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

fix: investigate stx fee issues #5387

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
May 20, 2024
Merged

Conversation

kyranjamie
Copy link
Collaborator

@kyranjamie kyranjamie commented May 20, 2024

Try out Leather build fc6b392Extension build, Test report, Storybook, Chromatic

More granular validation for STX amount. Analytics events.

unable_to_read_fee_in_stx_validator
unable_to_read_available_balanxce_in_stx_validator

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • New Features
    • Enhanced fee calculation to use BigNumber for improved accuracy.
    • Added error handling with analytics tracking for better monitoring of fee and available balance issues.

Copy link

coderabbitai bot commented May 20, 2024

Walkthrough

The recent update enhances the validation logic in the amount validators by incorporating BigNumber for precise fee calculations. Additionally, error handling has been improved with analytics tracking to monitor issues related to fee and availableBalance. This ensures more robust and accurate financial calculations within the application.

Changes

File Change Summary
src/app/common/validation/forms/amount-validators.ts - Imported analytics from @shared/utils/analytics.
- Updated fee calculation using BigNumber.
- Added error handling with analytics tracking for fee and availableBalance.

Poem

In the code where numbers dance,
BigNumber steps, a grand advance.
Errors tracked, with care and grace,
Analytics keeps us in the race.
Balances checked, all is sound,
In this update, strength is found. 🐇✨


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?

Share
Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

  • Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
    • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>.
    • Generate unit testing code for this file.
    • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
  • Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
    • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
  • PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai generate interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table.
    • @coderabbitai show all the console.log statements in this repository.
    • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
    • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.

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 as PR comments)

  • @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
  • @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
  • @coderabbitai review to trigger a review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
  • @coderabbitai help to get help.

Additionally, you can add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.

CodeRabbit Configration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

  • You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
  • Please see the configuration documentation for more information.
  • If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json

Documentation and Community

  • Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
  • Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
  • Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

Copy link

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a 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

Review Details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL

Commits Files that changed from the base of the PR and between ca9cf0b and f8c3422.
Files selected for processing (1)
  • src/app/common/validation/forms/amount-validators.ts (2 hunks)
Additional comments not posted (2)
src/app/common/validation/forms/amount-validators.ts (2)

6-6: Added import for analytics tracking.

This import is necessary for the new analytics events introduced in the PR.


94-103: Enhanced error handling with analytics tracking.

The addition of analytics tracking for scenarios where the fee or available balance cannot be read enhances the robustness of the validation logic. This change aligns with the PR's objectives to introduce more granular validation and analytics events.

src/app/common/validation/forms/amount-validators.ts Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Copy link
Collaborator

@markmhendrickson markmhendrickson left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Needs typo fix, but otherwise good

@kyranjamie kyranjamie force-pushed the chore/investigate-fee-issue branch from f8c3422 to fc6b392 Compare May 20, 2024 07:44
Copy link

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Actionable comments posted: 0

Review Details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL

Commits Files that changed from the base of the PR and between f8c3422 and fc6b392.
Files selected for processing (1)
  • src/app/common/validation/forms/amount-validators.ts (2 hunks)
Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)
  • src/app/common/validation/forms/amount-validators.ts

@kyranjamie kyranjamie added this pull request to the merge queue May 20, 2024
Merged via the queue into dev with commit c5e04c1 May 20, 2024
28 checks passed
@kyranjamie kyranjamie deleted the chore/investigate-fee-issue branch May 20, 2024 13:36
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