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

ISSUE-1734 Add missing configuration warning #1741

Draft
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

fbuys
Copy link
Contributor

@fbuys fbuys commented Oct 12, 2023

This PR adds a more descriptive error message when users add a detector without configuration. Before this change a NoMethodError exception was raised with an unclear error message. Now we catch this exception and provide a more helpful error message.

A better future option might be add dry-schema.
The current yaml schema validator is outdated and does not seem to have good documentation.

See: #1734

This PR adds a more descriptive error message when users add a detector
without configuration. Before this change a NoMethodError exception was
raised with an unclear error message. Now we catch this exception and
provide a more helpful error message.

A better future option might be add
[dry-schema](https://dry-rb.org/gems/dry-schema/1.13/)

See: troessner#1734
Copy link
Collaborator

@mvz mvz left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This is very useful but the error handling should be more in line with the rest of Reek.

Once that's done it should be easy to have some tests for this. This will make the specs pass again.

@@ -80,6 +80,8 @@ def strings_to_regexes_for_detectors
to_regex item
end
end
rescue NoMethodError
warn_about_missing_configuration(detector) if detectors[detector].nil?
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think it's better to detect that detector[detector] is nil at the beginning of this block and handle that specific case there.

@@ -101,10 +103,25 @@ def strings_to_regexes_for_directories
to_regex item
end
end
rescue NoMethodError
warn_about_missing_configuration(detector) if configuration.nil?
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think it's better to detect that configuration is nil at the beginning of this block and handle that specific case there.

end
end
end
end

def warn_about_missing_configuration(detector)
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The way error handling works in Reek is that we raise specific errors throughout the code and then do the warning in lib/reek/cli/application.rb.

We do this, among other reasons, because it allows us to test the error handling code without having warnings appear all over the place during the spec run.

In this case, the error should probably be a Reek::Errors::ConfigFileError. It will be handled here:

rescue Errors::ConfigFileError => error

@@ -21,8 +21,10 @@ module DefaultDirective
# @return [self]
def add(detectors_configuration)
detectors_configuration.each do |name, configuration|
detector = key_to_smell_detector(name)
self[detector] = (self[detector] || {}).merge configuration
if configuration
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Empty configs should be filtered out earlier on. In fact, if you move the handling of the error, Reek will not run with nil configurations so this condition will no longer be needed.

@mvz
Copy link
Collaborator

mvz commented Oct 13, 2023

An alternative solution would be to move to dry-schema immediately.

@troessner
Copy link
Owner

Agree with all of @mvz comments so far :)

@fbuys
Copy link
Contributor Author

fbuys commented Nov 6, 2023

Making this a WIP PR, waiting on #1749

@fbuys fbuys marked this pull request as draft November 6, 2023 19:43
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.

3 participants