-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 25
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
sell的基礎介面 #126
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
sell的基礎介面 #126
Conversation
WalkthroughThe pull request introduces updates to the project by modifying the Changes
Poem
📜 Recent review detailsConfiguration used: CodeRabbit UI ⛔ Files ignored due to path filters (1)
📒 Files selected for processing (2)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)
🔇 Additional comments (2)src/routeTree.gen.ts (2)Line range hint The new
Since this is an auto-generated file by TanStack Router, the changes follow the expected structure. Let's verify the route integration is complete and consistent: ✅ Verification successfulRoute integration verified successfully The verification confirms:
🏁 Scripts executedThe following scripts were executed for the analysis: Script: #!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify the route integration and related components
# Test 1: Verify the route component exists
fd "add_sell.tsx" "src/routes"
# Test 2: Check if the route follows the same pattern as other routes
rg -A 1 "path: '/\w+/[^/]+'" "src/routeTree.gen.ts"
# Test 3: Verify parent route relationship
rg "getParentRoute: \(\) => \w+Route" "src/routeTree.gen.ts"
Length of output: 1084
A few architectural considerations for the sales feature:
Let's verify the security implementation: ✅ Verification successfulRoute organization and security implementation verified The codebase shows a consistent and secure implementation:
The architectural concerns raised in the review are already addressed in the implementation. 🏁 Scripts executedThe following scripts were executed for the analysis: Script: #!/bin/bash
# Description: Check for authentication/authorization implementation
# Test 1: Check for auth guard usage
rg -A 5 "AuthGuard|useAuth|isAuthenticated" "src/routes/sales/add_sell.tsx"
# Test 2: Check for role-based access control
rg -A 5 "role|permission|canAccess" "src/routes/sales/add_sell.tsx"
Length of output: 457 Script: #!/bin/bash
# Let's verify the route organization and security patterns more thoroughly
# Check for other sales-related routes and their patterns
rg -l "path.*sales.*" src/
# Check the auth guard implementation
rg -A 10 "export.*AuthGuard" src/
# Check if there's a consistent pattern for protected routes
rg -A 5 "beforeLoad.*AuthGuard" src/
# Look for role-based checks in auth utilities
rg -A 5 "role|permission|isAdmin" src/utils/auth.ts
Length of output: 2985 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 (
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Actionable comments posted: 4
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (2)
src/routes/sales/add_sell.tsx (2)
100-102
: Replace generic circles with semantic iconsThe BasicIcon components are currently rendering simple circles. Consider using more meaningful icons for search and filter functionality.
<BasicIcon size={24}> - <circle cx="12" cy="12" r="14" /> + <path d="M15.5 14h-.79l-.28-.27C15.41 12.59 16 11.11 16 9.5 16 5.91 13.09 3 9.5 3S3 5.91 3 9.5 5.91 16 9.5 16c1.61 0 3.09-.59 4.23-1.57l.27.28v.79l5 4.99L20.49 19l-4.99-5zm-6 0C7.01 14 5 11.99 5 9.5S7.01 5 9.5 5 14 7.01 14 9.5 11.99 14 9.5 14z"/> <!-- Search icon --> </BasicIcon>Also applies to: 104-106
38-54
: Improve responsive grid layoutThe current grid implementation might have issues on different screen sizes:
- Fixed percentage widths might not work well on mobile devices
- No media queries for different breakpoints
Consider using Tailwind's grid utilities:
-grid: { - padding: '10px', - display: 'flex', - flexWrap: 'wrap', - gap: '10px', - justifyContent: 'space-between', -}, +className="grid grid-cols-1 sm:grid-cols-2 md:grid-cols-3 lg:grid-cols-4 gap-4 p-4"
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
⛔ Files ignored due to path filters (1)
package-lock.json
is excluded by!**/package-lock.json
📒 Files selected for processing (4)
.env
(1 hunks)package.json
(1 hunks)src/routeTree.gen.ts
(13 hunks)src/routes/sales/add_sell.tsx
(1 hunks)
✅ Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (1)
- package.json
🧰 Additional context used
🪛 Gitleaks (8.21.1)
.env
2-2: Uncovered a JSON Web Token, which may lead to unauthorized access to web applications and sensitive user data.
(jwt)
🔇 Additional comments (2)
src/routeTree.gen.ts (2)
21-21
: LGTM: Route definition is properly structured.
The new route for sales functionality is correctly imported and defined with proper parent route configuration.
Also applies to: 63-67
122-128
: Verify route path consistency with existing sales routes.
The new route /sales/add_sell
is consistently defined across all interfaces. However, let's verify its alignment with existing sales routes for consistent URL structure.
Also applies to: 175-175, 189-189, 204-204, 220-220, 233-233, 246-246, 261-261, 275-275, 300-300, 323-325
✅ Verification successful
Based on the results, I can generate the final response as we have sufficient information about the route structure.
Route path /sales/add_sell
follows consistent URL structure
The route path follows the existing sales route structure, being properly nested under /sales/
. The search results show that:
- The parent route is consistently defined as
/sales/
- The new route
/sales/add_sell
is consistently referenced across route definitions - No other add/create patterns were found in other routes, making this the first such route under sales
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check for consistent URL structure in sales routes
# Search for all sales-related route definitions
echo "Checking sales route patterns..."
rg -A 1 "'/sales/" src/routeTree.gen.ts
# Search for any other add/create patterns in routes
echo "Checking other add/create patterns..."
rg -A 1 "/(add|create)/" src/routeTree.gen.ts
Length of output: 1100
function EventSale() { | ||
const { sales } = Route.useLoaderData() | ||
return ( | ||
<> | ||
<Header /> | ||
<div style={styles.container}> | ||
<div style={styles.searchSection}> | ||
<BasicIcon size={24}> | ||
<circle cx="12" cy="12" r="14" /> | ||
</BasicIcon> | ||
<input style={styles.searchInput} placeholder="搜尋" /> | ||
<BasicIcon size={24}> | ||
<circle cx="12" cy="12" r="14" /> | ||
</BasicIcon> | ||
</div> | ||
<div style={styles.categories}> | ||
<button style={styles.categoryButton}>全部</button> | ||
<button style={styles.categoryButton}>五金</button> | ||
<button style={styles.categoryButton}>飲料</button> | ||
<button style={styles.categoryButton}>贈品</button> | ||
</div> | ||
<div style={styles.grid}> | ||
{ | ||
sales.map((p) => ( | ||
<div key={p.id} style={styles.card}> | ||
<h1 style={styles.productName}>{p.product}</h1> | ||
<p style={styles.productInfo}>價格: {p.price} 元</p> | ||
</div> | ||
)) | ||
} | ||
</div> | ||
</div> | ||
</> | ||
) | ||
} |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Implement search functionality and add TypeScript types
The component has several areas for improvement:
- Search input is non-functional
- Category buttons are hardcoded without filtering logic
- Missing TypeScript type definitions
Consider implementing these improvements:
interface Sale {
id: string;
product: string;
price: number;
category: string;
}
function EventSale() {
const { sales } = Route.useLoaderData()
const [searchTerm, setSearchTerm] = useState('')
const [selectedCategory, setSelectedCategory] = useState('all')
const filteredSales = sales.filter((sale: Sale) => {
const matchesSearch = sale.product.toLowerCase().includes(searchTerm.toLowerCase())
const matchesCategory = selectedCategory === 'all' || sale.category === selectedCategory
return matchesSearch && matchesCategory
})
return (
// ... existing JSX with updated handlers
<input
value={searchTerm}
onChange={(e) => setSearchTerm(e.target.value)}
style={styles.searchInput}
placeholder="搜尋"
/>
// ... rest of the component
)
}
{ | ||
sales.map((p) => ( | ||
<div key={p.id} style={styles.card}> | ||
<h1 style={styles.productName}>{p.product}</h1> | ||
<p style={styles.productInfo}>價格: {p.price} 元</p> | ||
</div> | ||
)) | ||
} |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Add loading and error states
The sales data rendering doesn't handle loading or error states, which could lead to poor user experience.
Add proper state handling:
function EventSale() {
const { sales } = Route.useLoaderData()
+ const [isLoading, setIsLoading] = useState(true)
+ if (isLoading) {
+ return <div>Loading sales data...</div>
+ }
+ if (!sales?.length) {
+ return <div>No sales data available</div>
+ }
return (
// ... existing JSX
)
}
Committable suggestion skipped: line range outside the PR's diff.
loader: async () => { | ||
const { data, error } = await supabase | ||
.from('sales') | ||
.select('*') | ||
if (error !== null) { | ||
throw error | ||
} | ||
|
||
return { sales: data } | ||
}, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Implement pagination and improve error handling
The current data fetching implementation has several potential issues:
- Fetching all sales records at once could impact performance
- Generic error handling might not be user-friendly
Consider implementing pagination and better error handling:
loader: async () => {
+ const PAGE_SIZE = 20;
const { data, error } = await supabase
.from('sales')
.select('*')
+ .range(0, PAGE_SIZE - 1)
+ .order('created_at', { ascending: false })
if (error !== null) {
- throw error
+ throw new Error(`Failed to fetch sales: ${error.message}`)
}
- return { sales: data }
+ return {
+ sales: data,
+ hasMore: data.length === PAGE_SIZE
+ }
}
Committable suggestion skipped: line range outside the PR's diff.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Please make sure to pass the type check and do not commit .env file onto the main branch, thx
Summary by CodeRabbit
New Features
/sales/add_sell
.Dependencies
tailwindcss
dependency version from^3.4.10
to^3.4.14
.