enhance(apps/frontend-manage): make activity evaluation pages resizable #4362
Conversation
…able-activity-evaluation
Current Aviator status
This PR was merged manually (without Aviator). Merging manually can negatively impact the performance of the queue. Consider using Aviator next time.
See the real-time status of this PR on the
Aviator webapp.
Use the Aviator Chrome Extension
to see the status of your PR within GitHub.
|
📝 Walkthrough📝 WalkthroughWalkthroughThis pull request introduces updates to three components: Changes
Possibly related PRs
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 (
|
|
| GitGuardian id | GitGuardian status | Secret | Commit | Filename | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1509424 | Triggered | Generic Password | 42d14a4 | docker-compose.yml | View secret |
| 1509424 | Triggered | Generic Password | 42d14a4 | util/_restore-prod.sh | View secret |
| 1509424 | Triggered | Generic Password | 42d14a4 | util/_restore-prod.sh | View secret |
| 1509424 | Triggered | Generic Password | 42d14a4 | util/_restore-prod.sh | View secret |
| 1509424 | Triggered | Generic Password | 09c947b | docker-compose.yml | View secret |
| 1623504 | Triggered | Username Password | 09c947b | deploy/compose-traefik-proxy/klicker/services.env | View secret |
| 1509424 | Triggered | Generic Password | 09c947b | deploy/compose/docker-compose.yml | View secret |
| 1509424 | Triggered | Generic Password | 09c947b | deploy/compose/docker-compose.yml | View secret |
| 1509424 | Triggered | Generic Password | fb6f372 | deploy/compose/docker-compose.yml | View secret |
| 1623504 | Triggered | Username Password | fb6f372 | deploy/compose-traefik-proxy/klicker/services.env | View secret |
| 1509424 | Triggered | Generic Password | fb6f372 | docker-compose.yml | View secret |
| 1509424 | Triggered | Generic Password | fb6f372 | deploy/compose/docker-compose.yml | View secret |
🛠 Guidelines to remediate hardcoded secrets
- Understand the implications of revoking this secret by investigating where it is used in your code.
- Replace and store your secrets safely. Learn here the best practices.
- Revoke and rotate these secrets.
- If possible, rewrite git history. Rewriting git history is not a trivial act. You might completely break other contributing developers' workflow and you risk accidentally deleting legitimate data.
To avoid such incidents in the future consider
- following these best practices for managing and storing secrets including API keys and other credentials
- install secret detection on pre-commit to catch secret before it leaves your machine and ease remediation.
🦉 GitGuardian detects secrets in your source code to help developers and security teams secure the modern development process. You are seeing this because you or someone else with access to this repository has authorized GitGuardian to scan your pull request.
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Caution
Inline review comments failed to post. This is likely due to GitHub's limits when posting large numbers of comments.
Actionable comments posted: 1
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (3)
apps/frontend-manage/src/components/evaluation/elements/ChoicesEvaluation.tsx (2)
28-31: Add type safety to useLocalStorage hookConsider adding type safety to the useLocalStorage hook to ensure the stored value is always boolean.
- const [isCollapsed, setIsCollapsed] = useLocalStorage( + const [isCollapsed, setIsCollapsed] = useLocalStorage<boolean>( `evaluation-${instanceEvaluation.id}-isCollapsed`, false )
48-62: Consider adding a collapse indicator or toggle buttonWhen the sidebar is collapsed, there's no visual indication or easy way to expand it back. Consider adding a collapse indicator or toggle button for better user experience.
<ResizablePanel defaultSize={isCollapsed ? 0 : 20} minSize={10} collapsible collapsedSize={0} onCollapse={() => setIsCollapsed(true)} onExpand={() => setIsCollapsed(false)} - className={twMerge('gap-2 border-l px-4 py-2', textSize.text)} + className={twMerge( + 'gap-2 border-l px-4 py-2 relative', + textSize.text + )} > + {isCollapsed && ( + <button + onClick={() => setIsCollapsed(false)} + className="absolute -left-4 top-2 bg-gray-200 p-1 rounded" + aria-label="Expand sidebar" + > + <span>⟨</span> + </button> + )} <ChoicesSidebar instance={instanceEvaluation} textSize={textSize} showSolution={showSolution} /> </ResizablePanel>apps/frontend-manage/src/components/evaluation/elements/NREvaluation.tsx (1)
49-49: Simplify thekeyprop to prevent unnecessary re-mountsIncluding
isCollapsedin thekeyprop of theResizablePanelcauses the component to unmount and remount wheneverisCollapsedchanges, which can lead to performance issues. Since React re-renders components based on state changes, it's unnecessary to alter thekeyfor this purpose.Apply this diff to optimize the
keyprop:- key={`parent-${instanceEvaluation.id}-${isCollapsed ? 'collapsed' : 'expanded'}`} + key={`parent-${instanceEvaluation.id}`}
🛑 Comments failed to post (1)
apps/frontend-manage/src/components/evaluation/elements/FTEvaluation.tsx (1)
51-51: 🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Avoid changing component keys based on state
Changing the key of
ResizablePanelbased on theisCollapsedstate can lead to unnecessary unmounting and remounting of the component, potentially causing performance issues and loss of state. It's recommended to use a stable key.Apply this change:
- key={`parent-${instanceEvaluation.id}-${isCollapsed ? 'collapsed' : 'expanded'}`} + key={`parent-${instanceEvaluation.id}`}📝 Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.key={`parent-${instanceEvaluation.id}`}
klicker-uzh
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Project |
klicker-uzh
|
| Branch Review |
resizable-activity-evaluation
|
| Run status |
|
| Run duration | 11m 48s |
| Commit |
|
| Committer | Jannis Alsbach |
| View all properties for this run ↗︎ | |
| Test results | |
|---|---|
Failures
|
0
|
Flaky
|
0
|
Pending
|
0
|
Skipped
|
0
|
Passing
|
146
|
| View all changes introduced in this branch ↗︎ | |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Looks great! However, I would wait with merging this branch until we have completed the architectural changes of the live quiz (PR #4338), where we combine the live quiz and asynchronous activity evaluation. There, we should also make sure that the QR codes are properly shown on the sidebars and do not cause scrolling or similar undesired behavior.
apps/frontend-manage/src/components/evaluation/elements/ChoicesEvaluation.tsx
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
apps/frontend-manage/src/components/evaluation/elements/ChoicesEvaluation.tsx
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
apps/frontend-manage/src/components/evaluation/elements/FTEvaluation.tsx
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
apps/frontend-manage/src/components/evaluation/elements/NREvaluation.tsx
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
…h-bf/klicker-uzh into resizable-activity-evaluation
…able-activity-evaluation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Caution
Inline review comments failed to post. This is likely due to GitHub's limits when posting large numbers of comments.
Actionable comments posted: 3
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (4)
apps/frontend-manage/src/components/evaluation/elements/ChoicesEvaluation.tsx (1)
33-40: Consider adding responsive size constraintsThe implementation looks good with appropriate size constraints. Consider adding responsive size constraints for different screen sizes if needed.
- <ResizablePanel defaultSize={80} minSize={50} className="px-4"> + <ResizablePanel + defaultSize={80} + minSize={{ base: 30, md: 50 }} + className="px-4" + >apps/frontend-manage/src/components/evaluation/elements/NREvaluation.tsx (2)
31-35: Consider sanitizing the instance ID for storageThe
autoSaveIduses the instance ID directly. Consider sanitizing it to ensure it's safe for use in storage keys.- autoSaveId={`evaluation-${instanceEvaluation.id}`} + autoSaveId={`evaluation-${encodeURIComponent(instanceEvaluation.id)}`}
31-62: Optimize ResizablePanelGroup key implementationThe panel group's key dependency on
instanceEvaluation.idmight cause unnecessary remounts. Consider moving the key to the parent component if the entire evaluation needs to remount on ID change.Otherwise, the resizable layout implementation is well-structured with appropriate default and minimum sizes, and proper collapse handling.
apps/frontend-manage/src/components/evaluation/elements/FTEvaluation.tsx (1)
33-45: Consider performance optimization for chart renderingThe ElementChart is re-rendered on every panel resize. Consider implementing ResizeObserver or debouncing to optimize performance.
<ResizablePanel defaultSize={80} minSize={50} className="px-4"> + <div className="h-full"> <ElementChart chartType={chartType} instanceEvaluation={instanceEvaluation} showSolution={showSolution} textSize={textSize} /> + </div> </ResizablePanel>
🛑 Comments failed to post (3)
apps/frontend-manage/src/components/evaluation/elements/ChoicesEvaluation.tsx (1)
8-12: 💡 Codebase verification
Missing
@uzh-bf/design-systemin dependenciesThe design system components are imported from
'@uzh-bf/design-system/dist/future'but@uzh-bf/design-systemis not listed inpackage.jsondependencies.🔗 Analysis chain
Verify the stability of design system components
The components are imported from '@uzh-bf/design-system/dist/future' which might indicate experimental features. Ensure these components are stable for production use.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Check if these components are used elsewhere in the codebase rg --type tsx --type jsx "from '@uzh-bf/design-system/dist/future'" -B 1 -A 1 # Check package.json for the design system version fd package.json --exec cat {} | jq '.dependencies["@uzh-bf/design-system"]'Length of output: 363
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Corrected search for components from '@uzh-bf/design-system/dist/future' in tsx and jsx files rg "from '@uzh-bf/design-system/dist/future'" --type-add 'tsx:*.tsx' --type-add 'jsx:*.jsx' --type tsx --type jsx # Verify if the design system is marked as stable or experimental in package.json jq '.dependencies["@uzh-bf/design-system"]' package.jsonLength of output: 1152
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Check for '@uzh-bf/design-system' in dependencies, devDependencies, and peerDependencies jq '.dependencies["@uzh-bf/design-system"], .devDependencies["@uzh-bf/design-system"], .peerDependencies["@uzh-bf/design-system"]' package.jsonLength of output: 160
apps/frontend-manage/src/components/evaluation/elements/FTEvaluation.tsx (2)
47-65: 🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Add error boundary for resizable sidebar
The sidebar contains complex conditional rendering that could fail at runtime. Consider wrapping it in an error boundary to gracefully handle potential failures.
+import { ErrorBoundary } from '@uzh-bf/design-system' <ResizablePanel defaultSize={20} minSize={10} collapsible collapsedSize={0} onCollapse={() => setIsCollapsed(true)} onExpand={() => setIsCollapsed(false)} className={twMerge('gap-2 border-l px-4 py-2', textSize.text)} > + <ErrorBoundary fallback={<div>Error loading sidebar</div>}> {instanceEvaluation.results.solutions && showSolution && !isCollapsed && ( <FTSidebar instance={instanceEvaluation} textSize={textSize} showSolution={showSolution} /> )} + </ErrorBoundary> </ResizablePanel>Committable suggestion skipped: line range outside the PR's diff.
8-13: 💡 Codebase verification
@uzh-bf/design-systemis not listed inpackage.jsondependenciesThe components from
@uzh-bf/design-system/dist/futureare used in multiple files but the package is not included inpackage.json. Please ensure that@uzh-bf/design-systemis added to the project's dependencies.🔗 Analysis chain
Verify stability of design system components
The components are being imported from
@uzh-bf/design-system/dist/futurewhich suggests they might be experimental or in beta. Ensure these components are stable enough for production use.
[/run_scripts]
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Check if these components are used elsewhere in the codebase # and verify their stability through package.json # Search for other usages of these components echo "Checking usage of ResizablePanel components:" rg -l "ResizablePanel|ResizablePanelGroup|ResizableHandle" --type tsx # Check package version echo -e "\nChecking @uzh-bf/design-system version:" cat package.json | jq '.dependencies["@uzh-bf/design-system"]'Length of output: 363
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Search for usages of specific ResizablePanel components in .tsx files without using --type echo "Checking usage of ResizablePanel components in .tsx files:" rg "ResizablePanel|ResizablePanelGroup|ResizableHandle" --glob "*.tsx" # Check all dependency sections in package.json for @uzh-bf/design-system echo -e "\nChecking all dependency sections in package.json for @uzh-bf/design-system:" cat package.json | jq '.dependencies["@uzh-bf/design-system"] // .devDependencies["@uzh-bf/design-system"] // .peerDependencies["@uzh-bf/design-system"]'Length of output: 3662
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Very nice! Made a small adjustment so the state is actually saved per question type and not for a specific instance id (that will probably not be opened a second time anyway). Also to not fill up local storage with so many key/value pairs.
LGTM and will merge after the related live quiz branch is integrated.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (2)
apps/frontend-manage/src/components/evaluation/elements/NREvaluation.tsx (1)
31-62: Consider enhancing accessibilityThe resizable interface could benefit from improved accessibility features.
Consider applying these improvements:
<ResizablePanelGroup autoSaveId="evaluation-nr" key={`panel-group-${instanceEvaluation.id}`} direction="horizontal" + aria-label="Evaluation layout" > - <ResizablePanel defaultSize={80} minSize={50} className="px-4"> + <ResizablePanel + defaultSize={80} + minSize={50} + className="px-4" + aria-label="Chart panel" + > {/* ... */} </ResizablePanel> - <ResizableHandle withHandle /> + <ResizableHandle + withHandle + aria-label="Resize handle" + /> <ResizablePanel defaultSize={20} minSize={10} collapsible collapsedSize={0} onCollapse={() => setIsCollapsed(true)} onExpand={() => setIsCollapsed(false)} className={twMerge('gap-2 border-l px-4 py-2', textSize.text)} + aria-label="Sidebar panel" + aria-expanded={!isCollapsed} >apps/frontend-manage/src/components/evaluation/elements/FTEvaluation.tsx (1)
38-45: Consider adding aria labels for accessibilityThe resizable panels and handle could benefit from aria labels to improve accessibility for screen readers.
- <ResizablePanel defaultSize={80} minSize={50} className="px-4"> + <ResizablePanel + defaultSize={80} + minSize={50} + className="px-4" + aria-label="Chart panel" + > <ElementChart chartType={chartType} instanceEvaluation={instanceEvaluation} showSolution={showSolution} textSize={textSize} /> </ResizablePanel> - <ResizableHandle withHandle /> + <ResizableHandle withHandle aria-label="Resize handle" /> - <ResizablePanel + <ResizablePanel + aria-label="Solutions sidebar"Also applies to: 47-65
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (3)
apps/frontend-manage/src/components/evaluation/elements/ChoicesEvaluation.tsx(2 hunks)apps/frontend-manage/src/components/evaluation/elements/FTEvaluation.tsx(2 hunks)apps/frontend-manage/src/components/evaluation/elements/NREvaluation.tsx(2 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (10)
apps/frontend-manage/src/components/evaluation/elements/ChoicesEvaluation.tsx (3)
33-40: LGTM! Panel constraints are well-balanced
The size constraints (default: 80%, minimum: 50%) ensure the chart remains usable while allowing flexibility in resizing.
41-54: LGTM! Clean implementation of collapsible sidebar
The sidebar implementation is well-structured with appropriate size constraints and built-in collapse functionality. Good job on removing the manual collapse state management as suggested in the previous review.
8-12: Verify the stability of future components
The components are imported from @uzh-bf/design-system/dist/future, which suggests they might be experimental. Ensure these components are stable enough for production use.
✅ Verification successful
Let me check the CHANGELOG.md file to understand if there are any stability concerns with these components.
Based on the package.json files and CHANGELOG.md, I can see that @uzh-bf/design-system is being used at version 3.0.0-alpha.34 across multiple packages, and there are no stability warnings or issues mentioned regarding the ResizablePanel components or future path.
Components from /dist/future are stable for production use
The components are part of the official v3 alpha release of the design system. While they are in the future directory, they are included in the published package and are being actively used across the codebase. No stability issues have been reported in the changelog.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check the package.json and documentation for any stability warnings
fd package.json | xargs rg -l "@uzh-bf/design-system" | xargs cat
fd "README|CHANGELOG" -e md | xargs rg -l "ResizablePanel|future"
Length of output: 27876
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check CHANGELOG.md for any mentions of ResizablePanel or future components
cat CHANGELOG.md
Length of output: 131120
apps/frontend-manage/src/components/evaluation/elements/NREvaluation.tsx (3)
28-28: LGTM! Clear and purposeful state management
The collapsed state implementation is clean and follows React best practices.
31-35: LGTM! Well-structured resizable layout
The ResizablePanelGroup implementation provides a good user experience with appropriate default and minimum sizes.
8-13: Verify stability of design system components
The imports from '@uzh-bf/design-system/dist/future' suggest these components might be experimental. Ensure these components are stable enough for production use.
✅ Verification successful
Resizable components are consistently used and properly integrated
The verification shows that:
- The resizable components are used consistently across multiple evaluation components (FTEvaluation, ChoicesEvaluation)
- They are part of
@uzh-bf/design-systemv3.0.0-alpha.34, which is a proper dependency in frontend-manage's package.json - The implementation pattern is consistent, using the components for a main content panel and a collapsible sidebar
- The codebase also uses
react-resizable-panelsas a dependency, suggesting these components are built on a stable foundation
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check if these components are used elsewhere in the codebase
rg -l "ResizablePanel|ResizablePanelGroup|ResizableHandle" --type tsx
Length of output: 99
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check if these components are used elsewhere in the codebase, using ripgrep without file type filter
rg -l "ResizablePanel|ResizablePanelGroup|ResizableHandle"
# Also check package.json for the design system dependency
cat package.json 2>/dev/null || cat apps/frontend-manage/package.json 2>/dev/null
Length of output: 4413
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check the content of other files using these components to understand their usage pattern
rg "ResizablePanel|ResizablePanelGroup|ResizableHandle" -A 5 -B 5 apps/frontend-manage/src/components/evaluation/elements/FTEvaluation.tsx apps/frontend-manage/src/components/evaluation/elements/ChoicesEvaluation.tsx
# Check the frontend-manage package.json for design system dependency
cat apps/frontend-manage/package.json
Length of output: 14113
apps/frontend-manage/src/components/evaluation/elements/FTEvaluation.tsx (4)
28-28: LGTM: Clean state management implementation
The useState implementation for collapse state is clean and appropriate for this local UI state management.
68-74: LGTM: Clean fallback implementation
The fallback rendering when showSolution is false maintains consistency with the resizable version while providing a simpler layout.
8-13: Verify stability of design system components
The components are being imported from @uzh-bf/design-system/dist/future which might indicate experimental features. Ensure these components are stable enough for production use.
✅ Verification successful
Let me check how these components are being used in other files to verify their stability.
Resizable components from design system are being used consistently
The ResizablePanel components from '@uzh-bf/design-system/dist/future' are being used consistently across multiple evaluation components (FTEvaluation, ChoicesEvaluation, NREvaluation) with identical patterns and configurations. This consistent implementation across related components suggests these are stable, production-ready features rather than experimental ones.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check if these components are used elsewhere in the codebase
rg -l "from '@uzh-bf/design-system/dist/future'" | grep -v "FTEvaluation.tsx"
Length of output: 568
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check the usage patterns of ResizablePanel components in other files
rg -A 5 "ResizablePanel|ResizablePanelGroup|ResizableHandle" apps/frontend-manage/src/components/
Length of output: 10605
33-36: Verify persistence of panel sizes
The autoSaveId suggests panel sizes are persisted. Ensure this works as expected across sessions.
✅ Verification successful
Panel size persistence is consistently implemented
The autoSaveId is consistently used across all evaluation components (FT, NR, and Choices) with unique identifiers. The ResizablePanelGroup component is imported from '@uzh-bf/design-system/dist/future' and follows a consistent pattern:
- Main panel: 80% default, 50% minimum size
- Sidebar panel: 20% default, 10% minimum size
- Proper collapsible functionality with handle
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check for other usages of autoSaveId to understand the persistence pattern
rg "autoSaveId" --type typescript
Length of output: 68
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for autoSaveId using ripgrep without file type restriction
rg "autoSaveId"
# Also search for ResizablePanelGroup to understand the component usage
rg "ResizablePanelGroup"
# Use ast-grep to find ResizablePanelGroup component implementations
ast-grep --pattern 'ResizablePanelGroup {
$$$
}'
Length of output: 1330
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's examine the implementation details of these evaluation components
cat apps/frontend-manage/src/components/evaluation/elements/FTEvaluation.tsx
cat apps/frontend-manage/src/components/evaluation/elements/NREvaluation.tsx
cat apps/frontend-manage/src/components/evaluation/elements/ChoicesEvaluation.tsx
# Also search for any ResizablePanel imports to understand the component source
rg "from.*ResizablePanel"
Length of output: 6112
apps/frontend-manage/src/components/evaluation/elements/ChoicesEvaluation.tsx
Show resolved
Hide resolved
…able-activity-evaluation # Conflicts: # apps/frontend-manage/src/components/evaluation/elements/ChoicesEvaluation.tsx # apps/frontend-manage/src/components/evaluation/elements/FTEvaluation.tsx # apps/frontend-manage/src/components/evaluation/elements/NREvaluation.tsx
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (1)
apps/frontend-manage/src/components/evaluation/elements/NREvaluation.tsx (1)
48-52: Consider dynamic autoSaveId for multiple instancesThe static
autoSaveId="evaluation-nr"might cause conflicts if multiple instances of this component are rendered. Consider making it unique by incorporating the instance ID.- autoSaveId="evaluation-nr" + autoSaveId={`evaluation-nr-${instanceEvaluation.id}`}
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (3)
apps/frontend-manage/src/components/evaluation/elements/ChoicesEvaluation.tsx(2 hunks)apps/frontend-manage/src/components/evaluation/elements/FTEvaluation.tsx(2 hunks)apps/frontend-manage/src/components/evaluation/elements/NREvaluation.tsx(3 hunks)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)
- apps/frontend-manage/src/components/evaluation/elements/FTEvaluation.tsx
🔇 Additional comments (8)
apps/frontend-manage/src/components/evaluation/elements/NREvaluation.tsx (3)
38-38: LGTM: Clean state management implementation
The collapsed state management is well-implemented with clear naming and proper initialization.
53-84: LGTM: Well-structured resizable layout
The resizable panel implementation is well thought out with:
- Appropriate default sizes (80/20 split)
- Reasonable minimum size constraints
- Proper collapse/expand functionality
- Clean conditional rendering of sidebar content
9-13: Verify stability of imports from future directory
The components are being imported from @uzh-bf/design-system/dist/future which might indicate experimental features. Consider verifying the stability of these components for production use.
apps/frontend-manage/src/components/evaluation/elements/ChoicesEvaluation.tsx (5)
30-34: Consider using dynamic autoSaveId based on instance ID
The autoSaveId should be unique per evaluation instance to ensure proper state persistence.
- autoSaveId="evaluation-choices"
+ autoSaveId={`evaluation-choices-${instanceEvaluation.id}`}35-42: LGTM! Chart panel configuration is well-structured
The panel size constraints (default: 80%, min: 50%) provide a good balance for chart visibility while maintaining resizability.
43-43: LGTM! Handle implementation is correct
The resizable handle is properly configured with visual feedback.
44-57: Consider removing any manual collapse handling code
The ResizablePanel now handles collapsing automatically. Verify if there's any redundant collapse state management code in the ChoicesSidebar component that can be removed.
8-12: Verify stability of design system imports
The imports are from '@uzh-bf/design-system/dist/future' which might indicate experimental features. Ensure these components are stable for production use.
✅ Verification successful
Based on the shell script results and changelog analysis, I can generate the final response:
Components from design-system/dist/future are stable for production use
The imports from '@uzh-bf/design-system/dist/future' are part of the design system version 3.0.0-alpha.35, which is being actively used across the codebase. The changelog shows consistent updates and improvements to the design system integration, indicating these components are intended for production use despite the 'future' path. The ResizablePanel components are part of the standard feature set in the current version.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check package.json for design system version and any related documentation
fd package.json --exec cat {} | jq '.dependencies["@uzh-bf/design-system"]'
# Look for any documentation about these components
fd README.md --exec grep -A 5 -i "ResizablePanel\|future" {}
Length of output: 314
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's check the actual usage of these components in the codebase
rg -A 5 "from '@uzh-bf/design-system/dist/future'" --type tsx
# Check if there are any other imports from the future path
rg "from '@uzh-bf/design-system/dist/future'" --type tsx
# Look for any migration or breaking changes documentation
fd CHANGELOG.md --exec grep -A 10 -i "ResizablePanel\|future\|3.0.0-alpha" {}
# Check the actual implementation to see if these are the only files using these components
ast-grep --pattern 'import { $$$ } from "@uzh-bf/design-system/dist/future"'
Length of output: 41325
apps/frontend-manage/src/components/evaluation/elements/NREvaluation.tsx
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (5)
apps/frontend-manage/src/components/evaluation/elements/NREvaluation.tsx (1)
51-51: Consider removing unnecessary key propThe key prop
panel-group-${instanceEvaluation.id}might cause unnecessary remounts of the entire panel group when the ID changes. Since ResizablePanelGroup is already a top-level component, this key might not be needed unless there's a specific reason for forcing remounts.- key={`panel-group-${instanceEvaluation.id}`}apps/frontend-manage/src/components/evaluation/elements/ChoicesEvaluation.tsx (1)
45-58: Consider adding accessibility attributes to the collapsible panelWhile the implementation is functionally correct, consider enhancing accessibility by adding ARIA attributes.
<ResizablePanel defaultSize={20} minSize={10} collapsible collapsedSize={0} + aria-label="Evaluation sidebar" + aria-expanded={!collapsed} className={twMerge('gap-2 border-l px-4 py-2', textSize.text)} >apps/frontend-manage/src/components/evaluation/elements/FTEvaluation.tsx (3)
36-40: Consider adding error boundary for panel persistenceThe
autoSaveIdfeature relies on local storage. Consider implementing error handling for cases where storage access fails.
41-48: Extract panel size configurationsConsider extracting the panel size configurations into constants for better maintainability:
+const PANEL_CONFIG = { + chart: { default: 80, min: 50 }, + sidebar: { default: 20, min: 10, collapsed: 0 } +} as const; -<ResizablePanel defaultSize={80} minSize={50} className="px-4"> +<ResizablePanel + defaultSize={PANEL_CONFIG.chart.default} + minSize={PANEL_CONFIG.chart.min} + className="px-4" +>Also applies to: 50-58
59-68: Simplify conditional rendering logicThe nested conditions for sidebar rendering could be simplified using a single condition:
-{instanceEvaluation.results.solutions && - showSolution && - !isCollapsed && ( +{!isCollapsed && showSolution && instanceEvaluation.results.solutions && (
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (3)
apps/frontend-manage/src/components/evaluation/elements/ChoicesEvaluation.tsx(2 hunks)apps/frontend-manage/src/components/evaluation/elements/FTEvaluation.tsx(2 hunks)apps/frontend-manage/src/components/evaluation/elements/NREvaluation.tsx(3 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (10)
apps/frontend-manage/src/components/evaluation/elements/NREvaluation.tsx (3)
39-39: LGTM! Clean state management implementation
The isCollapsed state is well-implemented with appropriate typing and initialization.
49-85: Well-structured resizable layout implementation
The ResizablePanelGroup implementation is well thought out:
- Appropriate default and minimum sizes for both panels
- Proper handling of collapse/expand states
- Efficient conditional rendering of sidebar content
- Good use of design system components
9-14: Verify stability of future/experimental features
The components are imported from @uzh-bf/design-system/dist/future, which might indicate experimental or unstable features. Consider verifying the stability and backward compatibility guarantees.
✅ Verification successful
Let me gather more information about the design system package version and its documentation.
Future components from design-system are part of stable alpha release
The components from @uzh-bf/design-system/dist/future are being used consistently across multiple components in the codebase, and they are part of a versioned alpha release (3.0.0-alpha.35). The /future path appears to be an intentional organizational structure rather than experimental features, as evidenced by widespread usage in stable components like DataTable, Evaluation elements, and Badges.
- Found in 8 different component files across the codebase
- All imports use the same stable alpha version
- Components are used in core functionality (evaluation, data tables)
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check package.json for version constraints and documentation
fd -t f "package.json" -x grep -l "@uzh-bf/design-system" {} \;
# Look for other usages of future components
rg -g "*.{ts,tsx}" "@uzh-bf/design-system/dist/future"
Length of output: 1483
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check the specific version constraint in frontend-manage's package.json
cat apps/frontend-manage/package.json | grep -A 1 "@uzh-bf/design-system"
# Look for any documentation or README about the future components
fd -t f "README.md" -x grep -l "@uzh-bf/design-system" {} \;
Length of output: 206
apps/frontend-manage/src/components/evaluation/elements/ChoicesEvaluation.tsx (4)
31-35: Consider using dynamic autoSaveId based on instance ID
The static autoSaveId could cause state conflicts between different evaluation instances.
- autoSaveId="evaluation-choices"
+ autoSaveId={`evaluation-choices-${instanceEvaluation.id}`}36-43: LGTM!
The chart panel implementation is well-structured with appropriate size constraints and proper prop passing.
44-44: LGTM!
The handle implementation is correct and straightforward.
8-13: Verify stability of design system components
The components are imported from the future subdirectory, which might indicate experimental or beta features. Ensure these components are stable enough for production use.
✅ Verification successful
Components from dist/future are being actively adopted across the codebase
The analysis shows that the dist/future components are being used consistently across multiple files in the codebase, particularly for resizable panels and UI components. The package version 3.0.0-alpha.35 indicates this is part of a planned migration to a new version of the design system, and these components are being actively adopted. The usage pattern suggests this is an intentional architectural decision rather than an experimental feature.
- Found in 8 different files using components from
dist/future - Components being used: ResizablePanel, ResizablePanelGroup, ResizableHandle, Button, Badge, TableCell
- Consistent version
3.0.0-alpha.35across multiple package.json files
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check package.json for @uzh-bf/design-system version and documentation
fd -t f "package.json" -x cat {} \; | jq '.dependencies["@uzh-bf/design-system"] // .devDependencies["@uzh-bf/design-system"]'
Length of output: 359
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check if these components are used elsewhere in the codebase
rg -l "from '@uzh-bf/design-system/dist/future'" --type ts --type tsx
# Check if there are any other imports from design-system to understand migration patterns
rg "from '@uzh-bf/design-system/((?!dist/future).)*'" --type ts --type tsx
Length of output: 469
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check if these components are used elsewhere in the codebase (corrected syntax)
rg "from '@uzh-bf/design-system/dist/future'"
# Check other design-system imports (simplified pattern)
rg "from '@uzh-bf/design-system'" | grep -v "dist/future"
Length of output: 30338
apps/frontend-manage/src/components/evaluation/elements/FTEvaluation.tsx (3)
31-31: LGTM: Clean state management implementation
The useState hook is appropriately used for managing the sidebar's collapsed state, addressing the visibility issue mentioned in previous reviews.
72-79: LGTM: Clean fallback implementation
The fallback rendering maintains consistency with the resizable version while providing a simpler layout when solutions are not shown.
8-14: Verify stability of design system components
The resizable components are imported from @uzh-bf/design-system/dist/future, which might indicate experimental features. Ensure these components are stable for production use.
✅ Verification successful
Resizable components from future dist folder are stable for production use
The components are being used consistently across multiple files in the codebase:
- DataTable.tsx
- NREvaluation.tsx
- FTEvaluation.tsx
- ChoicesEvaluation.tsx
- Question.tsx
- IndividualLeaderboard.tsx
- CourseListButton.tsx
The components are imported from @uzh-bf/design-system version 3.0.0-alpha.35, which indicates they are part of an alpha release. However, since these components are used extensively in production code and there are no reported issues, they can be considered stable enough for production use.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check package.json for design system version and any related documentation
fd -t f "package.json" -x cat {} \; | jq '.dependencies["@uzh-bf/design-system"]'
# Look for any documentation about the future components
fd -t f "README.md" -x grep -l "design-system.*future" {} \;
Length of output: 318
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check if these components are used elsewhere in the codebase
rg "from '@uzh-bf/design-system/dist/future'" -B 1 -A 1
# Check if there are any other imports from the future directory
rg "design-system.*future" -B 1 -A 1
# Look for any documentation or types for these components
fd -t f -e ts -e tsx -e d.ts | xargs rg "ResizablePanel|ResizablePanelGroup|ResizableHandle" -B 1 -A 1
Length of output: 136497
klicker-uzh
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Project |
klicker-uzh
|
| Branch Review |
v3
|
| Run status |
|
| Run duration | 11m 47s |
| Commit |
|
| Committer | Jannis Alsbach |
| View all properties for this run ↗︎ | |
| Test results | |
|---|---|
|
Failures
|
0
|
|
Flaky
|
0
|
|
Pending
|
0
|
|
Skipped
|
0
|
|
Passing
|
146
|
| View all changes introduced in this branch ↗︎ | |
Summary by CodeRabbit
New Features
Bug Fixes