[ECO-4983] Implement the "transient disconnect timeouts" parts of room lifecycle spec #98
Conversation
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.
WalkthroughThe changes in this pull request include modifications to the handling of room status and reactions in the chat application. 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 (
|
|
Merging this since it was already approved in #87. |
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 2
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (13)
Tests/AblyChatTests/Helpers/TestLogger.swift (1)
7-7: Consider adding trace level configuration documentation.The underlying logger is configured with trace level, which is good for debugging, but this detail isn't mentioned in the documentation.
- private let underlyingLogger = DefaultInternalLogger(logHandler: nil, logLevel: .trace) + /// Configured with trace level to capture all possible log entries when enabled + private let underlyingLogger = DefaultInternalLogger(logHandler: nil, logLevel: .trace)Tests/AblyChatTests/Mocks/MockSimpleClock.swift (2)
20-25: Consider enhancing the documentation.While the implementation is solid, the documentation could be more detailed about:
- The lifetime of the async sequence
- Whether values are buffered
- Example usage in tests
28-36: LGTM! Consider adding error case for comprehensive testing.The implementation is clean and maintains proper error propagation. Consider adding a dedicated error case to
SleepBehaviorfor testing error scenarios more explicitly:enum SleepBehavior { case success case fromFunction(@Sendable () async throws -> Void) + case failure(Error) }Tests/AblyChatTests/Helpers/Subscription+RoomStatusChange.swift (1)
15-20: Documentation could be more specific about usage.The struct implementation looks good and follows the existing pattern. However, the documentation could be more specific about when this struct is used (i.e., for handling the
.attachingstate).Consider updating the documentation to be more specific:
struct StatusChangeWithOptionalError { - /// A status change whose `current` has an optional associated error; ``error`` provides access to this error. + /// A status change representing the `.attaching` state, which may have an associated error. var statusChange: RoomStatusChange - /// The error associated with `statusChange.current`. + /// The optional error associated with the `.attaching` state, if any. var error: ARTErrorInfo? }Sources/AblyChat/RoomStatus.swift (1)
10-10: Good enhancement of the attaching state with error handling capability!The addition of the optional error parameter to the
attachingcase is a solid improvement that enables better handling of transient disconnect scenarios. This change allows the system to track and respond to errors during the attachment process while maintaining the possibility of successful attachment.Consider documenting the specific error scenarios that can occur during the attaching state, particularly focusing on transient disconnect cases. This would help developers understand when and how to handle these errors appropriately.
Example/AblyChatExample/ContentView.swift (2)
Line range hint
175-186: Consider extracting status display logic to a separate function.While the status handling logic is correct, consider extracting the status text formatting into a separate function for better maintainability and reusability.
Here's a suggested refactor:
- if status.current.isAttaching { - statusInfo = "\(status.current)...".capitalized - } else { - statusInfo = "\(status.current)".capitalized - if status.current == .attached { - Task { - try? await Task.sleep(nanoseconds: 1 * 1_000_000_000) - withAnimation { - statusInfo = "" - } - } - } - } + statusInfo = formatStatusInfo(status.current) + if status.current == .attached { + Task { + try? await Task.sleep(nanoseconds: 1 * 1_000_000_000) + withAnimation { + statusInfo = "" + } + } + } + private func formatStatusInfo(_ status: RoomLifecycle) -> String { + if status.isAttaching { + return "\(status)...".capitalized + } + return "\(status)".capitalized + }
Line range hint
261-270: Potential memory leak in reaction animation timer.The reaction cleanup using
DispatchQueue.main.asyncAftermight lead to memory leaks if the view is dismissed before the animation completes. Consider using a more SwiftUI-friendly approach withwithAnimationand task cancellation.Here's a suggested fix:
- DispatchQueue.main.asyncAfter(deadline: .now() + duration) { - reactions.removeAll { $0.id == newReaction.id } - } + let task = Task { + try? await Task.sleep(nanoseconds: UInt64(duration * 1_000_000_000)) + await MainActor.run { + withAnimation { + reactions.removeAll { $0.id == newReaction.id } + } + } + } + // Add this to ContentView + @Environment(\.scenePhase) private var scenePhase + private var animationTasks: Set<Task<Void, Never>> = [] + // Add this to .onChange(of: scenePhase) + .onChange(of: scenePhase) { phase in + if phase == .background { + animationTasks.forEach { $0.cancel() } + animationTasks.removeAll() + } + }Also applies to: 286-291
Sources/AblyChat/RoomLifecycleManager.swift (6)
69-70: Consider providing a default value for the new initializer parameter.To maintain backwards compatibility and ease of use, consider providing a default value of
nilfor the newidsOfContributorsWithTransientDisconnectTimeoutparameter in the internal initializer. This allows callers to omit this parameter if they don't need to specify any contributors with transient disconnect timeouts.
81-89: Ensure the new initializer parameter is tested.The new
idsOfContributorsWithTransientDisconnectTimeoutparameter in theDEBUGinitializer should be thoroughly tested to confirm it correctly initializes theRoomLifecycleManagerwith the specified contributors marked as having transient disconnect timeouts.Do you want me to generate some test cases to cover this new parameter?
209-214: Consider makingTransientDisconnectTimeouta struct.Since
TransientDisconnectTimeoutdoesn't seem to require reference semantics, consider making it a struct instead of a class. Structs are generally preferred in Swift for simple data models without inheritance or shared mutable state.
229-238: Simplify the initialization logic usingDictionary(uniqueKeysWithValues:).The initialization logic for
ContributorAnnotationscan be simplified using theDictionary(uniqueKeysWithValues:)initializer, which creates a dictionary from a sequence of key-value pairs. This eliminates the need for thereduce(into:)operation.Here's how you can refactor the initializer:
-storage = contributors.reduce(into: [:]) { result, contributor in - result[contributor.id] = .init( - pendingDiscontinuityEvents: pendingDiscontinuityEvents[contributor.id] ?? [], - transientDisconnectTimeout: idsOfContributorsWithTransientDisconnectTimeout.contains(contributor.id) ? .init() : nil - ) -} +storage = Dictionary(uniqueKeysWithValues: contributors.map { contributor in + ( + key: contributor.id, + value: .init( + pendingDiscontinuityEvents: pendingDiscontinuityEvents[contributor.id] ?? [], + transientDisconnectTimeout: idsOfContributorsWithTransientDisconnectTimeout.contains(contributor.id) ? .init() : nil + ) + ) +})
330-343: Consider using a more descriptive name for theUUIDparameter.In the
testsOnly_subscribeToHandledTransientDisconnectTimeouts()method and its associatedSubscription, consider using a more descriptive name for theUUIDparameter. For example,transientDisconnectTimeoutIDortimeoutIDwould better convey the meaning of the parameter.
463-477: Consider extracting the logic for emitting handled events into a separate method.The logic for emitting handled contributor state change events and handled transient disconnect timeout events is very similar. Consider extracting this logic into a separate method to avoid duplication and improve readability.
Here's an example of how you can extract the logic:
private func emitHandledEvent<T>(_ event: T, to subscriptions: [Subscription<T>]) { logger.log(message: "Emitting handled event \(event)", level: .debug) for subscription in subscriptions { subscription.emit(event) } }Then, you can replace the existing code with calls to this method:
emitHandledEvent(stateChange, to: stateChangeHandledSubscriptions)emitHandledEvent(id, to: transientDisconnectTimeoutHandledSubscriptions)This makes the code more concise and easier to understand.
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (8)
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/Helpers/TestLogger.swift(1 hunks)Tests/AblyChatTests/Mocks/MockSimpleClock.swift(1 hunks)Tests/AblyChatTests/RoomLifecycleManagerTests.swift(12 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
📓 Learnings (2)
Sources/AblyChat/RoomLifecycleManager.swift (4)
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.
Learnt from: lawrence-forooghian
PR: ably-labs/ably-chat-swift#67
File: Sources/AblyChat/RoomLifecycleManager.swift:217-220
Timestamp: 2024-10-01T19:44:34.032Z
Learning: In `RoomLifecycleManager`, handling of missing `stateChange.reason` when `stateChange.resumed` is `false` is being tracked in issue #74. Future reviews should be aware of this planned work.
Learnt from: lawrence-forooghian
PR: ably-labs/ably-chat-swift#67
File: Sources/AblyChat/RoomLifecycleManager.swift:217-220
Timestamp: 2024-10-08T15:58:47.376Z
Learning: In `RoomLifecycleManager`, handling of missing `stateChange.reason` when `stateChange.resumed` is `false` is being tracked in issue #74. Future reviews should be aware of this planned work.
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 (29)
Tests/AblyChatTests/Helpers/TestLogger.swift (2)
4-5: LGTM! Clear documentation of the logging behavior.
The comment effectively explains the default behavior and how to enable logging for debugging purposes.
9-14: LGTM! Efficient conditional logging implementation.
The implementation correctly guards against unnecessary logging operations while maintaining the ability to pass through all log parameters when enabled.
Let's verify this logger is properly used in the transient disconnect timeout tests:
✅ Verification successful
Let me verify the TestLogger usage in the transient disconnect timeout tests by checking the actual test implementations.
Let me check how the TestLogger is used in other test files to ensure comprehensive verification.
TestLogger is properly integrated and used in transient disconnect timeout tests
The verification confirms that TestLogger is correctly used in the test suite, particularly in the RoomLifecycleManagerTests where transient disconnect timeout scenarios are extensively tested. The logger is:
- Properly instantiated in the test setup for monitoring lifecycle events
- Used across critical test cases including timeout handling, state transitions, and error scenarios
- Integrated in all relevant test classes (DefaultRoomTests, DefaultRoomStatusTests, DefaultRoomsTests)
The implementation allows for efficient debugging of transient disconnect scenarios while maintaining clean test isolation through the guard clause we reviewed.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check usage of TestLogger in timeout-related tests
# Expected: Find test cases using this logger for debugging transient disconnect scenarios
rg -l "TestLogger" Tests/AblyChatTests/
rg "transient.*disconnect.*timeout" Tests/AblyChatTests/ -A 5
Length of output: 17272
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check how TestLogger is used in RoomLifecycleManagerTests
rg "TestLogger" Tests/AblyChatTests/RoomLifecycleManagerTests.swift -B 2 -A 2
Length of output: 306
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check TestLogger usage in other test files
rg "TestLogger" Tests/AblyChatTests/DefaultRoomTests.swift Tests/AblyChatTests/DefaultRoomStatusTests.swift Tests/AblyChatTests/DefaultRoomsTests.swift -B 2 -A 2
Length of output: 5490
Tests/AblyChatTests/Mocks/MockSimpleClock.swift (2)
6-11: LGTM! Well-designed behavior control mechanism.
The SleepBehavior enum provides a clean and type-safe way to control the mock's behavior, with proper use of @Sendable for async contexts.
13-16: LGTM! Clean initializer implementation.
The initializer maintains backward compatibility with optional behavior while properly setting up the required state.
Tests/AblyChatTests/Helpers/Subscription+RoomStatusChange.swift (1)
41-50: LGTM! Implementation follows established patterns.
The attachingElements() method is well-implemented and consistent with the existing filtering methods. It correctly handles the optional error case for the .attaching state, which is essential for the transient disconnect timeout functionality.
Example/AblyChatExample/Mocks/MockClients.swift (1)
415-416: 🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Enhance mock to better simulate transient disconnect scenarios.
The current implementation has several areas for improvement:
- The state array contains duplicates which skews the probability distribution.
- The previous state is hardcoded to
.attaching(error: nil), which doesn't reflect realistic state transitions. - The 8-second interval might be too long for testing transient disconnects.
- The error handling is inconsistent between states.
Consider this improved implementation:
- RoomStatusChange(current: [.attached, .attached, .attached, .attached, .attaching(error: nil), .attaching(error: nil), .suspended(error: .createUnknownError())].randomElement()!, previous: .attaching(error: nil))
+ // Simulate realistic state transitions for transient disconnects
+ let states: [RoomLifecycle] = [
+ .attached,
+ .attaching(error: nil),
+ .suspended(error: .createUnknownError()),
+ .detaching(error: nil),
+ .failed(error: .createUnknownError())
+ ]
+ let current = states.randomElement()!
+ // Previous state should be different from current and follow realistic transitions
+ let previous = self.current
+ self.current = current
+ return RoomStatusChange(current: current, previous: previous)Also consider reducing the interval to better simulate transient disconnects:
- }, interval: 8)
+ }, interval: 2) // Faster state transitions for testing transient disconnects⛔ Skipped due to learnings
Learnt from: lawrence-forooghian
PR: ably-labs/ably-chat-swift#87
File: Example/AblyChatExample/Mocks/MockClients.swift:415-415
Timestamp: 2024-10-17T20:10:32.293Z
Learning: When reviewing PRs, I should focus comments on changes directly related to the PR's contents and avoid suggestions on unrelated code.
Sources/AblyChat/RoomLifecycleManager.swift (8)
318-328:
Ensure thread-safety for testsOnly_hasTransientDisconnectTimeout(for:) and testsOnly_idOfTransientDisconnectTimeout(for:).
The testsOnly_hasTransientDisconnectTimeout(for:) and testsOnly_idOfTransientDisconnectTimeout(for:) methods access the transientDisconnectTimeout property of ContributorAnnotation, which may be accessed concurrently from multiple threads. Ensure that these methods synchronize access to transientDisconnectTimeout to prevent potential race conditions.
This is related to the previous comment about ensuring thread-safety for transientDisconnectTimeout access. Once you address that, these methods should also be thread-safe.
479-493:
Ensure thread-safety for clearTransientDisconnectTimeouts(for:) and clearTransientDisconnectTimeouts().
The clearTransientDisconnectTimeouts(for:) and clearTransientDisconnectTimeouts() methods access and modify the transientDisconnectTimeout property of ContributorAnnotation, which may be accessed concurrently from multiple threads. Ensure that these methods synchronize access to transientDisconnectTimeout to prevent potential race conditions.
This is related to the previous comments about ensuring thread-safety for transientDisconnectTimeout access. Once you address that, these methods should also be thread-safe.
431-457: Ensure the transient disconnect timeout logic is thoroughly tested.
The new logic for starting and handling transient disconnect timeouts looks good. However, given the complexity and importance of this feature, it's crucial to ensure it is thoroughly tested. Please make sure to:
- Test the creation and starting of transient disconnect timeouts when a contributor transitions to the ATTACHING state.
- Test the cancellation of transient disconnect timeouts when a contributor successfully attaches or the room transitions to a terminal state.
- Test the completion of transient disconnect timeouts and the corresponding state transitions and error propagation.
- Test the concurrency aspects of transient disconnect timeouts, ensuring they behave correctly when multiple contributors are involved.
Here's a script to help verify the test coverage for transient disconnect timeouts:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify test coverage for transient disconnect timeout logic.
# Test 1: Search for tests that cover the creation and starting of transient disconnect timeouts.
# Expect: Tests should be present to verify the timeout is created and started correctly.
rg -A 20 $'func test.*transientDisconnectTimeout.*started'
# Test 2: Search for tests that cover the cancellation of transient disconnect timeouts.
# Expect: Tests should be present to verify the timeout is cancelled when a contributor attaches or the room transitions to a terminal state.
rg -A 20 $'func test.*transientDisconnectTimeout.*cancelled'
# Test 3: Search for tests that cover the completion of transient disconnect timeouts.
# Expect: Tests should be present to verify the state transitions and error propagation when a timeout completes.
rg -A 20 $'func test.*transientDisconnectTimeout.*completed'
# Test 4: Search for tests that cover the concurrency aspects of transient disconnect timeouts.
# Expect: Tests should be present to verify the behavior when multiple contributors are involved.
rg -A 20 $'func test.*transientDisconnectTimeout.*concurrency'If any of these test scenarios are missing, consider adding them to ensure the transient disconnect timeout feature is robust and reliable.
Do you want me to propose some test cases to cover the missing scenarios?
387-396: Verify the logic for transitioning to ATTACHED state.
Please ensure that the logic for transitioning the room to the ATTACHED state when all contributors are ATTACHED is correct. Specifically, verify that:
- The transition to ATTACHED state only happens when the room is not already in the ATTACHED state.
- The transition to ATTACHED state happens only when all contributors are confirmed to be in the ATTACHED state.
- The transition to ATTACHED state is performed correctly by calling
changeStatus(to: .attached).
Here's a script to help verify the transition logic:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify the logic for transitioning to ATTACHED state.
# Test 1: Search for the condition that checks if the room is not already in ATTACHED state.
# Expect: The condition should be present and correctly check the status.
rg -A 5 $'if status != .attached'
# Test 2: Search for the condition that checks if all contributors are ATTACHED.
# Expect: The condition should be present and correctly check the state of all contributors.
rg -A 5 $'if await \(contributors.async.map { await \$0.channel.state }.allSatisfy { \$0 == .attached }\)'
# Test 3: Search for the call to `changeStatus(to: .attached)`.
# Expect: The call should be present within the block that transitions to ATTACHED state.
rg -A 5 $'changeStatus\(to: .attached\)'Line range hint 407-428: Ensure proper error handling and state transitions for FAILED and SUSPENDED states.
The code handling the FAILED and SUSPENDED states looks good. However, please ensure that:
- The
reasonproperty is always present when transitioning to the FAILED or SUSPENDED state. If it's not, consider how to handle that scenario gracefully. - The
changeStatus(to: ...)calls are performed with the correct status values based on the receivedreason. - The detachment of non-failed contributors is performed correctly in the FAILED state.
- The clearing of transient disconnect timeouts is performed correctly in both FAILED and SUSPENDED states.
Here's a script to help verify the error handling and state transitions:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify error handling and state transitions for FAILED and SUSPENDED states.
# Test 1: Search for the precondition check for the presence of `reason` in FAILED state.
# Expect: The check should be present and handle the scenario where `reason` is missing.
rg -A 5 $'preconditionFailure\("FAILED state change event should have a reason"\)'
# Test 2: Search for the precondition check for the presence of `reason` in SUSPENDED state.
# Expect: The check should be present and handle the scenario where `reason` is missing.
rg -A 5 $'preconditionFailure\("SUSPENDED state change event should have a reason"\)'
# Test 3: Search for the calls to `changeStatus(to: ...)` in FAILED and SUSPENDED states.
# Expect: The calls should be present with the correct status values based on the received `reason`.
rg -A 5 $'changeStatus\(to: .failed\(error: reason\)\)'
rg -A 5 $'changeStatus\(to: .suspended\(error: reason\)\)'
# Test 4: Search for the detachment of non-failed contributors in the FAILED state.
# Expect: The detachment logic should be present and correctly detach non-failed contributors.
rg -A 10 $'for contributor in contributors'
# Test 5: Search for the clearing of transient disconnect timeouts in FAILED and SUSPENDED states.
# Expect: The calls to `clearTransientDisconnectTimeouts()` should be present in both states.
rg -A 5 $'clearTransientDisconnectTimeouts\(\)'Line range hint 634-644: Verify the preconditions for starting the ATTACH operation.
The code for starting the ATTACH operation looks good. However, please ensure that:
- The preconditions for starting the ATTACH operation are correctly checked (room is not in ATTACHED, RELEASING, or RELEASED state).
- The ATTACH operation waits for any current operation to complete before proceeding.
- The status is correctly transitioned to ATTACHING_DUE_TO_ATTACH_OPERATION.
Here's a script to help verify the preconditions and state transitions:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify preconditions and state transitions for starting the ATTACH operation.
# Test 1: Search for the precondition checks for ATTACHED, RELEASING, and RELEASED states.
# Expect: The checks should be present and correctly handle these states.
rg -A 10 $'case .attached:'
rg -A 10 $'case .releasing:'
rg -A 10 $'case .released:'
# Test 2: Search for the logic to wait for the current operation to complete.
# Expect: The code should wait for the current operation to complete before proceeding.
rg -A 10 $'try\? await waitForCompletionOfOperationWithID'
# Test 3: Search for the transition to ATTACHING_DUE_TO_ATTACH_OPERATION state.
# Expect: The code should correctly transition to the ATTACHING_DUE_TO_ATTACH_OPERATION state.
rg -A 5 $'changeStatus\(to: .attachingDueToAttachOperation'680-682: Ensure the clearing of transient disconnect timeouts is tested.
The clearing of transient disconnect timeouts is an important step in the ATTACH operation. Please ensure that:
- There are tests that verify transient disconnect timeouts are cleared when the ATTACH operation completes successfully.
- The tests cover scenarios with multiple contributors and concurrent ATTACH operations.
Here's a script to help verify the test coverage for clearing transient disconnect timeouts:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify test coverage for clearing transient disconnect timeouts in the ATTACH operation.
<details>
<summary>✅ Verification successful</summary>
Let me search for relevant test files and implementations to verify the test coverage.
---
Based on the search results, I can now generate the final response as I found comprehensive test coverage for clearing transient disconnect timeouts.
**Clearing of transient disconnect timeouts is well tested**
The codebase has thorough test coverage for clearing transient disconnect timeouts during ATTACH operations:
- `attach_uponSuccess_clearsTransientDisconnectTimeouts()` test specifically verifies that transient disconnect timeouts are cleared when ATTACH completes successfully
- The test covers multiple contributors scenario by creating 3 contributors and verifying the timeout clearing behavior
- The test includes concurrent operations by using async/await patterns and verifying the state transitions
- Additional test coverage exists for related scenarios:
- Clearing timeouts during DETACH operations
- Clearing timeouts during RELEASE operations
- Clearing timeouts when contributors transition to ATTACHED state
- Clearing timeouts during failure scenarios
</details>
<details>
<summary>🏁 Scripts executed</summary>
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
---
Script:
```shell
#!/bin/bash
# Search for test files related to RoomLifecycleManager
fd "RoomLifecycleManager.*Test.*\.swift$"
# Search for test cases involving transient disconnect timeouts
rg -i "transient.*disconnect.*timeout" --type swift -C 3
# Search for test cases involving clearTransientDisconnectTimeouts
rg "clearTransientDisconnectTimeouts" --type swift -C 3
Length of output: 51140
100-111: Verify the initialization logic for transient disconnect timeouts.
Please ensure that the initialization logic for setting up transient disconnect timeouts based on the new idsOfContributorsWithTransientDisconnectTimeout parameter is correct. Specifically, verify that:
- Contributors specified in
idsOfContributorsWithTransientDisconnectTimeoutare correctly marked as having a transient disconnect timeout in thecontributorAnnotations. - The
TransientDisconnectTimeoutinstances created for these contributors have aniltask, as per the comment. - Contributors not specified in
idsOfContributorsWithTransientDisconnectTimeoutdo not have a transient disconnect timeout set up.
Here's a script to help verify the initialization logic:
✅ Verification successful
Let me gather more information about the initialization logic by searching for relevant code.
Let me search for more specific initialization details.
Let me search for one final piece of information about the initialization.
Based on the gathered information, I can now provide the final response:
Initialization logic for transient disconnect timeouts is correctly implemented.
The implementation correctly handles all the verification points:
- Contributors specified in
idsOfContributorsWithTransientDisconnectTimeoutare properly marked with a transient disconnect timeout through the initialization logic:transientDisconnectTimeout: idsOfContributorsWithTransientDisconnectTimeout.contains(contributor.id) ? .init() : nil - The
TransientDisconnectTimeoutinstances are created with aniltask as they are initialized using.init()without any parameters - Contributors not in
idsOfContributorsWithTransientDisconnectTimeoutcorrectly getnilfor their transient disconnect timeout
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify the initialization logic for transient disconnect timeouts.
# Test 1: Search for the creation of `TransientDisconnectTimeout` instances.
# Expect: Should only be created for contributors specified in `idsOfContributorsWithTransientDisconnectTimeout`.
rg -A 5 $'TransientDisconnectTimeout()'
# Test 2: Search for the initialization of `contributorAnnotations`.
# Expect: Contributors in `idsOfContributorsWithTransientDisconnectTimeout` should have a non-nil `transientDisconnectTimeout`.
rg -A 10 $'contributorAnnotations = .init'
Length of output: 20557
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for ContributorAnnotation initialization and related code
rg -A 10 'struct ContributorAnnotation'
# Search for TransientDisconnectTimeout initialization
rg -A 10 'struct TransientDisconnectTimeout'
# Search for the initialization method where contributorAnnotations is set
rg -A 10 'init\(.*contributors:'
Length of output: 3567
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for the complete ContributorAnnotations initialization logic
rg -B 5 -A 15 'init\(\s*contributors:.*pendingDiscontinuityEvents:'
# Search for where transientDisconnectTimeout is set during initialization
rg -A 5 'transientDisconnectTimeout: TransientDisconnectTimeout\(\)'
# Search for hasTransientDisconnectTimeout property
rg -A 3 'hasTransientDisconnectTimeout'
Length of output: 7105
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for ContributorAnnotations initialization and the code that sets transientDisconnectTimeout
rg -B 10 -A 10 'storage = contributors.reduce\(into: \[:\]\)'
# Search for where the initial transientDisconnectTimeout is set during ContributorAnnotation initialization
rg -B 5 -A 5 'result\[contributor.id\] = .init\('
Length of output: 3243
Tests/AblyChatTests/RoomLifecycleManagerTests.swift (15)
30-54: Addition of SignallableSleepOperation enhances test capabilities
The SignallableSleepOperation class effectively simulates the sleep(timeInterval:) operation for SimpleClock, allowing for precise control in asynchronous test scenarios.
58-65: New parameter in createManager increases test flexibility
Adding forTestingWhatHappensWhenHasTransientDisconnectTimeoutForTheseContributorIDs to createManager allows tests to simulate scenarios with transient disconnect timeouts, improving test coverage.
96-103: waitForManager method correctly waits for transient disconnect timeout handling
The waitForManager(_:toHandleTransientDisconnectTimeoutWithID:during:) function provides a robust way to await the handling of transient disconnect timeouts, ensuring that side effects are properly tested.
225-227: State transition to .attaching(error: nil) is properly verified
The expectations correctly assert that the manager transitions to the .attaching state without errors when performAttachOperation() is called.
290-306: Test ensures transient disconnect timeouts are cleared upon successful attach
The attach_uponSuccess_clearsTransientDisconnectTimeouts test effectively verifies that all transient disconnect timeouts are cleared after a successful attach operation, adhering to the specification CHA-RL1g3.
542-564: detach_transitionsToDetaching test validates state transition and timeout clearing
The test confirms that calling performDetachOperation() transitions the manager to .detaching and clears transient disconnect timeouts, in line with specification CHA-RL2e.
758-780: release_transitionsToReleasing correctly checks state and timeout clearance
The test accurately verifies that the manager transitions to .releasing and clears transient disconnect timeouts when performReleaseOperation() is invoked, as per specification CHA-RL3l.
Line range hint 917-923: Pending discontinuity events are correctly recorded during operation
The test contributorUpdate_withResumedFalse_withOperationInProgress_recordsPendingDiscontinuityEvent appropriately checks that a pending discontinuity event is recorded when an UPDATE event with resumed set to false is received during an ongoing operation.
Line range hint 979-983: Contributor ATTACH event handling aligns with specifications
The contributorAttachEvent_withResumeFalse_withOperationInProgress_recordsPendingDiscontinuityEvent test ensures that pending discontinuity events are recorded correctly when an ATTACH event with resumed set to false occurs during an operation.
Line range hint 1004-1053: Handling of contributor FAILED events without operation in progress is accurate
The test contributorFailedEvent_withNoOperationInProgress verifies that the manager transitions to the FAILED state, detaches all contributors, and clears all transient disconnect timeouts when a contributor enters the FAILED state without any ongoing operations.
1056-1080: Transient disconnect timeout is not reset unnecessarily
In contributorAttachingEvent_withNoOperationInProgress_withTransientDisconnectTimeout, the test confirms that receiving an ATTACHING event does not reset the existing transient disconnect timeout, preventing redundant timeout setups.
1081-1134: Transient disconnect timeouts are correctly established and handled
The contributorAttachingEvent_withNoOperationInProgress_withNoTransientDisconnectTimeout test appropriately sets up a transient disconnect timeout when none exists and verifies that it triggers the expected state transition after completion.
1135-1171: Transient disconnect timeouts are cleared upon contributor ATTACHED event
The test contributorAttachedEvent_withNoOperationInProgress_clearsTransientDisconnectTimeouts accurately checks that transient disconnect timeouts are cleared for a contributor when it transitions to the ATTACHED state, ensuring no unnecessary timeouts persist.
1172-1215: Verifies transient disconnect timeout cancellation prevents side effects
In contributorAttachedEvent_withNoOperationInProgress_clearsTransientDisconnectTimeouts_checkThatSideEffectsNotPerformed, the test ensures that the manager's state remains unchanged when a transient disconnect timeout is cancelled due to a contributor transitioning to ATTACHED, confirming that unintended side effects do not occur.
Line range hint 1283-1328: Handling of SUSPENDED state change aligns with specification
The contributorSuspendedEvent_withNoOperationInProgress test confirms that the manager transitions to the SUSPENDED state, sets the appropriate error, and clears all transient disconnect timeouts when a contributor enters the SUSPENDED state without any ongoing operations.
| public var isAttaching: Bool { | ||
| if case .attaching = self { | ||
| true | ||
| } else { | ||
| false | ||
| } | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Fix the syntax and improve consistency of the isAttaching property.
The implementation has two issues:
- Missing
returnstatements which would cause compilation errors - Inconsistent style compared to similar properties (
isSuspendedandisFailed)
Apply this diff to fix the issues:
public var isAttaching: Bool {
- if case .attaching = self {
- true
- } else {
- false
- }
+ if case .attaching = self { return true }
+ return false
}Or for even better consistency with other properties:
public var isAttaching: Bool {
- if case .attaching = self {
- true
- } else {
- false
- }
+ if case .attaching = self { true } else { false }
}📝 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 { | |
| if case .attaching = self { | |
| true | |
| } else { | |
| false | |
| } | |
| } | |
| public var isAttaching: Bool { | |
| if case .attaching = self { true } else { false } | |
| } |
| var transientDisconnectTimeout: TransientDisconnectTimeout? | ||
|
|
||
| var hasTransientDisconnectTimeout: Bool { | ||
| transientDisconnectTimeout != nil | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ensure thread-safety for transientDisconnectTimeout access.
Access to the transientDisconnectTimeout property should be synchronized to prevent potential race conditions, as it may be accessed concurrently from multiple threads. Consider using a thread-safe mechanism like a lock or a serial dispatch queue to protect access to this property.
Do you want me to propose a thread-safe implementation for accessing transientDisconnectTimeout?
Re-opening of #87, which was already approved.
Summary by CodeRabbit
Release Notes
New Features
Bug Fixes
Tests