chore(driving-license): quality photo check for 65+ #16191
Conversation
WalkthroughThe changes involve modifications to three files related to the handling of driving license applications. An unused import was removed from the Changes
Sequence Diagram(s)sequenceDiagram
participant User
participant Application
participant Utils
User->>Application: Submit application
Application->>Utils: Check visibility (isVisible)
Utils-->>Application: Return visibility status
Application->>Utils: Check application condition (isApplicationForCondition)
Utils-->>Application: Return condition status
Application-->>User: Display application result
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
|
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (1)
libs/application/templates/driving-license/src/lib/utils/formUtils.ts (1)
39-45: Approved: Good improvement in flexibility and type safety.The changes to
isApplicationForConditionfunction enhance its flexibility by allowing both single and multiple condition checks. The use of TypeScript for input typing is commendable.Consider a minor refactoring for improved readability:
export const isApplicationForCondition = (result: DrivingLicenseApplicationFor | DrivingLicenseApplicationFor[]) => (answers: FormValue) => { - const strings = Array.isArray(result) ? result : [result] + const conditions = Array.isArray(result) ? result : [result] - return strings.some( + return conditions.some( (x) => x === getValueViaPath(answers, 'applicationFor') ?? B_FULL, ) }This change makes the variable name more descriptive of its purpose.
📜 Review details
Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (3)
- libs/application/templates/driving-license/src/fields/QualityPhoto/QualityPhoto.tsx (0 hunks)
- libs/application/templates/driving-license/src/forms/draft/subSectionQualityPhoto.ts (1 hunks)
- libs/application/templates/driving-license/src/lib/utils/formUtils.ts (1 hunks)
💤 Files not reviewed due to no reviewable changes (1)
- libs/application/templates/driving-license/src/fields/QualityPhoto/QualityPhoto.tsx
🧰 Additional context used
📓 Path-based instructions (2)
libs/application/templates/driving-license/src/forms/draft/subSectionQualityPhoto.ts (1)
Pattern
libs/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- Reusability of components and hooks across different NextJS apps.
- TypeScript usage for defining props and exporting types.
- Effective tree-shaking and bundling practices."
libs/application/templates/driving-license/src/lib/utils/formUtils.ts (1)
Pattern
libs/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- Reusability of components and hooks across different NextJS apps.
- TypeScript usage for defining props and exporting types.
- Effective tree-shaking and bundling practices."
🔇 Additional comments (2)
libs/application/templates/driving-license/src/lib/utils/formUtils.ts (1)
39-45: Adherence to coding guidelines confirmed.The changes in this file comply with the coding guidelines for
libs/**/*:
- The
isApplicationForConditionfunction remains exportable and reusable across different NextJS apps.- TypeScript is effectively used for defining the function parameter types.
- The changes don't introduce any issues with tree-shaking or bundling practices.
libs/application/templates/driving-license/src/forms/draft/subSectionQualityPhoto.ts (1)
23-23: Approve the change with a suggestion for verification.The modification to use an array
[B_FULL, B_FULL_RENEWAL_65]instead of a boolean OR condition is a good improvement. It enhances the flexibility of the code and aligns with TypeScript best practices.However, to ensure the change functions as intended, please verify the implementation of the
isApplicationForConditionfunction to confirm it correctly handles an array of conditions.To verify the implementation, please run the following script:
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #16191 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 36.70% 36.70%
=======================================
Files 6776 6776
Lines 139609 139604 -5
Branches 39694 39689 -5
=======================================
+ Hits 51242 51243 +1
+ Misses 88367 88361 -6
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.
... and 1 file with indirect coverage changes Continue to review full report in Codecov by Sentry.
|
Datadog ReportAll test runs ✅ 70 Total Test Services: 0 Failed, 68 Passed Test ServicesThis report shows up to 10 services
🔻 Code Coverage Decreases vs Default Branch (1)
|
stjanilofts
added
the
deprecated:automerge
Co-authored-by: kodiakhq[bot] <49736102+kodiakhq[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
Add photo check for 65+
https://app.asana.com/0/1204431115744096/1208330991700443
Summary by CodeRabbit
New Features
Bug Fixes
QualityPhotocomponent.Refactor
isApplicationForConditionfunction to handle single and array inputs effectively.