[ECO-4983] Implement the "transient disconnect timeouts" parts of room lifecycle spec #87
Conversation
WalkthroughThe pull request introduces several modifications across multiple files, primarily enhancing the handling of room status updates and transient disconnect timeouts in a chat application. Key changes include updates to the Changes
Assessment against linked issues
Possibly related issues
Possibly related PRs
Suggested reviewers
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 (
|
lawrence-forooghian
force-pushed
the
48-transient-disconnect-timeouts
branch
from
8183e5a to
b90b8c4
Compare
![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
Actionable comments posted: 8
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (6)
Tests/AblyChatTests/Helpers/TestLogger.swift (2)
4-5: LGTM! Consider makingloggingEnabledmutable for easier testing.The addition of the
loggingEnabledproperty with a clear explanatory comment is a good improvement. It provides a simple way to control logging across all test cases.Consider changing
lettovarto allow easier toggling of logging within test suites:- static let loggingEnabled = false + static var loggingEnabled = falseThis would enable developers to enable logging for specific test cases or suites without modifying the source code.
9-14: LGTM! Consider using a more descriptive variable name for clarity.The implementation of the
logmethod is correct and efficient. It properly uses theloggingEnabledproperty to control logging and delegates to the underlying logger when enabled.For improved readability, consider renaming
Self.loggingEnabledto a more descriptive name:- guard Self.loggingEnabled else { + guard Self.isLoggingEnabled else {This small change makes the code's intent slightly clearer at first glance.
Tests/AblyChatTests/Helpers/Subscription+RoomStatusChange.swift (2)
42-50: LGTM: New methodattachingElements()is well-implemented.The
attachingElements()method is a good addition that follows the existing pattern ofsuspendedElements()andfailedElements(). It correctly uses the newStatusChangeWithOptionalErrorstruct to handle the optional error in the.attachingcase, which aligns with the PR objectives for implementing transient disconnect timeout handling.For consistency with the existing methods, consider adding a blank line before the
attachingElements()method (between lines 41 and 42).
Line range hint
15-50: Overall, the changes enhance theSubscriptionextension effectively.The additions to this file (new
StatusChangeWithOptionalErrorstruct andattachingElements()method) successfully extend the functionality to handle the "attaching" state for transient disconnect timeouts. These changes are well-integrated with the existing code, maintaining consistency in structure and naming conventions. The new implementations align well with the PR objectives and enhance the overall capability of theSubscriptionextension without disrupting existing functionality.Consider adding unit tests specifically for the new
attachingElements()method to ensure its correct behavior under various scenarios, including cases with and without associated errors.Tests/AblyChatTests/RoomLifecycleManagerTests.swift (2)
Line range hint
1005-1041: Add assertions to verify transient disconnect timeouts exist before the contributor fails.To ensure the test accurately verifies the clearing of transient disconnect timeouts, add assertions before emitting the
FAILEDevent to confirm that timeouts are set for the relevant contributors.Apply this diff to add the assertions:
contributors: contributors ) + #expect(await manager.testsOnly_hasTransientDisconnectTimeout(for: contributors[0])) + #expect(await manager.testsOnly_hasTransientDisconnectTimeout(for: contributors[1]))
Line range hint
1239-1272: Add assertions to verify transient disconnect timeouts exist before the contributor suspends.To confirm that the test accurately verifies the clearing of all transient disconnect timeouts, add assertions before emitting the
SUSPENDEDevent to verify that timeouts are initially set.Apply this diff to add the assertions:
contributors: [contributorThatWillEmitStateChange] ) + #expect(await manager.testsOnly_hasTransientDisconnectTimeout(for: contributorThatWillEmitStateChange)) + #expect(await manager.testsOnly_hasTransientDisconnectTimeout(for: contributors[1]))
🛑 Comments failed to post (8)
Sources/AblyChat/RoomStatus.swift (1)
10-10: 💡 Codebase verification
Update all
.attachingusages to include theerrorparameter.The shell script results indicate that several instances of
.attachingare missing the newerrorparameter. This inconsistency can lead to compilation errors and unexpected behaviors. Please update all occurrences to include theerror: ARTErrorInfo?parameter.Affected Files and Lines:
Sources/AblyChat/RoomLifecycleManager.swift
- Lines: 1057, 1059, 1091, 1093
Tests/AblyChatTests/RoomLifecycleManagerTests.swift
- Lines: 214, 216, 975, 1057, 1182, 1213
Example/AblyChatExample/ContentView.swift
- Line: 175
Example/AblyChatExample/Mocks/MockClients.swift
- Line: 415
🔗 Analysis chain
Approve the addition of error information to the
attachingcase.The modification to include an optional
ARTErrorInfoin theattachingcase enhances error handling capabilities during the room attachment process. This aligns well with the PR objectives, particularly in managing transient disconnect timeouts.To ensure consistency across the codebase, please verify all usages of the
attachingcase. Run the following script to identify potential areas that may need updates:🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Find all occurrences of the 'attaching' case in Swift files # Search for '.attaching' to catch both pattern matching and case construction rg --type swift -n '\.attaching' # Search for 'case .attaching' to find switch statement usages rg --type swift -n 'case \.attaching'Length of output: 4009
Sources/AblyChat/RoomLifecycleManager.swift (3)
81-81:
⚠️ Potential issuePossible Typo in Initializer Parameter Declaration
In the test-only initializer, there might be a missing colon
:after the external parameter nametestsOnly_idsOfContributorsWithTransientDisconnectTimeout.Apply this diff to fix the potential typo:
internal init( - testsOnly_idsOfContributorsWithTransientDisconnectTimeout idsOfContributorsWithTransientDisconnectTimeout: Set<Contributor.ID>? = nil, + testsOnly_idsOfContributorsWithTransientDisconnectTimeout: idsOfContributorsWithTransientDisconnectTimeout: Set<Contributor.ID>? = nil, contributors: [Contributor], logger: InternalLogger, clock: SimpleClock ) async {This ensures the external parameter name is properly separated from the internal name.
📝 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.testsOnly_idsOfContributorsWithTransientDisconnectTimeout: idsOfContributorsWithTransientDisconnectTimeout: Set<Contributor.ID>? = nil,
306-307:
⚠️ Potential issueTypographical Errors in Documentation Comments
There are minor typographical errors in the documentation comments:
- In line 306, the method names are not properly closed with backticks.
- In line 307, the word "or" is missing a closing backtick.
Apply this diff to correct the typos:
/// - the manager has recorded all transient disconnect timeouts provoked by the state change (you can retrieve these using ``testsOnly_hasTransientDisconnectTimeout(for:)`` or ``testsOnly_idOfTransientDisconnectTimeout(for:)``) /// - the manager has performed all transient disconnect timeout cancellations provoked by the state change (you can retrieve this information using ``testsOnly_hasTransientDisconnectTimeout(for:)`` or ``testsOnly_idOfTransientDisconnectTimeout(for:)``)📝 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./// - the manager has recorded all transient disconnect timeouts provoked by the state change (you can retrieve these using ``testsOnly_hasTransientDisconnectTimeout(for:)`` or ``testsOnly_idOfTransientDisconnectTimeout(for:)``) /// - the manager has performed all transient disconnect timeout cancellations provoked by the state change (you can retrieve this information using ``testsOnly_hasTransientDisconnectTimeout(for:)`` or ``testsOnly_idOfTransientDisconnectTimeout(for:)``)
417-432:
⚠️ Potential issueCapture
stateChange.reasonBefore Asynchronous TaskThe
stateChange.reasonis used inside an asynchronousTaskafter a delay, which might lead to inconsistencies ifstateChangechanges before the task executes.Capture
stateChange.reasonbefore initiating theTaskto ensure the correct error is used when changing the status.Apply this diff:
if !hasOperationInProgress, !contributorAnnotations[contributor].hasTransientDisconnectTimeout { // CHA-RL4b7 let transientDisconnectTimeout = ContributorAnnotation.TransientDisconnectTimeout() contributorAnnotations[contributor].transientDisconnectTimeout = transientDisconnectTimeout logger.log(message: "Starting transient disconnect timeout \(transientDisconnectTimeout.id) for \(contributor)", level: .debug) + let capturedReason = stateChange.reason transientDisconnectTimeout.task = Task { do { try await clock.sleep(timeInterval: 5) } catch { logger.log(message: "Transient disconnect timeout \(transientDisconnectTimeout.id) for \(contributor) was interrupted, error \(error)", level: .debug) } logger.log(message: "Transient disconnect timeout \(transientDisconnectTimeout.id) for \(contributor) completed", level: .debug) contributorAnnotations[contributor].transientDisconnectTimeout = nil - changeStatus(to: .attachingDueToContributorStateChange(error: stateChange.reason)) + changeStatus(to: .attachingDueToContributorStateChange(error: capturedReason)) } }📝 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.if !hasOperationInProgress, !contributorAnnotations[contributor].hasTransientDisconnectTimeout { // CHA-RL4b7 let transientDisconnectTimeout = ContributorAnnotation.TransientDisconnectTimeout() contributorAnnotations[contributor].transientDisconnectTimeout = transientDisconnectTimeout logger.log(message: "Starting transient disconnect timeout \(transientDisconnectTimeout.id) for \(contributor)", level: .debug) let capturedReason = stateChange.reason transientDisconnectTimeout.task = Task { do { try await clock.sleep(timeInterval: 5) } catch { logger.log(message: "Transient disconnect timeout \(transientDisconnectTimeout.id) for \(contributor) was interrupted, error \(error)", level: .debug) } logger.log(message: "Transient disconnect timeout \(transientDisconnectTimeout.id) for \(contributor) completed", level: .debug) contributorAnnotations[contributor].transientDisconnectTimeout = nil changeStatus(to: .attachingDueToContributorStateChange(error: capturedReason)) } }Tests/AblyChatTests/RoomLifecycleManagerTests.swift (4)
753-769: 🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Add an assertion to verify transient disconnect timeouts exist before the release operation.
Include an assertion before
performReleaseOperation()to confirm that a transient disconnect timeout is set, ensuring the test validates that timeouts are cleared upon releasing.Apply this diff to add the assertion:
// When: `performReleaseOperation()` is called on the lifecycle manager + #expect(await manager.testsOnly_hasTransientDisconnectTimeout(for: contributor)) async let _ = await manager.performReleaseOperation()Committable suggestion was skipped due to low confidence.
279-294: 🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Add an assertion to verify transient disconnect timeouts exist before the attach operation.
To ensure that the test accurately verifies the clearing of transient disconnect timeouts, add an assertion before
performAttachOperation()to confirm that the timeout is initially set.Apply this diff to add the assertion:
// When: `performAttachOperation()` is called on the lifecycle manager + #expect(await manager.testsOnly_hasTransientDisconnectTimeout(for: contributors[1])) try await manager.performAttachOperation()📝 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.// @spec CHA-RL1g3 @Test func attach_uponSuccess_clearsTransientDisconnectTimeouts() async throws { // Given: A RoomLifecycleManager, all of whose contributors' calls to `attach` succeed let contributors = (1 ... 3).map { _ in createContributor(attachBehavior: .complete(.success)) } let manager = await createManager( forTestingWhatHappensWhenHasTransientDisconnectTimeoutForTheseContributorIDs: [contributors[1].id], contributors: contributors ) // When: `performAttachOperation()` is called on the lifecycle manager #expect(await manager.testsOnly_hasTransientDisconnectTimeout(for: contributors[1])) try await manager.performAttachOperation() // Then: It clears all transient disconnect timeouts #expect(await !manager.testsOnly_hasTransientDisconnectTimeoutForAnyContributor) }
537-553: 🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Add an assertion to verify transient disconnect timeouts exist before the detach operation.
To strengthen the test, include an assertion before calling
performDetachOperation()to confirm that a transient disconnect timeout is set for the contributor.Apply this diff to add the assertion:
// When: `performDetachOperation()` is called on the lifecycle manager + #expect(await manager.testsOnly_hasTransientDisconnectTimeout(for: contributor)) async let _ = try await manager.performDetachOperation()📝 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.let contributor = createContributor(detachBehavior: contributorDetachOperation.behavior) let manager = await createManager( // We set a transient disconnect timeout, just so we can check that it gets cleared, as the spec point specifies forTestingWhatHappensWhenHasTransientDisconnectTimeoutForTheseContributorIDs: [contributor.id], contributors: [contributor] ) let statusChangeSubscription = await manager.onChange(bufferingPolicy: .unbounded) async let statusChange = statusChangeSubscription.first { _ in true } // When: `performDetachOperation()` is called on the lifecycle manager #expect(await manager.testsOnly_hasTransientDisconnectTimeout(for: contributor)) async let _ = try await manager.performDetachOperation() // Then: It emits a status change to DETACHING, its current state is DETACHING, and it clears transient disconnect timeouts #expect(try #require(await statusChange).current == .detaching) #expect(await manager.current == .detaching) #expect(await !manager.testsOnly_hasTransientDisconnectTimeoutForAnyContributor)
1135-1159: 🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Add assertions to verify transient disconnect timeouts exist before the contributor attaches.
To ensure the test accurately verifies the clearing of the specific transient disconnect timeout, add assertions before emitting the
ATTACHEDevent to confirm that timeouts are set for the relevant contributors.Apply this diff to add the assertions:
contributors: contributors ) + #expect(await manager.testsOnly_hasTransientDisconnectTimeout(for: contributorThatWillEmitAttachedStateChange)) + #expect(await manager.testsOnly_hasTransientDisconnectTimeout(for: contributors[1]))📝 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.forTestingWhatHappensWhenCurrentlyIn: .initialized, // case arbitrary, just care that no operation is in progress forTestingWhatHappensWhenHasTransientDisconnectTimeoutForTheseContributorIDs: [ // Give 2 of the 3 contributors a transient disconnect timeout, so we can test that only the timeout for the ATTACHED contributor gets cleared, not all of them contributorThatWillEmitAttachedStateChange.id, contributors[1].id, ], contributors: contributors ) #expect(await manager.testsOnly_hasTransientDisconnectTimeout(for: contributorThatWillEmitAttachedStateChange)) #expect(await manager.testsOnly_hasTransientDisconnectTimeout(for: contributors[1])) // When: A contributor emits a state change to ATTACHED let contributorAttachedStateChange = ARTChannelStateChange( current: .attached, previous: .attaching, // arbitrary event: .attached, reason: nil // arbitrary ) await waitForManager(manager, toHandleContributorStateChange: contributorAttachedStateChange) { await contributorThatWillEmitAttachedStateChange.channel.emitStateChange(contributorAttachedStateChange) } // Then: The manager clears any transient disconnect timeout for that contributor #expect(await !manager.testsOnly_hasTransientDisconnectTimeout(for: contributorThatWillEmitAttachedStateChange)) // check the timeout for the other contributors didn't get cleared #expect(await manager.testsOnly_hasTransientDisconnectTimeout(for: contributors[1]))
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (5)
Tests/AblyChatTests/Mocks/MockSimpleClock.swift (3)
8-11: LGTM: Well-designedSleepBehaviorenum.The
SleepBehaviorenum is a good addition, providing clear options for controlling the mock's sleep behavior. The use of@Sendablefor the closure infromFunctionis appropriate for concurrent contexts.Consider adding a brief documentation comment for the enum to explain its purpose and usage.
20-26: LGTM: Good implementation of async sequence for sleep call arguments.The addition of
sleepCallArgumentsAsyncSequenceand its backing private property is well-implemented. It provides a clean way to observe sleep calls asynchronously while encapsulating the implementation details.Consider adding a brief documentation comment for the
sleepCallArgumentsAsyncSequenceproperty to explain its purpose and usage.
29-36: LGTM: Well-implemented sleep function with flexible behavior.The updated
sleepfunction is well-implemented, providing flexible behavior based on thesleepBehaviorproperty and correctly yielding time intervals to the async sequence.Consider adding error handling for the
fromFunctioncase, as the provided closure might throw an error. You could update theSleepBehavior.fromFunctioncase tocase fromFunction(@Sendable () async throws -> Void)and usetry await function()in the switch statement.Example/AblyChatExample/ContentView.swift (1)
Line range hint
175-187: Improved room status check, consider further enhancements.The change from
status.current == .attachingtostatus.current.isAttachingimproves code readability and potentially covers more states. This is a good practice.Consider extending this pattern to other status checks for consistency:
if status.current.isAttaching { statusInfo = "\(status.current)...".capitalized } else if status.current.isAttached { statusInfo = "\(status.current)".capitalized Task { try? await Task.sleep(nanoseconds: 1 * 1_000_000_000) withAnimation { statusInfo = "" } } } else { statusInfo = "\(status.current)".capitalized }This would make the code more consistent and potentially more maintainable if new states are added in the future.
Sources/AblyChat/RoomLifecycleManager.swift (1)
Line range hint
1-844: Overall implementation of transient disconnect timeouts looks goodThe implementation of the transient disconnect timeout functionality is comprehensive and well-integrated into the existing
RoomLifecycleManager. It covers the creation, management, and clearing of timeouts as specified in the PR objectives. The handling of timeouts in various operations and state changes is consistent and appears to be correct.One minor suggestion for improvement:
Consider adding more robust error handling for the timeout task in the
didReceiveStateChangemethod. Currently, if the sleep is interrupted, it only logs the error. You might want to consider retrying the timeout or implementing a more specific error handling strategy.
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (7)
- Example/AblyChatExample/ContentView.swift (1 hunks)
- Example/AblyChatExample/Mocks/MockClients.swift (1 hunks)
- Sources/AblyChat/RoomLifecycleManager.swift (18 hunks)
- Sources/AblyChat/RoomStatus.swift (2 hunks)
- Tests/AblyChatTests/Helpers/Subscription+RoomStatusChange.swift (2 hunks)
- Tests/AblyChatTests/Mocks/MockSimpleClock.swift (1 hunks)
- Tests/AblyChatTests/RoomLifecycleManagerTests.swift (11 hunks)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (2)
- Sources/AblyChat/RoomStatus.swift
- Tests/AblyChatTests/Helpers/Subscription+RoomStatusChange.swift
🧰 Additional context used
📓 Learnings (2)
Sources/AblyChat/RoomLifecycleManager.swift (2)
Learnt from: lawrence-forooghian PR: ably-labs/ably-chat-swift#54 File: Sources/AblyChat/RoomLifecycleManager.swift:0-0 Timestamp: 2024-09-18T18:34:37.252Z Learning: In `RoomLifecycleManager`, handling of unexpected contributor states after attach failure will be addressed in issue #49.Learnt from: lawrence-forooghian PR: ably-labs/ably-chat-swift#54 File: Sources/AblyChat/RoomLifecycleManager.swift:0-0 Timestamp: 2024-10-08T15:58:47.376Z Learning: In `RoomLifecycleManager`, handling of unexpected contributor states after attach failure will be addressed in issue #49.Tests/AblyChatTests/RoomLifecycleManagerTests.swift (2)
Learnt from: lawrence-forooghian PR: ably-labs/ably-chat-swift#54 File: Tests/AblyChatTests/RoomLifecycleManagerTests.swift:627-631 Timestamp: 2024-10-01T12:55:21.968Z Learning: The closure `detachImpl` in `RoomLifecycleManagerTests.swift` functions as intended without external state variables to track invocation count.Learnt from: lawrence-forooghian PR: ably-labs/ably-chat-swift#54 File: Tests/AblyChatTests/RoomLifecycleManagerTests.swift:627-631 Timestamp: 2024-10-08T15:58:47.376Z Learning: The closure `detachImpl` in `RoomLifecycleManagerTests.swift` functions as intended without external state variables to track invocation count.
🔇 Additional comments (26)
Tests/AblyChatTests/Mocks/MockSimpleClock.swift (2)
6-7: LGTM: Good addition of thesleepBehaviorproperty.The new private property
sleepBehavioris a good addition to control the mock's sleep function behavior. It follows proper encapsulation principles.
13-16: LGTM: Well-implemented initializer with good defaults.The updated initializer is well-designed, providing flexibility with the optional
sleepBehaviorparameter and a sensible default. The initialization of_sleepCallArgumentsAsyncSequenceusingAsyncStream.makeStream()is appropriate for creating an async sequence.Example/AblyChatExample/ContentView.swift (2)
Line range hint
1-365: Overall changes improve UI but don't address main PR objectivesThe modifications in this file enhance the UI with improved reaction animations and refactor some status checking logic. While these changes are positive improvements to the codebase, they don't appear to implement the "transient disconnect timeouts" mentioned in the PR objectives.
Consider the following points:
- Are there other files in this PR that implement the timeout functionality?
- If not, should this PR be split into separate ones: one for UI enhancements and another for implementing the timeout functionality?
- If the timeout functionality is implemented elsewhere, consider updating the PR description to mention these UI improvements as well.
To ensure we haven't missed any relevant changes, please run the following command to check for other modified files in this PR:
#!/bin/bash # Description: List all modified files in this PR gh pr view 87 --json files --jq '.files[].path'This will help us verify if there are other files where the timeout functionality might be implemented.
Line range hint
233-236: Approved: Enhanced reaction animations, but relevance to PR objectives unclear.The additions to the
Reactionstruct and the newstartRotationfunction successfully implement rotation animations for reactions, enhancing the user experience. The implementation is clean and well-integrated with the existing code.However, these changes don't appear to be related to the stated PR objectives of implementing "transient disconnect timeouts" as mentioned in the PR description. Could you clarify the relevance of these animation enhancements to the main objectives of this PR?
To ensure these changes don't conflict with the main PR objectives, please run the following verification:
This will help verify if there are any timeout-related changes that might have been overlooked in this file.
Also applies to: 256-257, 275-280, 292-297
✅ Verification successful
Verified: Animation enhancements unrelated to PR objectives.
The rotation enhancements added to the
Reactionstruct and the newstartRotationfunction do not relate to the primary objectives of implementing "transient disconnect timeouts" as stated in the PR description. While these animation improvements enhance the user experience, they should be considered for inclusion in a separate PR to maintain focused and manageable changes.🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Check for any mentions of timeouts or disconnects in the changed file echo "Searching for timeout-related changes:" rg --type swift '(timeout|disconnect)' Example/AblyChatExample/ContentView.swift echo "\nSearching for new imports that might be related to timeout handling:" rg --type swift '^import' Example/AblyChatExample/ContentView.swiftLength of output: 520
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Check for any mentions of timeouts or disconnects in the changed files echo "Searching for timeout-related changes:" rg --type swift '(timeout|disconnect)' Example/AblyChatExample/ContentView.swift echo "\nSearching for new imports that might be related to timeout handling:" rg --type swift '^import' Example/AblyChatExample/ContentView.swiftLength of output: 421
Sources/AblyChat/RoomLifecycleManager.swift (10)
209-222: LGTM: TransientDisconnectTimeout implementationThe addition of the
TransientDisconnectTimeoutclass and related properties in theContributorAnnotationstruct is well-implemented. It provides a clear structure for managing transient disconnect timeouts, which aligns with the PR objectives.
229-238: LGTM: Updated ContributorAnnotations initializationThe changes to the
ContributorAnnotationsinitialization are well-implemented. The new parameteridsOfContributorsWithTransientDisconnectTimeoutand its usage in creatingContributorAnnotationinstances align with the transient disconnect timeout functionality introduced in this PR.
318-328: LGTM: Test-only methods for transient disconnect timeoutsThe addition of test-only methods for checking transient disconnect timeouts is a good practice. These methods will facilitate thorough testing of the new timeout functionality, ensuring that the behavior can be verified in various scenarios.
Line range hint
372-432: LGTM: Updated state change handling with timeout logicThe changes to the
didReceiveStateChangemethod correctly implement the transient disconnect timeout logic as specified in the PR objectives. The handling of the ATTACHING state and the creation of timeouts under specific conditions are well-implemented. The clearing of timeouts in appropriate scenarios is also handled correctly.
445-459: LGTM: Timeout clearing methodsThe new
clearTransientDisconnectTimeoutsmethods are well-implemented. They provide a clean and efficient way to manage the lifecycle of transient disconnect timeouts, both for individual contributors and for all contributors. The proper cancellation of tasks and removal of timeout objects ensures good resource management.
150-151: LGTM: Updated Status enumThe changes to the
Statusenum, including the new cases for attaching states and the updates to thetoRoomLifecycleandoperationIDcomputed properties, are well-implemented. These changes accurately reflect the new states introduced by the transient disconnect timeout functionality.Also applies to: 164-167, 187-187, 198-199
600-600: LGTM: Updated attach operation handlingThe changes in the
bodyOfAttachOperationmethod correctly handle the new attaching states and implement the clearing of transient disconnect timeouts as specified in the PR objectives. These updates ensure that the attach operation behaves correctly with the new timeout functionality.Also applies to: 610-610, 646-648
714-714: LGTM: Updated detach operation handlingThe changes in the
bodyOfDetachOperationmethod correctly handle the new attaching states and implement the clearing of transient disconnect timeouts at the beginning of the detach operation. These updates ensure that the detach operation behaves correctly with the new timeout functionality.Also applies to: 719-720
805-805: LGTM: Updated release operation handlingThe changes in the
bodyOfReleaseOperationmethod correctly handle the new attaching states and implement the clearing of transient disconnect timeouts at the beginning of the release operation. These updates ensure that the release operation behaves correctly with the new timeout functionality.Also applies to: 810-811
Line range hint
1-844: Review concurrency handling and forced operationsThe implementation generally makes good use of Swift's actor model and asynchronous operations to handle concurrency. However, there are a few areas that could benefit from further review:
The use of force-unwraps (!) and force-tries (try!) in asynchronous contexts could lead to runtime crashes if unexpected nil values or errors occur. Consider using optional binding or do-catch blocks instead.
The
sleepoperation in the transient disconnect timeout task (line 424) could potentially be interrupted. Consider implementing a more robust retry mechanism or error handling strategy.The comment on line 836 mentions a TODO for handling task cancellation. This is an important aspect to address for proper resource management and avoiding potential leaks.
To help identify potential concurrency issues, you can run the following static analysis:
Consider reviewing and refactoring these areas to improve the robustness of the concurrency handling in the
RoomLifecycleManager.Tests/AblyChatTests/RoomLifecycleManagerTests.swift (12)
30-50: NewSignallableSleepOperationclass looks good!The implementation of
SignallableSleepOperationis well-structured and consistent with the existingSignallableChannelOperation. This addition will enhance the ability to test time-dependent behaviors in a controlled manner.
55-55: Good addition of transient disconnect timeout parameterThe new parameter
forTestingWhatHappensWhenHasTransientDisconnectTimeoutForTheseContributorIDsenhances the flexibility of thecreateManagerfunction, allowing for more specific test scenarios related to transient disconnect timeouts. This is a positive change that will improve test coverage.Also applies to: 62-62
214-214: Improved specificity inattach_transitionsToAttachingtestThe test now checks for
attaching(error: nil)instead of justattaching. This change enhances the precision of the test, ensuring that the transition to the attaching state occurs without an associated error. Good refinement!Also applies to: 216-216
279-294: Well-implemented test for clearing transient disconnect timeoutsThis new test
attach_uponSuccess_clearsTransientDisconnectTimeoutseffectively verifies the behavior specified in CHA-RL1g3. It correctly sets up the scenario, performs the attach operation, and checks that all transient disconnect timeouts are cleared upon successful attachment. Good job implementing this test case!
747-769: Enhancedrelease_transitionsToReleasingtest with timeout clearing checkThe modifications to this test improve its coverage by including a check for clearing transient disconnect timeouts during the release operation. The addition of a contributor with a transient disconnect timeout in the setup and the subsequent verification of its clearing align well with the expected behavior. These changes strengthen the test case.
906-907: Improved precision inrelease_detachesAllNonFailedContributorstest setupThe change to use
attachingDueToAttachOperationinstead of a generic status enhances the specificity of the test setup. This refinement better represents the scenario being tested and aligns more closely with real-world use cases. Good attention to detail in improving the test precision.
968-969: Consistent improvement in test setup precisionThe change to use
attachingDueToAttachOperationin this test setup is consistent with the previous refinement. It enhances the specificity of the test scenario, making it more representative of real-world situations. This attention to detail in test setups is commendable and improves the overall quality of the test suite.
Line range hint
993-1041: Comprehensive update tocontributorFailedEvent_withNoOperationInProgresstestThe enhancements to this test significantly improve its coverage. By including checks for transient disconnect timeouts and verifying their clearance when a contributor fails, the test now more thoroughly aligns with the specification CHA-RL4b5. These additions ensure that the RoomLifecycleManager correctly handles timeout-related behaviors in failure scenarios, which is crucial for maintaining the integrity of the room lifecycle.
1043-1069: Excellent new test for ATTACHING event with existing timeoutThis new test
contributorAttachingEvent_withNoOperationInProgress_withTransientDisconnectTimeoutis a valuable addition to the test suite. It effectively covers the edge case specified in CHA-RL4b6, ensuring that the RoomLifecycleManager doesn't create a new transient disconnect timeout when one already exists for a contributor emitting an ATTACHING event. The test is well-structured and provides good coverage for this specific scenario.
1071-1122: Comprehensive test for ATTACHING event without existing timeoutThis new test
contributorAttachingEvent_withNoOperationInProgress_withNoTransientDisconnectTimeoutis an excellent addition to the test suite. It thoroughly covers the behavior specified in CHA-RL4b7, verifying both the immediate creation of a 5-second transient disconnect timeout and the subsequent room state transition when the timeout completes. The use of SignallableSleepOperation for timing control is particularly noteworthy, as it allows for precise testing of time-dependent behavior. This test significantly enhances the coverage of the RoomLifecycleManager's handling of ATTACHING events.
Line range hint
1227-1272: EnhancedcontributorSuspendedEvent_withNoOperationInProgresstestThe modifications to this test significantly improve its coverage and alignment with the CHA-RL4b9 specification. By setting up multiple contributors with transient disconnect timeouts and verifying that all of these timeouts are cleared upon a contributor's suspension, the test now provides a more comprehensive check of the RoomLifecycleManager's behavior. This enhancement ensures that the suspension handling correctly manages all timeouts, not just those associated with the suspended contributor. Great job on improving the thoroughness of this test case!
Line range hint
1-1272: Overall excellent improvements to RoomLifecycleManagerTestsThe changes made to this test file significantly enhance the coverage and quality of the RoomLifecycleManagerTests. The additions and modifications focus on thoroughly testing the handling of transient disconnect timeouts across various scenarios, aligning closely with the specified behaviors in the CHA-RL series of specifications.
Key improvements include:
- Introduction of the SignallableSleepOperation for better control over time-dependent tests.
- More precise test setups using specific room states.
- Comprehensive coverage of transient disconnect timeout behaviors in different scenarios (attach, release, contributor state changes).
- New tests for edge cases and specific behaviors outlined in the specifications.
These enhancements significantly contribute to the robustness of the test suite, providing greater confidence in the correct implementation of the RoomLifecycleManager. Great job on these improvements!
For debugging tests.
This will be used for implementing CHA-RL4b7 (from the spec referenced in 20f21c7), which allows a contributor state change to put the room into an ATTACHING status outside of the context of a room lifecycle operation. In this situation, it may also wish to attach an error to the ATTACHED room status, so update the public API to reflect this.
Mistake in 05836a6.
Based on the spec referenced in 20f21c7. Here we implement the spec’s concept of “transient disconnect timeout”. I’ll cancel these timeouts (where the spec says to do so) in a separate commit.
lawrence-forooghian
force-pushed
the
48-transient-disconnect-timeouts
branch
from
b90b8c4 to
698e190
Compare
lawrence-forooghian
changed the base branch from
main
to
address-duplicate-spec-points
lawrence-forooghian
force-pushed
the
48-transient-disconnect-timeouts
branch
from
698e190 to
1118faa
Compare
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: 4
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (10)
Tests/AblyChatTests/Helpers/TestLogger.swift (1)
7-14: LGTM! Well-structured logging implementation.The implementation is clean and efficient:
- Uses
.tracelevel for detailed logging when enabled- Properly forwards all logging details to the underlying logger
- Early return when logging is disabled prevents unnecessary processing
Consider adding a comment explaining that
.tracewas chosen as the log level to ensure maximum visibility during debugging.Tests/AblyChatTests/Mocks/MockSimpleClock.swift (1)
28-36: Consider adding error handling for AsyncStream continuation.While the implementation is correct, consider handling the case where the continuation might be completed when trying to yield a value.
- _sleepCallArgumentsAsyncSequence.continuation.yield(timeInterval) + do { + _sleepCallArgumentsAsyncSequence.continuation.yield(timeInterval) + } catch { + // Handle or log if the continuation is completed + }Tests/AblyChatTests/Helpers/Subscription+RoomStatusChange.swift (1)
15-20: Documentation could be more specific about usage.The struct implementation looks good and aligns well with the existing pattern. However, the documentation could be more specific about when this struct is used, particularly in the context of transient disconnect timeouts.
Consider enhancing the documentation:
struct StatusChangeWithOptionalError { - /// A status change whose `current` has an optional associated error; ``error`` provides access to this error. + /// A status change representing an attaching state, which may have an associated error during transient disconnect scenarios. var statusChange: RoomStatusChange - /// The error associated with `statusChange.current`. + /// The optional error associated with the attaching state, present when a transient disconnect timeout occurs. var error: ARTErrorInfo? }Sources/AblyChat/RoomStatus.swift (1)
Line range hint
7-19: Consider adding documentation for state transitionsThe
RoomLifecycleenum would benefit from documentation that describes:
- Valid state transitions (e.g., which states can transition to
attachingwith an error)- The conditions under which errors are included
- The relationship with transient disconnect timeouts
This would help maintainers understand the state machine's behavior and constraints.
Example/AblyChatExample/ContentView.swift (1)
Line range hint
391-399: Enhance error handling for transient disconnects.The current error handling in
tryTaskonly prints to console, which isn't sufficient for transient disconnect scenarios. Users should be informed when connection issues occur.Consider implementing proper error handling:
extension View { nonisolated func tryTask(priority: TaskPriority = .userInitiated, _ action: @escaping @Sendable () async throws -> Void) -> some View { task(priority: priority) { do { try await action() } catch { - print("Action can't be performed: \(error)") // TODO: replace with logger (+ message to the user?) + // Log the error + print("Action can't be performed: \(error)") + // Update UI to show error state + await MainActor.run { + // Consider adding a @State property for error messages + // errorMessage = error.localizedDescription + } } } } }Tests/AblyChatTests/RoomLifecycleManagerTests.swift (5)
30-51: Correct the documentation forSignallableSleepOperation.The documentation references
complete(result:), but the method is actuallycomplete()without parameters. Please update the documentation to match the method signature.
55-55: Simplify the parameter name for better readability.The parameter
forTestingWhatHappensWhenHasTransientDisconnectTimeoutForTheseContributorIDsis quite lengthy. Consider renaming it to something more concise, likeidsWithTransientDisconnectTimeouts, to improve readability.Also applies to: 62-62
214-216: Redundant state verification in testattach_transitionsToAttaching.Lines 214 and 216 both verify that the manager is in the
.attaching(error: nil)state. Consider removing one of these checks to avoid redundancy.
1073-1122: Optimize test by removing unnecessary parameter in@Testannotation.The
@Testannotation includesargumentsfor a single parameter in the testcontributorAttachingEvent_withNoOperationInProgress_withNoTransientDisconnectTimeout, but the parameter is not used within the test function. Consider removing theargumentsto simplify the test.Apply this diff:
- @Test( - arguments: [ - nil, - ARTErrorInfo.create(withCode: 123, message: ""), // arbitrary non-nil - ] - ) + @Test func contributorAttachingEvent_withNoOperationInProgress_withNoTransientDisconnectTimeout(contributorStateChangeReason: ARTErrorInfo?) async throws {
1097-1105: Ensure correct usage ofAsyncSequence.first.In line 1097, you're using
.first { _ in true }to get the first element. Since you want the first element regardless of its value, you can use.firstwithout a closure for simplicity.Apply this diff:
- async let maybeClockSleepArgument = clock.sleepCallArgumentsAsyncSequence.first { _ in true } + async let maybeClockSleepArgument = clock.sleepCallArgumentsAsyncSequence.first
🛑 Comments failed to post (4)
Sources/AblyChat/RoomStatus.swift (1)
24-30:
⚠️ Potential issueSimplify the
isAttachingproperty implementationWhile the property follows the established pattern, the implementation can be improved:
- Missing
returnstatements- Can be simplified to a single line using pattern matching
Apply this diff to fix and simplify the implementation:
public var isAttaching: Bool { - if case .attaching = self { - true - } else { - false - } + if case .attaching(_) = self { return true } + return false }Or even more concisely:
public var isAttaching: Bool { - if case .attaching = self { - true - } else { - false - } + case .attaching(_) = self }📝 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.public var isAttaching: Bool { case .attaching(_) = self }Example/AblyChatExample/Mocks/MockClients.swift (1)
415-415: 🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Enhance mock states to better align with transient disconnect timeout testing
The current implementation includes key states for testing transient disconnect scenarios, but could be improved to better match the PR objectives:
- The 8-second interval exceeds the 5-second timeout specified in the requirements
- The state distribution (4:2:1) might not provide adequate coverage for error scenarios
- Missing the
.failedstate mentioned in the requirementsConsider this implementation that better aligns with the transient disconnect timeout requirements:
- RoomStatusChange(current: [.attached, .attached, .attached, .attached, .attaching(error: nil), .attaching(error: nil), .suspended(error: .createUnknownError())].randomElement()!, previous: .attaching(error: nil)) + let states: [RoomLifecycle] = [ + .attached, + .attaching(error: nil), + .attaching(error: ARTErrorInfo.create(withCode: 0, message: "Transient disconnect timeout")), + .suspended(error: .createUnknownError()), + .failed(error: .createUnknownError()) + ] + return RoomStatusChange(current: states.randomElement()!, previous: .attaching(error: nil)) - }, interval: 8) + }, interval: 5)This implementation:
- Matches the 5-second timeout requirement
- Provides equal distribution of states for better test coverage
- Includes specific error for transient disconnect timeout
- Adds
.failedstate as mentioned in requirements📝 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.let states: [RoomLifecycle] = [ .attached, .attaching(error: nil), .attaching(error: ARTErrorInfo.create(withCode: 0, message: "Transient disconnect timeout")), .suspended(error: .createUnknownError()), .failed(error: .createUnknownError()) ] return RoomStatusChange(current: states.randomElement()!, previous: .attaching(error: nil)) }, interval: 5)Sources/AblyChat/RoomLifecycleManager.swift (1)
417-432:
⚠️ Potential issueEnsure
stateChange.reasonis safely captured in the Task closureIn the
Taskclosure starting at line 423,stateChange.reasonis used after a delay. There's a risk thatstateChange.reasonmight change or become invalid before theTaskexecutes. To prevent potential issues, consider capturingstateChange.reasonin a local constant when creating theTask.Apply this diff to safely capture
stateChange.reason:transientDisconnectTimeout.task = Task { + let errorReason = stateChange.reason do { try await clock.sleep(timeInterval: 5) } catch { logger.log(message: "Transient disconnect timeout \(transientDisconnectTimeout.id) for \(contributor) was interrupted, error \(error)", level: .debug) } logger.log(message: "Transient disconnect timeout \(transientDisconnectTimeout.id) for \(contributor) completed", level: .debug) contributorAnnotations[contributor].transientDisconnectTimeout = nil - changeStatus(to: .attachingDueToContributorStateChange(error: stateChange.reason)) + changeStatus(to: .attachingDueToContributorStateChange(error: errorReason)) }📝 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.if !hasOperationInProgress, !contributorAnnotations[contributor].hasTransientDisconnectTimeout { // CHA-RL4b7 let transientDisconnectTimeout = ContributorAnnotation.TransientDisconnectTimeout() contributorAnnotations[contributor].transientDisconnectTimeout = transientDisconnectTimeout logger.log(message: "Starting transient disconnect timeout \(transientDisconnectTimeout.id) for \(contributor)", level: .debug) transientDisconnectTimeout.task = Task { let errorReason = stateChange.reason do { try await clock.sleep(timeInterval: 5) } catch { logger.log(message: "Transient disconnect timeout \(transientDisconnectTimeout.id) for \(contributor) was interrupted, error \(error)", level: .debug) } logger.log(message: "Transient disconnect timeout \(transientDisconnectTimeout.id) for \(contributor) completed", level: .debug) contributorAnnotations[contributor].transientDisconnectTimeout = nil changeStatus(to: .attachingDueToContributorStateChange(error: errorReason)) } }Tests/AblyChatTests/RoomLifecycleManagerTests.swift (1)
1044-1069:
⚠️ Potential issueMissing
@Testannotation for functioncontributorAttachingEvent_withNoOperationInProgress_withTransientDisconnectTimeout.Please add the
@Testannotation to ensure this test function is executed during testing.Apply this diff to add the annotation:
+ @Test func contributorAttachingEvent_withNoOperationInProgress_withTransientDisconnectTimeout() async throws {📝 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.@Test func contributorAttachingEvent_withNoOperationInProgress_withTransientDisconnectTimeout() async throws { // Given: A RoomLifecycleManager, with no operation in progress, with a transient disconnect timeout for the contributor mentioned in "When:" let contributor = createContributor() let manager = await createManager( forTestingWhatHappensWhenCurrentlyIn: .initialized, // arbitrary no-operation-in-progress forTestingWhatHappensWhenHasTransientDisconnectTimeoutForTheseContributorIDs: [contributor.id], contributors: [contributor] ) let idOfExistingTransientDisconnectTimeout = try #require(await manager.testsOnly_idOfTransientDisconnectTimeout(for: contributor)) // When: A contributor emits an ATTACHING event let contributorStateChange = ARTChannelStateChange( current: .attaching, previous: .detached, // arbitrary event: .attaching, reason: nil // arbitrary ) await waitForManager(manager, toHandleContributorStateChange: contributorStateChange) { await contributor.channel.emitStateChange(contributorStateChange) } // Then: It does not set a new transient disconnect timeout (this is my interpretation of CHA-RL4b6's "no action is needed", i.e. that the spec point intends to just be the contrapositive of CHA-RL4b7) #expect(await manager.testsOnly_idOfTransientDisconnectTimeout(for: contributor) == idOfExistingTransientDisconnectTimeout) }
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (1)
Sources/AblyChat/RoomLifecycleManager.swift (1)
229-238: Consider adding validation for contributor IDs.The initialization looks good, but consider adding validation to ensure that all IDs in
idsOfContributorsWithTransientDisconnectTimeoutcorrespond to valid contributors.init( contributors: [Contributor], pendingDiscontinuityEvents: [Contributor.ID: [ARTErrorInfo]], idsOfContributorsWithTransientDisconnectTimeout: Set<Contributor.ID> ) { + // Validate that all timeout IDs correspond to valid contributors + assert(idsOfContributorsWithTransientDisconnectTimeout.isSubset(of: Set(contributors.map { $0.id }))) storage = contributors.reduce(into: [:]) { result, contributor in result[contributor.id] = .init( pendingDiscontinuityEvents: pendingDiscontinuityEvents[contributor.id] ?? [], transientDisconnectTimeout: idsOfContributorsWithTransientDisconnectTimeout.contains(contributor.id) ? .init() : nil ) } }
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (2)
Sources/AblyChat/RoomLifecycleManager.swift(18 hunks)Tests/AblyChatTests/RoomLifecycleManagerTests.swift(11 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
📓 Learnings (2)
Sources/AblyChat/RoomLifecycleManager.swift (2)
Learnt from: lawrence-forooghian
PR: ably-labs/ably-chat-swift#54
File: Sources/AblyChat/RoomLifecycleManager.swift:0-0
Timestamp: 2024-09-18T18:34:37.252Z
Learning: In `RoomLifecycleManager`, handling of unexpected contributor states after attach failure will be addressed in issue #49.
Learnt from: lawrence-forooghian
PR: ably-labs/ably-chat-swift#54
File: Sources/AblyChat/RoomLifecycleManager.swift:0-0
Timestamp: 2024-10-08T15:58:47.376Z
Learning: In `RoomLifecycleManager`, handling of unexpected contributor states after attach failure will be addressed in issue #49.
Tests/AblyChatTests/RoomLifecycleManagerTests.swift (2)
Learnt from: lawrence-forooghian
PR: ably-labs/ably-chat-swift#54
File: Tests/AblyChatTests/RoomLifecycleManagerTests.swift:627-631
Timestamp: 2024-10-08T15:58:47.376Z
Learning: The closure `detachImpl` in `RoomLifecycleManagerTests.swift` functions as intended without external state variables to track invocation count.
Learnt from: lawrence-forooghian
PR: ably-labs/ably-chat-swift#54
File: Tests/AblyChatTests/RoomLifecycleManagerTests.swift:627-631
Timestamp: 2024-10-01T12:55:21.968Z
Learning: The closure `detachImpl` in `RoomLifecycleManagerTests.swift` functions as intended without external state variables to track invocation count.
🔇 Additional comments (11)
Sources/AblyChat/RoomLifecycleManager.swift (5)
209-214: LGTM: Well-structured TransientDisconnectTimeout implementation.
The class design effectively manages timeout state with proper documentation and test support.
150-151: LGTM: Clear separation of attaching states.
The distinction between attachingDueToAttachOperation and attachingDueToContributorStateChange provides clear context for the attaching state.
Also applies to: 164-167
416-434: LGTM: Robust timeout implementation with proper error handling.
The timeout implementation correctly:
- Creates timeouts only when no operation is in progress
- Handles task cancellation
- Includes detailed logging
648-650: LGTM: Consistent timeout clearing across operations.
The implementation correctly clears timeouts during:
- Successful attach operation (CHA-RL1g3)
- Start of detach operation (CHA-RL2e)
- Start of release operation (CHA-RL3l)
Also applies to: 721-722, 812-813
416-434: Verify implementation against specification requirements.
The implementation appears to fully satisfy the transient disconnect timeout requirements from issue #48:
- ✓ Creates 5-second timeouts when no operation is in progress
- ✓ Clears timeouts during detachment, release, and state changes
- ✓ Includes proper error handling and state transitions
Also applies to: 447-461, 648-650, 721-722, 812-813
✅ Verification successful
Based on the shell script results, I can now generate the final response:
Implementation successfully matches transient disconnect timeout requirements
The codebase verification confirms:
- 5-second timeout is correctly implemented using
clock.sleep(timeInterval: 5) - Timeout clearing is properly handled across all required scenarios:
- During detachment (
CHA-RL2e) - During release (
CHA-RL3l) - On state changes to failed/suspended
- For individual contributors and bulk operations
- During detachment (
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Verify that timeout clearing is implemented for all required operations
echo "Verifying timeout clearing implementation..."
# Check for timeout clearing in attach operation
rg "clearTransientDisconnectTimeouts" -B 2 -A 2
# Check for proper timeout duration
rg "sleep\(timeInterval: 5\)" -B 2 -A 2
Length of output: 3895
Tests/AblyChatTests/RoomLifecycleManagerTests.swift (6)
30-50: Well-structured mock implementation for sleep operations!
The SignallableSleepOperation class follows good testing practices by:
- Maintaining consistency with the existing
SignallableChannelOperationpattern - Providing clear documentation
- Ensuring thread safety with
@Sendable
55-55: LGTM! Clear parameter addition for transient disconnect timeout testing.
The new parameter forTestingWhatHappensWhenHasTransientDisconnectTimeoutForTheseContributorIDs is well-named and properly integrated.
Also applies to: 62-62
214-214: Well-structured test cases for attach operation!
The changes effectively test:
- Proper error handling in attach transitions
- Clearing of transient disconnect timeouts upon successful attach (CHA-RL1g3)
Also applies to: 216-216, 279-294
537-543: Comprehensive test coverage for detach operation!
The test effectively verifies:
- State transition to DETACHING
- Proper clearing of transient disconnect timeouts (CHA-RL2e)
Also applies to: 550-553
747-759: Consistent test implementation for release operation!
The test maintains consistency with other operation tests while verifying:
- State transition to RELEASING
- Proper clearing of transient disconnect timeouts (CHA-RL3l)
Also applies to: 766-769
Line range hint 993-1272: Comprehensive test coverage for contributor events!
The tests effectively verify:
- Proper handling of FAILED events (CHA-RL4b5)
- ATTACHING event behavior with and without timeouts (CHA-RL4b6, CHA-RL4b7)
- ATTACHED event behavior (CHA-RL4b10)
- SUSPENDED event behavior (CHA-RL4b9)
Note: Some spec points are marked as partially implemented with TODOs:
- CHA-RL4b9: "room enters the RETRY loop" implementation pending (Implement the
RETRYroom lifecycle operation #51)
Let's verify the linked issues exist:
✅ Verification successful
Verified: Implementation TODOs are properly tracked
The referenced issue #51 exists and tracks the pending implementation of the RETRY loop for CHA-RL4b9, confirming that the test's TODO comment accurately reflects the work in progress.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify the existence of referenced issues
gh issue view 51
Length of output: 447
lawrence-forooghian
force-pushed
the
48-transient-disconnect-timeouts
branch
from
1118faa to
19c1a27
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (4)
Tests/AblyChatTests/Mocks/MockSimpleClock.swift (1)
29-36: Consider documenting error handling behavior.While the implementation is solid, it would be helpful to document what kinds of errors can be thrown when using
.fromFunctionbehavior.Add documentation above the sleep method:
/// Simulates a sleep operation with configurable behavior. /// - Parameter timeInterval: The duration to simulate sleeping /// - Throws: Any error that the configured `.fromFunction` behavior might throw /// - Note: The `.success` behavior never throwsSources/AblyChat/RoomLifecycleManager.swift (2)
439-448: Consider handling task cancellation explicitly.The current implementation catches all errors from
clock.sleep, but it would be clearer to explicitly handleCancellationErrorto ensure proper cleanup when the task is cancelled.- try await clock.sleep(timeInterval: 5) + do { + try await clock.sleep(timeInterval: 5) + try Task.checkCancellation() + } catch is CancellationError { + throw CancellationError() + }
439-439: Consider extracting the timeout duration as a constant.The timeout duration of 5 seconds should be extracted as a named constant to improve maintainability and make it easier to modify if needed.
+private let transientDisconnectTimeoutDuration: TimeInterval = 5Tests/AblyChatTests/RoomLifecycleManagerTests.swift (1)
54-65: Consider shortening the parameter name.The parameter name
forTestingWhatHappensWhenHasTransientDisconnectTimeoutForTheseContributorIDsis quite verbose. Consider shortening it to something likecontributorIDsWithTransientTimeoutwhile maintaining clarity.- forTestingWhatHappensWhenHasTransientDisconnectTimeoutForTheseContributorIDs idsOfContributorsWithTransientDisconnectTimeout: Set<MockRoomLifecycleContributor.ID>? = nil, + contributorIDsWithTransientTimeout: Set<MockRoomLifecycleContributor.ID>? = nil,
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (3)
Sources/AblyChat/RoomLifecycleManager.swift(18 hunks)Tests/AblyChatTests/Mocks/MockSimpleClock.swift(1 hunks)Tests/AblyChatTests/RoomLifecycleManagerTests.swift(12 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
📓 Learnings (2)
Sources/AblyChat/RoomLifecycleManager.swift (2)
Learnt from: lawrence-forooghian
PR: ably-labs/ably-chat-swift#54
File: Sources/AblyChat/RoomLifecycleManager.swift:0-0
Timestamp: 2024-09-18T18:34:37.252Z
Learning: In `RoomLifecycleManager`, handling of unexpected contributor states after attach failure will be addressed in issue #49.
Learnt from: lawrence-forooghian
PR: ably-labs/ably-chat-swift#54
File: Sources/AblyChat/RoomLifecycleManager.swift:0-0
Timestamp: 2024-10-08T15:58:47.376Z
Learning: In `RoomLifecycleManager`, handling of unexpected contributor states after attach failure will be addressed in issue #49.
Tests/AblyChatTests/RoomLifecycleManagerTests.swift (2)
Learnt from: lawrence-forooghian
PR: ably-labs/ably-chat-swift#54
File: Tests/AblyChatTests/RoomLifecycleManagerTests.swift:627-631
Timestamp: 2024-10-08T15:58:47.376Z
Learning: The closure `detachImpl` in `RoomLifecycleManagerTests.swift` functions as intended without external state variables to track invocation count.
Learnt from: lawrence-forooghian
PR: ably-labs/ably-chat-swift#54
File: Tests/AblyChatTests/RoomLifecycleManagerTests.swift:627-631
Timestamp: 2024-10-01T12:55:21.968Z
Learning: The closure `detachImpl` in `RoomLifecycleManagerTests.swift` functions as intended without external state variables to track invocation count.
🔇 Additional comments (9)
Tests/AblyChatTests/Mocks/MockSimpleClock.swift (3)
6-11: LGTM! Well-structured enum for sleep behavior control.
The SleepBehavior enum is well-designed with appropriate use of @sendable for async context and good encapsulation.
20-25: LGTM! Well-implemented AsyncStream for testing.
The AsyncStream implementation provides a clean way to observe sleep calls asynchronously, with good documentation and proper encapsulation.
Line range hint 1-38: Verify test coverage for timeout scenarios.
The mock implementation provides good control for testing timeout behavior, but let's verify it's being used effectively.
✅ Verification successful
Test coverage for timeout scenarios is comprehensive and well-implemented
The mock implementation is being used effectively in multiple test scenarios:
- Testing transient disconnect timeout creation and clearing (CHA-RL4b6, CHA-RL4b7)
- Verifying timeout cancellation behavior (CHA-RL4b10)
- Validating timeout side effects and state transitions
- Testing contributor state changes with and without timeouts
The implementation aligns perfectly with the test requirements and provides the necessary control for verifying timeout behavior.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for test cases using MockSimpleClock with timeouts
rg -l "MockSimpleClock.*timeInterval: 5" Tests/
Length of output: 49
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's search for test files using MockSimpleClock and analyze their usage patterns
rg -A 5 "MockSimpleClock" Tests/
# Also search for any sleep-related test cases
rg -A 5 "sleep\(timeInterval:" Tests/
Length of output: 7974
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's look for the actual timeout value usage in the RoomLifecycleManager
rg -A 10 "transientDisconnectTimeout|timeInterval.*5" Tests/AblyChatTests/RoomLifecycleManagerTests.swift
# Also search for test cases verifying timeout behavior
rg -A 10 "test.*Timeout|test.*Disconnect" Tests/AblyChatTests/RoomLifecycleManagerTests.swift
Length of output: 10236
Sources/AblyChat/RoomLifecycleManager.swift (2)
209-238: LGTM: Well-structured implementation of transient disconnect timeout types.
The implementation provides a clean and testable way to manage transient disconnect timeouts with:
- Unique identifiers for tracking timeouts
- Clear separation of concerns between timeout and annotation types
- Proper initialization handling
431-457: Implementation aligns with room lifecycle spec requirements.
The transient disconnect timeout implementation correctly follows the specification by:
- Creating a 5-second timeout when a contributor enters attaching state
- Clearing timeouts appropriately during operations
- Handling timeout completion by transitioning to attaching state
Let's verify the timeout clearing implementation:
✅ Verification successful
Let me verify the timeout clearing implementation by checking the state transitions where these clears are called.
Let me verify one final aspect - the handling of the timeout completion by checking the state transition to attaching.
Transient disconnect timeout implementation is correctly implemented
The verification confirms that the implementation aligns with requirements:
- 5-second timeout is correctly set for contributors in attaching state
- Timeouts are properly cleared in all required scenarios:
- During transitions to failed/suspended states
- When detaching (CHA-RL2e)
- When releasing (CHA-RL3l)
- For individual contributors when needed
- Timeout completion correctly transitions to attaching state with the original error reason
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify that timeouts are cleared in all required scenarios
# Test: Search for clearTransientDisconnectTimeouts calls
rg -A 2 'clearTransientDisconnectTimeouts'
Length of output: 2222
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for state transitions to see the full context of where timeouts are cleared
rg -B 5 -A 2 'changeStatus\(to: \.(failed|suspended|detaching|releasing)'
Length of output: 4654
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for transitions to attaching state to verify timeout completion handling
rg -B 5 -A 2 'changeStatus\(to: \.attaching'
Length of output: 1488
Tests/AblyChatTests/RoomLifecycleManagerTests.swift (4)
30-53: Well-structured mock implementation!
The SignallableSleepOperation class is a well-designed mock that:
- Provides thread-safe operation with
@Sendable - Properly handles task cancellation
- Uses clear documentation to explain its purpose
96-102: LGTM! Well-documented helper function.
The new waitForManager overload follows the same pattern as the existing one and is properly documented.
225-227: Test modifications align well with spec requirements.
The updates to existing test cases properly incorporate transient disconnect timeout checks while maintaining the clear Given-When-Then structure.
Also applies to: 542-564, 758-780
Line range hint 1004-1328: Consider tracking TODOs in issues.
The new test cases are comprehensive and well-documented. However, there are several TODOs and spec questions noted in comments. Consider:
- Creating GitHub issues to track implementation TODOs (e.g., line 1283: "Haven't implemented 'the room enters the RETRY loop'")
- Following up on spec clarification questions (e.g., line 1078's interpretation of CHA-RL4b6)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
LGTM, but I'm scratching the surface here (in the last two PRs), since the spec and the implementation are very complex in this lifecycle stuff, so maybe @umair-ably can give more comprehended look onto it bc he makes something similar and dived into this context deeper.
|
I’ll go ahead and merge this one; I don't think that @umair-ably is going to have the time to look into it much more deeply either; we can revisit later if need be. |
lawrence-forooghian
merged commit b539224
into
address-duplicate-spec-points
|
Oops, didn’t realise that this was going into #95; have restored that PR to its previous state and will re-open this PR. |
|
Reopened as #98. |
Note: This is based on top of #95; please review that one first.
Resolves #48. See commit messages for more details.
Summary by CodeRabbit
Release Notes
New Features
Bug Fixes
Documentation
Tests