Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[ECO-4952] Start implementing room lifecycle spec #7

Conversation

ruancomelli
Copy link
Collaborator

Note: This is based on top of ably#60; please review that one first.

This is based on ably/specification#200 at b4a495e. It’s generated some questions, which I’ve asked on that PR.

Note that the spec has been through a few revisions since I started implementing this; I’ve tried to keep everything in sync but some older stuff might still be accidentally there.

I’ve implemented most of the specified behaviour for the ATTACH, DETACH, and RELEASE operations. I have not yet implemented RETRY since it’s quite different to those three and I wanted to get eyes on this first chunk of work; have created ably#51 for implementing it.

Of the operations that I have implemented, I have not implemented the following (this is accurately reflected by the @spec… tags in the tests):

The room lifecycle manager introduced by this commit is currently a standalone object, which is not integrated with the rest of the SDK. I’ve created ably#47 for doing this integration work.

The @spec… tags are based on the on the JS rules @ 8c9ce8b, but I camel-cased them and also decided that:

  • if a test doesn't relate to a spec point, it doesn't need any markers
  • there should be a way to know that a spec point is tested across multiple tests
  • there should be a way of marking a spec point as implemented but not tested (so that can show up differently in reporting; important given that we’re also going to use this report as a to-do list of what still needs to be implemented)

Part of ably#28.

Summary by CodeRabbit

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • New Features

    • Introduced new error codes for improved error handling in the chat SDK.
    • Added a new section in the contribution guidelines for better test documentation related to SDK features.
    • Implemented a RoomLifecycleManager to manage chat room contributor states effectively.
    • Added a SimpleClock protocol to facilitate asynchronous task management in testing.
    • Introduced a mock implementation of RoomLifecycleContributorChannel for testing purposes.
  • Bug Fixes

    • Enhanced error reporting for attachment and detachment failures within the chat SDK.
  • Tests

    • Added comprehensive unit tests for the RoomLifecycleManager to ensure robust lifecycle management of chat rooms.
    • Introduced mock implementations to facilitate controlled testing scenarios.
    • Improved assertion capabilities in the testing framework for better error handling validation.

This is based on [1] at b4a495e. It’s generated some questions, which
I’ve asked on that PR.

Note that the spec has been through a few revisions since I started
implementing this; I’ve tried to keep everything in sync but some older
stuff might still be accidentally there.

I’ve implemented most of the specified behaviour for the ATTACH, DETACH,
and RELEASE operations. I have not yet implemented RETRY since it’s
quite different to those three and I wanted to get eyes on this first
chunk of work; have created ably#51 for implementing it.

Of the operations that I have implemented, I have not implemented the
following (this is accurately reflected by the @SPEC… tags in the
tests):

- Lifecycle behaviour that relates to another ongoing operation (created
  ably#52)

- Lifecycle behaviour relating to “transient disconnect timeouts”
  (created ably#48)

- Lifecycle behaviour that occurs “asynchronously” outside an operation
  (created ably#50)

- CHA-RL1g2, which refers to emitting “discontinuity events” which are a
  concept not yet implemented; this will come in ably#53.

The room lifecycle manager introduced by this commit is currently a
standalone object, which is not integrated with the rest of the SDK.
I’ve created ably#47 for doing this integration work.

The @SPEC… tags are based on the on the JS rules [2] @ 8c9ce8b, but I
camel-cased them and also decided that:

- if a test doesn't relate to a spec point, it doesn't need any markers

- there should be a way to know that a spec point is tested across
  multiple tests

- there should be a way of marking a spec point as implemented but not
  tested (so that can show up differently in reporting; important given
  that we’re also going to use this report as a to-do list of what still
  needs to be implemented)

Part of ably#28.

[1] ably/specification#200
[2] https://github.com/ably/ably-js/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md#tests-alignment-with-the-ably-features-specification
@ruancomelli
Copy link
Collaborator Author

This is an experiment review for experiment mermaid_diagrams
Run ID: mermaid_diagrams/run_2024-09-26T09-30-04_v1-23-0-20-g8a080be57-dirty
The benchmark review for this pull request can be found at #1.
This pull request was cloned from https://github.com/ably-labs/ably-chat-swift/pull/54. (Note: the URL is not a link to avoid triggering a notification on the original pull request.)

Experiment configuration
review_config:
  # User configuration for the review
  # - benchmark - use the user config from the benchmark reviews
  # - <value> - use the value directly
  user_review_config:
    enable_ai_review: true
    enable_rule_comments: false

    enable_complexity_comments: false
    enable_security_comments: false
    enable_tests_comments: false
    enable_comment_suggestions: false
    enable_functionality_review: false

    enable_pull_request_summary: false
    enable_review_guide: true

    enable_approvals: false

  ai_review_config:
    # The model responses to use for the experiment
    # - benchmark - use the model responses from the benchmark reviews
    # - llm - call the language model to generate responses
    model_responses:
      comments_model: benchmark
      comment_area_model: benchmark
      comment_validation_model: benchmark
      comment_suggestion_model: benchmark
      complexity_model: benchmark
      functionality_model: benchmark
      security_model: benchmark
      tests_model: benchmark
      pull_request_summary_model: benchmark
      review_guide_model: llm
      overall_comments_model: benchmark

# The pull request dataset to run the experiment on
pull_request_dataset:
- https://github.com/sourcery-ai/core/pull/4607
- https://github.com/sourcery-ai/core/pull/4631
- https://github.com/sourcery-ai/core/pull/4647
    # CodeRabbit examples:
- https://github.com/2lambda123/-Orange-OpenSource-oorobot/pull/15
- https://github.com/2lambda123/galaxyproject-galaxy/pull/12
- https://github.com/a0v0/avtoolz/pull/79
- https://github.com/adityask98/Hotaru/pull/10
- https://github.com/agdas/vscode/pull/2
- https://github.com/agluszak/hirschgarten/pull/2
- https://github.com/alexsnow348/insightface/pull/46
- https://github.com/alikuxac/utilities/pull/10
- https://github.com/AlphaDev87/timba-api/pull/49
- https://github.com/AngeloTadeucci/Maple2/pull/239
- https://github.com/AngeloTadeucci/Maple2.File/pull/36
- https://github.com/AngeloTadeucci/Maple2/pull/233
    # Examples where CodeRabbit does not generate diagrams
- https://github.com/baptisteArno/typebot.io/pull/1778
- https://github.com/btipling/foundations/pull/33
- https://github.com/btipling/foundations/pull/31
- https://github.com/chintu-777/jaeger/pull/1
- https://github.com/coji/remix-docs-ja/pull/55
- https://github.com/DaveMBush/SmartNgRX/pull/622
- https://github.com/DaveMBush/SmartNgRX/pull/481
- https://github.com/dkittle/party-connections/pull/6
- https://github.com/Drajad-Kusuma-Adi/onstudy-backend/pull/6
- https://github.com/imaami/libcanth/pull/2
  # Requested by Tim
- https://github.com/2lambda123/-Orange-OpenSource-oorobot/pull/15
- https://github.com/2lambda123/galaxyproject-galaxy/pull/12
- https://github.com/a0v0/avtoolz/pull/79
- https://github.com/adityask98/Hotaru/pull/10
- https://github.com/agdas/vscode/pull/2
- https://github.com/agluszak/hirschgarten/pull/2
- https://github.com/4DNucleome/PartSeg/pull/1183
- https://github.com/ably/ably-cocoa/pull/1973
- https://github.com/ably-labs/ably-chat-swift/pull/54
- https://github.com/ably-labs/ably-chat-swift/pull/35

# Questions to ask to label the review comments
review_comment_labels: []
# - label: correct
#   question: Is this comment correct?

# Benchmark reviews generated by running
#   python -m scripts.experiment benchmark <experiment_name>
benchmark_reviews:
- dataset_pull_request: https://github.com/sourcery-ai/core/pull/4607
  review_pull_request: https://github.com/sourcery-ai-experiments/core/pull/338
- dataset_pull_request: https://github.com/sourcery-ai/core/pull/4631
  review_pull_request: https://github.com/sourcery-ai-experiments/core/pull/339
- dataset_pull_request: https://github.com/sourcery-ai/core/pull/4647
  review_pull_request: https://github.com/sourcery-ai-experiments/core/pull/340
- dataset_pull_request: https://github.com/2lambda123/-Orange-OpenSource-oorobot/pull/15
  review_pull_request: https://github.com/sourcery-ai-experiments/-Orange-OpenSource-oorobot/pull/2
- dataset_pull_request: https://github.com/2lambda123/galaxyproject-galaxy/pull/12
  review_pull_request: https://github.com/sourcery-ai-experiments/galaxyproject-galaxy/pull/1
- dataset_pull_request: https://github.com/adityask98/Hotaru/pull/10
  review_pull_request: https://github.com/sourcery-ai-experiments/Hotaru/pull/2
- dataset_pull_request: https://github.com/agdas/vscode/pull/2
  review_pull_request: https://github.com/sourcery-ai-experiments/vscode/pull/3
- dataset_pull_request: https://github.com/agluszak/hirschgarten/pull/2
  review_pull_request: https://github.com/sourcery-ai-experiments/hirschgarten/pull/2
- dataset_pull_request: https://github.com/alikuxac/utilities/pull/10
  review_pull_request: https://github.com/sourcery-ai-experiments/utilities/pull/2
- dataset_pull_request: https://github.com/AlphaDev87/timba-api/pull/49
  review_pull_request: https://github.com/sourcery-ai-experiments/timba-api/pull/2
- dataset_pull_request: https://github.com/AngeloTadeucci/Maple2/pull/239
  review_pull_request: https://github.com/sourcery-ai-experiments/Maple2/pull/3
- dataset_pull_request: https://github.com/AngeloTadeucci/Maple2.File/pull/36
  review_pull_request: https://github.com/sourcery-ai-experiments/Maple2.File/pull/2
- dataset_pull_request: https://github.com/AngeloTadeucci/Maple2/pull/233
  review_pull_request: https://github.com/sourcery-ai-experiments/Maple2/pull/4
- dataset_pull_request: https://github.com/baptisteArno/typebot.io/pull/1778
  review_pull_request: https://github.com/sourcery-ai-experiments/typebot.io/pull/1
- dataset_pull_request: https://github.com/btipling/foundations/pull/33
  review_pull_request: https://github.com/sourcery-ai-experiments/foundations/pull/1
- dataset_pull_request: https://github.com/btipling/foundations/pull/31
  review_pull_request: https://github.com/sourcery-ai-experiments/foundations/pull/2
- dataset_pull_request: https://github.com/chintu-777/jaeger/pull/1
  review_pull_request: https://github.com/sourcery-ai-experiments/jaeger/pull/1
- dataset_pull_request: https://github.com/coji/remix-docs-ja/pull/55
  review_pull_request: https://github.com/sourcery-ai-experiments/remix-docs-ja/pull/1
- dataset_pull_request: https://github.com/DaveMBush/SmartNgRX/pull/622
  review_pull_request: https://github.com/sourcery-ai-experiments/SmartNgRX/pull/1
- dataset_pull_request: https://github.com/DaveMBush/SmartNgRX/pull/481
  review_pull_request: https://github.com/sourcery-ai-experiments/SmartNgRX/pull/2
- dataset_pull_request: https://github.com/dkittle/party-connections/pull/6
  review_pull_request: https://github.com/sourcery-ai-experiments/party-connections/pull/1
- dataset_pull_request: https://github.com/Drajad-Kusuma-Adi/onstudy-backend/pull/6
  review_pull_request: https://github.com/sourcery-ai-experiments/onstudy-backend/pull/1
- dataset_pull_request: https://github.com/imaami/libcanth/pull/2
  review_pull_request: https://github.com/sourcery-ai-experiments/libcanth/pull/1
- dataset_pull_request: https://github.com/4DNucleome/PartSeg/pull/1183
  review_pull_request: https://github.com/sourcery-ai-experiments/PartSeg/pull/2
- dataset_pull_request: https://github.com/ably/ably-cocoa/pull/1973
  review_pull_request: https://github.com/sourcery-ai-experiments/ably-cocoa/pull/1
- dataset_pull_request: https://github.com/ably-labs/ably-chat-swift/pull/54
  review_pull_request: https://github.com/sourcery-ai-experiments/ably-chat-swift/pull/1
- dataset_pull_request: https://github.com/ably-labs/ably-chat-swift/pull/35
  review_pull_request: https://github.com/sourcery-ai-experiments/ably-chat-swift/pull/2

@SourceryAI
Copy link

SourceryAI commented Sep 26, 2024

Reviewer's Guide by Sourcery

This pull request implements the initial room lifecycle management functionality for the Ably Chat SDK. It introduces a RoomLifecycleManager class that handles the ATTACH, DETACH, and RELEASE operations as specified in the Chat SDK features specification. The implementation includes error handling, state transitions, and retry mechanisms for various scenarios.

Sequence Diagrams

Room Lifecycle State Diagram

stateDiagram-v2
    [*] --> INITIALIZED
    INITIALIZED --> ATTACHING: ATTACH
    ATTACHING --> ATTACHED: Success
    ATTACHING --> SUSPENDED: Failure (some cases)
    ATTACHING --> FAILED: Failure (some cases)
    ATTACHED --> DETACHING: DETACH
    DETACHING --> DETACHED: Success
    DETACHING --> FAILED: Failure (some cases)
    DETACHED --> ATTACHING: ATTACH
    DETACHED --> RELEASING: RELEASE
    RELEASING --> RELEASED: Success
    RELEASED --> [*]
    SUSPENDED --> ATTACHING: ATTACH
    FAILED --> ATTACHING: ATTACH
Loading

ATTACH Operation Sequence Diagram

sequenceDiagram
    participant C as Client
    participant RLM as RoomLifecycleManager
    participant CC as ContributorChannels
    C->>RLM: performAttachOperation()
    RLM->>RLM: changeStatus(to: .attaching)
    loop For each contributor
        RLM->>CC: attach()
        alt Success
            CC-->>RLM: Success
        else Failure
            CC-->>RLM: Error
            RLM->>RLM: Handle error (change status, detach others)
            RLM-->>C: Throw error
        end
    end
    RLM->>RLM: changeStatus(to: .attached)
    RLM-->>C: Success
Loading

File-Level Changes

Change Details Files
Implement room lifecycle management
  • Create RoomLifecycleManager class to handle room lifecycle operations
  • Implement ATTACH operation with error handling and state transitions
  • Implement DETACH operation with error handling and state transitions
  • Implement RELEASE operation with error handling and state transitions
  • Add retry mechanisms for failed operations
Sources/AblyChat/RoomLifecycleManager.swift
Add new error codes and types for room lifecycle operations
  • Introduce new error codes for attachment and detachment failures
  • Create ChatError enum for detailed error information
  • Implement error handling for various room states and operations
Sources/AblyChat/Errors.swift
Create mock objects and helpers for testing
  • Implement MockRoomLifecycleContributorChannel for simulating channel behavior
  • Create MockSimpleClock for controlling time-based operations in tests
  • Add helper functions for error checking in tests
Tests/AblyChatTests/Mocks/MockRoomLifecycleContributorChannel.swift
Tests/AblyChatTests/Mocks/MockSimpleClock.swift
Tests/AblyChatTests/Helpers/Helpers.swift
Implement comprehensive unit tests for RoomLifecycleManager
  • Add tests for ATTACH operation in various scenarios
  • Add tests for DETACH operation in various scenarios
  • Add tests for RELEASE operation in various scenarios
  • Implement tests for error handling and state transitions
Tests/AblyChatTests/RoomLifecycleManagerTests.swift
Update contribution guidelines for testing and documentation
  • Add guidelines for attributing tests to specification points
  • Introduce @SPEC, @specOneOf, and @specPartial tags for test documentation
  • Add instructions for marking untested specification points
CONTRIBUTING.md

Tips and commands

Interacting with Sourcery

  • Trigger a new review: Comment @sourcery-ai review on the pull request.
  • Continue discussions: Reply directly to Sourcery's review comments.
  • Generate a GitHub issue from a review comment: Ask Sourcery to create an
    issue from a review comment by replying to it.

Customizing Your Experience

Access your dashboard to:

  • Enable or disable review features such as the Sourcery-generated pull request
    summary, the reviewer's guide, and others.
  • Change the review language.
  • Add, remove or edit custom review instructions.
  • Adjust other review settings.

Getting Help

Copy link

@SourceryAI SourceryAI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Hey @ruancomelli - I've reviewed your changes - here's some feedback:

Overall Comments:

  • Ensure that all TODOs and references to issues are tracked and resolved to avoid technical debt.
  • Revisit error handling and status codes once specification questions are resolved to maintain consistency.
  • Ensure comprehensive test coverage for all parts of the specification, especially those marked as @specPartial or @specUntested.
Here's what I looked at during the review
  • 🟡 General issues: 2 issues found
  • 🟢 Documentation: all looks good

LangSmith trace

Help me be more useful! Please click 👍 or 👎 on each comment to tell me if it was helpful.

switch self {
case .inconsistentRoomOptions:
case .inconsistentRoomOptions,

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

suggestion: Simplify the switch statement in the statusCode property

Consider grouping the cases that return the same value to reduce repetition and improve readability. For example, you could use a single case with a pattern that matches all relevant error codes.

case .roomIsReleased:
.roomIsReleased
}
}

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

suggestion: Extract repetitive code in localizedDescription into a separate method

The switch statements for attachment and detachment failures contain similar code. Consider extracting this logic into a separate method to reduce duplication and improve maintainability.

@ruancomelli ruancomelli closed this Oct 1, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants