaluate if certain resources (like MiterHandle) require any special processing beyond what's currently implemented. 3. Code Clarity: It might be helpful to add a comment explaining why resources are being handled similarly to relics, to improve code maintainability. These suggestions aim to enhance the robustness and clarity of the implementation. Overall, the changes effectively solve the immediate problem while leaving room for potential future improvements. --- `168-169`: **Approved with suggestions: Resource handling in formatRewardsToInventoryType** The modification to include `ExportResources` in the condition alongside `ExportRelics` addresses the PR objective of handling resource rewards. This change ensures that resources are processed similarly to relics, which appears to be the intended behavior. However, I have a few questions and suggestions: 1. Is it appropriate to treat all resources exactly like relics? Some resources might require different handling. 2. Is "MiscItems" the most suitable category for all types of resources? It might be worth considering a more specific category for certain resources. 3. The issue mentioned problems specifically with the MiterHandle. Is there any need for special handling of this particular resource? To ensure this change doesn't introduce any unintended side effects, could you provide more context on how resources are typically handled in the game? Additionally, it would be helpful to run the following verification: This will help us understand if there are any other places in the codebase where resources or the MiterHandle are handled differently. <details> <summary>✅ Verification successful</summary> To address the issues with the previous shell script, please run the following updated scripts: --- <!-- [monologue] [task finalize_verification_1/1] [observations] - The shell script successfully found multiple instances of `ExportResources` across the codebase. - No occurrences of `MiterHandle` were found, indicating there is no special handling for it. [analysis] - Since `ExportResources` is consistently used and no special cases for `MiterHandle` exist, the concerns raised in the review comment appear to be addressed. - The absence of `MiterHandle` suggests that no additional handling is necessary, or it might be handled elsewhere not covered by the current search. [actions] - Conclude that the verification is successful. - No further action or scripts are required. --> **Verification Successful: Resource Handling Confirmed** The inclusion of `ExportResources` alongside `ExportRelics` in the `formatRewardsToInventoryType` function has been verified. `ExportResources` is consistently handled across the codebase, and there are no special cases or additional handling required for `MiterHandle`. </details> <details> <summary>🏁 Scripts executed</summary> The following scripts were executed for the analysis: Script: ```shell #!/bin/bash # Description: Check for any special handling of resources or MiterHandle in the codebase # Search for any special handling of resources echo "Searching for special resource handling:" rg --type typescript "ExportResources" -C 5 # Search for any mentions of MiterHandle echo "Searching for MiterHandle mentions:" rg --type typescript "MiterHandle" -C 5 ``` Length of output: 325 --- Script: ```shell #!/bin/bash # Description: Check for any special handling of resources or MiterHandle in the codebase # Search for any special handling of resources echo "Searching for special resource handling:" rg --type ts "ExportResources" -C 5 # Search for any mentions of MiterHandle echo "Searching for MiterHandle mentions:" rg --type ts "MiterHandle" -C 5 ``` Length of output: 7596 </details> </blockquote></details> </blockquote></details> </details><!-- commit_ids_reviewed_start --> <!-- f3c2674ad7860d50df4ae68273873144627e9c7e --> <!-- commit_ids_reviewed_end --><!-- tips_start --> --- 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? <details> <summary>❤️ Share</summary> - [X](https://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=I%20just%20used%20%40coderabbitai%20for%20my%20code%20review%2C%20and%20it%27s%20fantastic%21%20It%27s%20free%20for%20OSS%20and%20offers%20a%20free%20trial%20for%20the%20proprietary%20code.%20Check%20it%20out%3A&url=https%3A//coderabbit.ai) - [Mastodon](https://mastodon.social/share?text=I%20just%20used%20%40coderabbitai%20for%20my%20code%20review%2C%20and%20it%27s%20fantastic%21%20It%27s%20free%20for%20OSS%20and%20offers%20a%20free%20trial%20for%20the%20proprietary%20code.%20Check%20it%20out%3A%20https%3A%2F%2Fcoderabbit.ai) - [Reddit](https://www.reddit.com/submit?title=Great%20tool%20for%20code%20review%20-%20CodeRabbit&text=I%20just%20used%20CodeRabbit%20for%20my%20code%20review%2C%20and%20it%27s%20fantastic%21%20It%27s%20free%20for%20OSS%20and%20offers%20a%20free%20trial%20for%20proprietary%20code.%20Check%20it%20out%3A%20https%3A//coderabbit.ai) - [LinkedIn](https://www.linkedin.com/sharing/share-offsite/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcoderabbit.ai&mini=true&title=Great%20tool%20for%20code%20review%20-%20CodeRabbit&summary=I%20just%20used%20CodeRabbit%20for%20my%20code%20review%2C%20and%20it%27s%20fantastic%21%20It%27s%20free%20for%20OSS%20and%20offers%20a%20free%20trial%20for%20proprietary%20code) </details> <details> <summary>🪧 Tips</summary> ### Chat There are 3 ways to chat with [CodeRabbit](https://coderabbit.ai): - 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 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. ### Documentation and Community - Visit our [Documentation](https://coderabbit.ai/docs) for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit. - Join our [Discord Community](http://discord.gg/coderabbit) to get help, request features, and share feedback. - Follow us on [X/Twitter](https://twitter.com/coderabbitai) for updates and announcements. </details> <!-- tips_end -->
Sign in to join this conversation.
Reviewers
No Reviewers
Labels
Clear labels
bug
An existing implemention is incorrect
dependencies
Pull requests that update a dependency file
documentation
Improvements or additions to documentation
enhancement
New feature or request specific to the emulator
help wanted
Extra attention is needed
improvement
missing data
part of more major rehaul
Can't be worked on right now without merge conflicts later
pr'd for
Soon™
question
Further information is requested
unimplemented
No Label
Milestone
No items
No Milestone
Projects
Clear projects
No project
Assignees
Clear assignees
No Assignees
1 Participants
Notifications
Due Date
No due date set.
Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: OpenWF/SpaceNinjaServer#545
No description provided.
Delete Branch "resource-reward"

Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?