-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 23
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
added boundary fix #1339
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
added boundary fix #1339
Conversation
WalkthroughThe pull request modifies the Changes
Possibly related PRs
Suggested reviewers
Poem
Finishing Touches
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
Documentation and Community
|
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: 1
@@ -3170,7 +3170,7 @@ const autoGenerateBoundaryCodes = async ( | |||
latLongData = result.latLongData; | |||
boundaryData = result.updatedData; | |||
} | |||
const updatedBoundaryData = updateBoundaryData(boundaryData, hierarchy); | |||
const updatedBoundaryData = updateBoundaryData(boundaryData, localizedHeadersOfBoundarySheet); |
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.
💡 Codebase verification
The change introduces a bug in boundary data processing
Using localizedHeadersOfBoundarySheet
instead of hierarchy
in updateBoundaryData
will break the key filtering logic. The function expects the hierarchy parameter to match the actual keys in boundaryData, but localized headers won't match these keys, resulting in no data being processed.
- Line 3173: Revert to using the original
hierarchy
array inupdateBoundaryData(boundaryData, hierarchy)
🔗 Analysis chain
LGTM! The change improves localization support.
The replacement of hierarchy
with localizedHeadersOfBoundarySheet
in the updateBoundaryData
function call correctly integrates with the localization system, ensuring boundary data is processed using localized headers.
Run the following script to verify the localization integration:
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify that the localization system is properly integrated with boundary data processing.
# Test: Search for localization-related function calls and their usage with boundary data.
# Check for localization function usage
rg -A 5 "getLocalizedHeaders.*boundarySheet|updateBoundaryData.*localizedHeaders"
# Check for boundary data processing with localization
ast-grep --pattern 'updateBoundaryData($_, $localizedHeadersOfBoundarySheet)'
Length of output: 779
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Find the declaration and initialization of localizedHeadersOfBoundarySheet
rg -B 5 "localizedHeadersOfBoundarySheet\s*="
# Find the implementation of updateBoundaryData function
ast-grep --pattern 'function updateBoundaryData($params) {
$$$
}'
Length of output: 778
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Find the complete implementation of updateBoundaryData
rg -B 2 -A 10 "function updateBoundaryData"
Length of output: 2719
Summary by CodeRabbit