API V3 Refactoring #44
Conversation
WalkthroughThis pull request restructures the project by replacing the old “lib” directory with a new “src” directory. File paths for Docker, Makefile, README, and module imports were updated accordingly. Numerous obsolete controllers, models, repositories, routes, and views in the “lib” folder have been removed and reimplemented in “src”. New service, controller, model, and repository classes now provide unified CRUD and simulation operations, along with improved error handling and updated testing configurations. Changes
Sequence Diagram(s)sequenceDiagram
participant Client
participant Router
participant Controller
participant Service
participant Repository
Client->>Router: HTTP Request (e.g., Create Environment)
Router->>Controller: Invoke Endpoint
Controller->>Service: Process business logic & simulation
Service->>Repository: Execute CRUD operation
Repository-->>Service: Return data/result
Service-->>Controller: Process and format result
Controller-->>Router: Return response payload
Router-->>Client: HTTP Response with status & data
Possibly related PRs
Suggested reviewers
Poem
🪧 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 (
|
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 13
🔭 Outside diff range comments (1)
src/utils.py (1)
104-104:⚠️ Potential issueFix unreachable code after return statements.
The code after the return statements at lines 104, 118, and 132 is unreachable.
Apply this diff to fix the unreachable code:
await self.send(self.initial_message) - await self.send(message) + return await self.send(message) await self.send(self.initial_message) - await self.send(message) + return await self.send(message) await self.send(self.initial_message) - await self.send(message) + return await self.send(message)Also applies to: 118-118, 132-132
🧰 Tools
🪛 GitHub Actions: Pylint
[warning] 104-104: W0101: Unreachable code (unreachable)
🧹 Nitpick comments (47)
pyproject.toml (1)
55-56: Review Pylint Disable Additions
The additions ofno-memberandprotected-accessin the[tool.pylint]disable list allow for more flexibility by suppressing errors related to member access and protected attributes. However, consider documenting the rationale behind disabling these rules (e.g., in a developer guidelines document) to ensure that their usage is intentional and to mitigate the risk of overlooking genuine issues.src/models/interface.py (1)
25-34: Align the property naming with Python conventions
PropertiesNAMEandMETHODSdeviate from typical snake_case naming. If the uppercase style is intentional for emphasis, add clarifying docstrings or keep them consistent across the codebase.src/controllers/interface.py (3)
12-36: Ensure exception clarity
CatchingExceptionrisks obscuring specific error cases. Logging covers the traceback, but consider raising or mapping them to more detailed custom HTTP errors for clarity.
45-57: Dynamic method assignment can reduce discoverability
Creating methods on the fly is flexible, though it may confuse static analysis and code browsing. Consider an explicit dictionary lookup to improve maintainability.
70-125: Consider partial updates as a separate method
Currently, only_put_modelis provided for updates, which typically implies full resource replacement. If partial updates are needed, implementing a_patch_modelmethod may avoid confusion.src/services/rocket.py (1)
30-53: Support for multi-stage or multiple motors
from_rocket_modelcurrently configures only one motor. If future requirements involve multiple motors or stages, consider incorporating a list or layered approach.src/views/flight.py (4)
9-154: Consider splitting or grouping fields withinFlightSimulation.
This class contains an extremely large number of fields, which can become unwieldy and difficult to maintain. Consider grouping related fields into sub-models or dedicated structures for better organization and clarity.
156-159: Add docstring forFlightView.
Including a short docstring will help other developers understand how this view differs fromFlightModeland clarify its use (e.g., why a separateflight_idis needed in addition to inherited fields).
161-164: Provide additional context or docstring forFlightCreated.
Currently, this class only declares a message and a flight ID. A brief explanation of what the creation workflow entails will improve clarity for integrators.
166-168: Retain consistent naming inFlightRetrieved.
Following the naming convention ofFlightCreated, consider whether you want to name itFlightReador maintain a consistent pattern if there are other classes named similarly (e.g.,FlightDeletedorFlightUpdated).src/repositories/interface.py (3)
114-119: Avoid coupling models too tightly to the repository.
You're passing an instance ofApiBaseModelto__init__. Ensure that this design remains flexible enough if you ever need to handle multiple model variations or run migrations.
230-238: Return HTTP 404 for missing records.
ReturningNonewhen a record is not found might confuse clients. Raise a 404 or handle it similarly to ensure consistent API responses.
240-244: Check deletion results.
Similar to updates,delete_onedoes not confirm whether a record was actually deleted. Consider returning a boolean or raising a 404 error if no deletion occurred.src/repositories/motor.py (3)
9-15: Include more descriptive class-level docs.
The docstring simply restates "CRUD operations." Consider explaining usage scenarios or constraints, such as concurrency or large data sets.
25-26: Return an explicit 404 or None on missing records.
read_motor_by_idmay returnNone, so ensure it’s handled correctly upstream. If guaranteeing a 404 in the router is desired, raise an exception for consistency.
33-34: Check deletion results to identify non-existent records.
Similar to updates, verify successful deletion and treat nonexistent records appropriately (e.g., log, raise 404).src/repositories/rocket.py (1)
10-15: Enhance class documentation.Consider adding:
- Return types for each method
- Exception details for error handling
- Example usage
src/repositories/flight.py (1)
1-34: Consider extracting common repository implementation.The implementation is nearly identical to
RocketRepository. Consider creating a base class that implements these common CRUD operations to reduce code duplication.Example approach:
class BaseRepository(RepositoryInterface): def __init__(self, model_class): super().__init__(model_class) @repository_exception_handler async def create(self, model: BaseModel) -> str: return await self.insert(model.model_dump()) # ... other common methods class FlightRepository(BaseRepository): def __init__(self): super().__init__(FlightModel)src/models/environment.py (1)
23-25: Consider using UTC for date default.The default date calculation using
datetime.datetime.today()could lead to inconsistent behavior across different timezones and during testing. Consider usingdatetime.datetime.utcnow()instead.- date: Optional[datetime.datetime] = ( - datetime.datetime.today() + datetime.timedelta(days=1) - ) + date: Optional[datetime.datetime] = ( + datetime.datetime.utcnow() + datetime.timedelta(days=1) + )src/models/sub/aerosurfaces.py (2)
31-44: Add validation for fins parameters.Consider adding Field validators with descriptions and constraints for the fins parameters to improve API usability and prevent invalid inputs.
class Fins(BaseModel): - fins_kind: Literal['trapezoidal', 'elliptical'] + fins_kind: Literal['trapezoidal', 'elliptical'] = Field( + ..., + description="Type of fins geometry" + ) - n: int + n: int = Field(..., gt=0, description="Number of fins") - root_chord: float + root_chord: float = Field(..., gt=0, description="Length of the root chord") - span: float + span: float = Field(..., gt=0, description="Span length of the fins")
56-58: Track TODO comment for airbrakes implementation.The TODO comment for implementing airbrakes should be tracked in the issue tracker.
Would you like me to create an issue to track the airbrakes implementation?
src/models/rocket.py (1)
27-28: Consider more meaningful default values for drag coefficients.The current default values of
[(0, 0)]for drag coefficients might not be the most meaningful defaults. Consider using more realistic values or requiring these parameters.- power_off_drag: List[Tuple[float, float]] = [(0, 0)] - power_on_drag: List[Tuple[float, float]] = [(0, 0)] + power_off_drag: List[Tuple[float, float]] = Field( + ..., + description="List of (Mach number, Drag coefficient) pairs for power-off configuration" + ) + power_on_drag: List[Tuple[float, float]] = Field( + ..., + description="List of (Mach number, Drag coefficient) pairs for power-on configuration" + )src/controllers/rocket.py (1)
22-40: Enhance error documentation for better clarity.While the method is well-documented, consider adding specific error cases that could trigger the HTTP 404, such as invalid ID format or database connection issues.
src/services/environment.py (1)
37-43: Consider making the environment property private.The property and its setter could be renamed to
_environmentto match the private variable naming convention, as it's an internal implementation detail.- @property - def environment(self) -> RocketPyEnvironment: + @property + def _environment(self) -> RocketPyEnvironment: return self._environment - @environment.setter - def environment(self, environment: RocketPyEnvironment): + @_environment.setter + def _environment(self, environment: RocketPyEnvironment): self._environment = environmentsrc/controllers/environment.py (1)
28-28: Fix typo in docstring.There's a typo in "rocketpy.Environmnet".
- Get rocketpy.Environmnet dill binary. + Get rocketpy.Environment dill binary.src/models/flight.py (2)
22-22: Address the TODO comment for initial_solution implementation.The TODO comment indicates missing functionality. Would you like me to help implement the initial_solution feature?
14-17: Consider extracting default values as class constants.The default values for
rail_length,time_overshoot,terminate_on_apogee, andequations_of_motioncould be defined as class constants for better maintainability.+ DEFAULT_RAIL_LENGTH: ClassVar[float] = 1.0 + DEFAULT_TIME_OVERSHOOT: ClassVar[bool] = True + DEFAULT_TERMINATE_ON_APOGEE: ClassVar[bool] = True + DEFAULT_EQUATIONS_OF_MOTION: ClassVar[str] = 'standard' - rail_length: float = 1 - time_overshoot: bool = True - terminate_on_apogee: bool = True - equations_of_motion: Literal['standard', 'solid_propulsion'] = 'standard' + rail_length: float = DEFAULT_RAIL_LENGTH + time_overshoot: bool = DEFAULT_TIME_OVERSHOOT + terminate_on_apogee: bool = DEFAULT_TERMINATE_ON_APOGEE + equations_of_motion: Literal['standard', 'solid_propulsion'] = DEFAULT_EQUATIONS_OF_MOTIONsrc/services/flight.py (1)
51-60: Consider adding docstring parameters and return type hints.While the method renaming better reflects its functionality, the docstring could be more comprehensive.
def get_flight_simulation(self) -> FlightSimulation: """ Get the simulation of the flight. + + Args: + None + + Returns: + FlightSimulation: A simulation object containing flight attributes """ attributes = get_instance_attributes(self.flight) flight_simulation = FlightSimulation(**attributes) return flight_simulationsrc/views/rocket.py (1)
41-53: Consider adding validation for rocket_id format.While the view classes are well-structured, adding validation for the rocket_id format would enhance data integrity.
class RocketView(RocketModel): - rocket_id: Optional[str] = None + rocket_id: Optional[str] = Field( + None, + pattern="^[a-zA-Z0-9-_]+$", + description="Rocket ID in alphanumeric format" + ) motor: MotorViewsrc/views/environment.py (1)
26-28: Consider using a single date field with computed properties.Having three separate date fields with the same default value could lead to inconsistencies. Consider using a single source of truth.
- date: Optional[datetime] = datetime.today() + timedelta(days=1) - local_date: Optional[datetime] = datetime.today() + timedelta(days=1) - datetime_date: Optional[datetime] = datetime.today() + timedelta(days=1) + date: Optional[datetime] = datetime.today() + timedelta(days=1) + + @property + def local_date(self) -> datetime: + return self.date + + @property + def datetime_date(self) -> datetime: + return self.datesrc/models/motor.py (1)
61-70: TODO comment needs to be addressed.The validation method has a TODO comment about extending guards. This should be addressed to ensure comprehensive validation.
Would you like me to help implement the extended validation for motor kinds and tank specifics?
src/controllers/flight.py (1)
21-22: Consider adding type hints for better code clarity.The
__init__method could benefit from explicit return type annotation.- def __init__(self): + def __init__(self) -> None:src/api.py (1)
82-84: Consider structuring error response for better client handling.The current error response might not provide enough structure for clients to handle errors programmatically. Consider returning a structured error object.
- content=exc_str, status_code=status.HTTP_422_UNPROCESSABLE_ENTITY + content={ + "error": { + "code": "VALIDATION_ERROR", + "message": exc_str, + "details": exc.errors() + } + }, + status_code=status.HTTP_422_UNPROCESSABLE_ENTITYtests/unit/test_routes/conftest.py (2)
101-102: Consider using an enum for fins_kind parameter.The
fins_kindparameter is using a string literal. Consider using an enum to prevent invalid values and improve type safety.+from enum import Enum + +class FinsKind(str, Enum): + TRAPEZOIDAL = 'trapezoidal' + # Add other valid kinds here + fins = Fins( - fins_kind='trapezoidal', + fins_kind=FinsKind.TRAPEZOIDAL,
125-125: Consider using an enum for coordinate_system_orientation parameter.Similar to the previous suggestion, the
coordinate_system_orientationparameter should use an enum to prevent invalid values.+from enum import Enum + +class CoordinateSystemOrientation(str, Enum): + TAIL_TO_NOSE = 'tail_to_nose' + # Add other valid orientations here + - coordinate_system_orientation='tail_to_nose', + coordinate_system_orientation=CoordinateSystemOrientation.TAIL_TO_NOSE,src/views/motor.py (2)
8-71: Consider grouping related attributes using nested models.The
MotorSimulationclass has many attributes that could be logically grouped into nested models for better organization and maintainability.+class GrainProperties(BaseModel): + grain_burn_out: Optional[float] = None + grain_density: Optional[float] = None + grain_initial_height: Optional[float] = None + # ... other grain-related properties + +class InertiaProperties(BaseModel): + dry_I_11: Optional[float] = None + dry_I_12: Optional[float] = None + # ... other inertia-related properties + class MotorSimulation(BaseModel): message: str = "Motor successfully simulated" - # ... current properties + grain: GrainProperties + inertia: InertiaProperties + # ... other grouped properties
15-15: Consider using an enum for coordinate_system_orientation.The
coordinate_system_orientationfield uses a string literal default value. Consider using an enum for type safety.+from enum import Enum + +class CoordinateSystemOrientation(str, Enum): + NOZZLE_TO_COMBUSTION_CHAMBER = 'nozzle_to_combustion_chamber' + # Add other valid orientations here + - coordinate_system_orientation: str = 'nozzle_to_combustion_chamber' + coordinate_system_orientation: CoordinateSystemOrientation = CoordinateSystemOrientation.NOZZLE_TO_COMBUSTION_CHAMBERsrc/routes/motor.py (2)
34-35: Enhance API documentation with request/response examples.The current documentation only mentions the argument type. Consider adding example request/response payloads to make the API more user-friendly.
## Args - ``` models.Motor JSON ``` + ``` models.Motor JSON ``` + + ## Request Example + ```json + { + "name": "Example Motor", + "manufacturer": "Example Manufacturer", + "thrust_curve": [...] + } + ``` + + ## Response Example + ```json + { + "id": "motor123", + "name": "Example Motor", + "created_at": "2025-02-20T10:00:00Z" + } + ```
84-94: Consider using 200 status code for binary downloads.The current implementation uses 203 (Non-Authoritative Information) for binary downloads. While this works, 200 (OK) is more commonly used for successful GET requests returning binary data.
responses={ - 203: { + 200: { "description": "Binary file download", "content": {"application/octet-stream": {}}, } }, - status_code=203, + status_code=200, response_class=Response,src/routes/rocket.py (1)
84-114: Consider extracting common binary download logic.The binary download endpoint implementation is duplicated across multiple route files. Consider extracting this into a reusable utility function.
Create a new utility file
src/utils/binary_response.py:from fastapi import Response def create_binary_response(binary: bytes, filename: str) -> Response: """Creates a standardized binary response with proper headers.""" headers = { 'Content-Disposition': f'attachment; filename="{filename}"' } return Response( content=binary, headers=headers, media_type="application/octet-stream", status_code=200, )Then simplify the endpoint:
- headers = { - 'Content-Disposition': f'attachment; filename="rocketpy_rocket_{rocket_id}.dill"' - } controller = RocketController() binary = await controller.get_rocketpy_rocket_binary(rocket_id) - return Response( - content=binary, - headers=headers, - media_type="application/octet-stream", - status_code=203, - ) + return create_binary_response(binary, f"rocketpy_rocket_{rocket_id}.dill")src/routes/flight.py (2)
119-136: Consider using PATCH for partial updates.The endpoints for updating environment and rocket use PUT, which typically implies a complete resource replacement. Since these are partial updates, consider using PATCH instead.
-@router.put("/{flight_id}/environment", status_code=204) +@router.patch("/{flight_id}/environment", status_code=204)And similarly for the rocket update endpoint:
-@router.put("/{flight_id}/rocket", status_code=204) +@router.patch("/{flight_id}/rocket", status_code=204)
158-169: Consider adding query parameters for simulation configuration.The simulation endpoint could benefit from optional query parameters to configure the simulation behavior.
@router.get("/{flight_id}/simulate") -async def get_flight_simulation(flight_id: str) -> FlightSimulation: +async def get_flight_simulation( + flight_id: str, + duration: float = 100.0, + time_step: float = 0.1, + max_altitude: float | None = None, +) -> FlightSimulation: """ Simulates a flight ## Args - ``` flight_id: Flight ID ``` + - flight_id: Flight ID + - duration: Simulation duration in seconds (default: 100.0) + - time_step: Time step for simulation in seconds (default: 0.1) + - max_altitude: Optional maximum altitude in meters """ with tracer.start_as_current_span("get_flight_simulation"): controller = FlightController() - return await controller.get_flight_simulation(flight_id) + return await controller.get_flight_simulation( + flight_id, + duration=duration, + time_step=time_step, + max_altitude=max_altitude, + )tests/unit/test_routes/test_environments_route.py (2)
137-138: Fix typos in variable names.The variable name "mock_reponse" is misspelled in multiple places. It should be "mock_response".
Apply this diff to fix the typos:
- mock_reponse = AsyncMock(return_value=None) - mock_controller_instance.put_environment_by_id = mock_reponse + mock_response = AsyncMock(return_value=None) + mock_controller_instance.put_environment_by_id = mock_responseAlso applies to: 156-157, 177-178, 197-198
1-259: Consider adding test cases for edge scenarios.The test suite is comprehensive but could be enhanced with additional test cases:
- Test invalid environment ID format (e.g., non-UUID strings)
- Test environment update with empty payload
Example test case for invalid ID format:
def test_read_environment_invalid_id(): response = client.get('/environments/invalid-id') assert response.status_code == 422 assert response.json() == {'detail': 'Invalid environment ID format'}tests/unit/test_routes/test_motors_route.py (1)
77-230: Consider refactoring motor type tests to reduce duplication.The tests for different motor types (generic, liquid, hybrid, solid) share similar structure and assertions. Consider using a parametrized test to reduce code duplication.
Example refactor:
@pytest.mark.parametrize("motor_type,extra_params", [ ("GENERIC", { 'chamber_radius': 0, 'chamber_height': 0, 'chamber_position': 0, 'propellant_initial_mass': 0, 'nozzle_position': 0, }), ("LIQUID", {'tanks': []}), ("HYBRID", { 'grain_number': 0, 'grain_density': 0, 'grain_outer_radius': 0, 'grain_initial_inner_radius': 0, 'grain_initial_height': 0, 'grains_center_of_mass_position': 0, 'grain_separation': 0, 'throat_radius': 0, 'tanks': [], }), ("SOLID", { 'grain_number': 0, 'grain_density': 0, 'grain_outer_radius': 0, 'grain_initial_inner_radius': 0, 'grain_initial_height': 0, 'grains_center_of_mass_position': 0, 'grain_separation': 0, }), ]) def test_create_motor_types( stub_motor_dump, mock_controller_instance, motor_type, extra_params ): extra_params['motor_kind'] = motor_type stub_motor_dump.update(extra_params) mock_response = AsyncMock(return_value=MotorCreated(motor_id='123')) mock_controller_instance.post_motor = mock_response response = client.post('/motors/', json=stub_motor_dump) assert response.status_code == 201 assert response.json() == { 'motor_id': '123', 'message': 'Motor successfully created', } mock_controller_instance.post_motor.assert_called_once_with( MotorModel(**stub_motor_dump) )tests/unit/test_routes/test_rockets_route.py (1)
125-304: Consider refactoring rocket motor type tests to reduce duplication.The tests for rockets with different motor types share similar structure and assertions. Consider using a parametrized test to reduce code duplication.
Example refactor:
@pytest.mark.parametrize("motor_type,extra_params", [ ("GENERIC", { 'chamber_radius': 0, 'chamber_height': 0, 'chamber_position': 0, 'propellant_initial_mass': 0, 'nozzle_position': 0, }), ("LIQUID", {'tanks': []}), ("HYBRID", { 'grain_number': 0, 'grain_density': 0, 'grain_outer_radius': 0, 'grain_initial_inner_radius': 0, 'grain_initial_height': 0, 'grains_center_of_mass_position': 0, 'grain_separation': 0, 'throat_radius': 0, 'tanks': [], }), ("SOLID", { 'grain_number': 0, 'grain_density': 0, 'grain_outer_radius': 0, 'grain_initial_inner_radius': 0, 'grain_initial_height': 0, 'grains_center_of_mass_position': 0, 'grain_separation': 0, }), ]) def test_create_rocket_with_motor_types( stub_rocket_dump, stub_motor_dump, mock_controller_instance, motor_type, extra_params, stub_level_tank_dump ): extra_params['motor_kind'] = motor_type if motor_type in ['LIQUID', 'HYBRID']: extra_params['tanks'] = [stub_level_tank_dump] stub_motor_dump.update(extra_params) stub_rocket_dump.update({'motor': stub_motor_dump}) mock_response = AsyncMock(return_value=RocketCreated(rocket_id='123')) mock_controller_instance.post_rocket = mock_response response = client.post('/rockets/', json=stub_rocket_dump) assert response.status_code == 201 assert response.json() == { 'rocket_id': '123', 'message': 'Rocket successfully created', } mock_controller_instance.post_rocket.assert_called_once_with( RocketModel(**stub_rocket_dump) )README.md (1)
41-43: Project Structure Documentation: Controllers Update
The addition ofinterface.pyin the controllers directory is a solid move toward abstraction and consistency. However, note that the tree still names the parent directory aslib—ensure this is intentional or update it tosrcif the restructuring is meant to be complete.
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (75)
Dockerfile(1 hunks)Makefile(1 hunks)README.md(5 hunks)lib/controllers/__init__.py(0 hunks)lib/controllers/environment.py(0 hunks)lib/controllers/flight.py(0 hunks)lib/controllers/motor.py(0 hunks)lib/controllers/rocket.py(0 hunks)lib/models/environment.py(0 hunks)lib/models/flight.py(0 hunks)lib/models/motor.py(0 hunks)lib/models/rocket.py(0 hunks)lib/repositories/__init__.py(0 hunks)lib/repositories/environment.py(0 hunks)lib/repositories/flight.py(0 hunks)lib/repositories/motor.py(0 hunks)lib/repositories/rocket.py(0 hunks)lib/routes/environment.py(0 hunks)lib/routes/flight.py(0 hunks)lib/routes/motor.py(0 hunks)lib/routes/rocket.py(0 hunks)lib/views/environment.py(0 hunks)lib/views/flight.py(0 hunks)lib/views/motor.py(0 hunks)lib/views/rocket.py(0 hunks)pyproject.toml(3 hunks)requirements-dev.txt(1 hunks)src/__init__.py(2 hunks)src/__main__.py(1 hunks)src/api.py(3 hunks)src/controllers/__init__.py(1 hunks)src/controllers/environment.py(1 hunks)src/controllers/flight.py(1 hunks)src/controllers/interface.py(1 hunks)src/controllers/motor.py(1 hunks)src/controllers/rocket.py(1 hunks)src/models/environment.py(1 hunks)src/models/flight.py(1 hunks)src/models/interface.py(1 hunks)src/models/motor.py(1 hunks)src/models/rocket.py(1 hunks)src/models/sub/aerosurfaces.py(3 hunks)src/models/sub/tanks.py(1 hunks)src/repositories/__init__.py(1 hunks)src/repositories/environment.py(1 hunks)src/repositories/flight.py(1 hunks)src/repositories/interface.py(7 hunks)src/repositories/motor.py(1 hunks)src/repositories/rocket.py(1 hunks)src/routes/environment.py(1 hunks)src/routes/flight.py(1 hunks)src/routes/motor.py(1 hunks)src/routes/rocket.py(1 hunks)src/services/environment.py(4 hunks)src/services/flight.py(4 hunks)src/services/motor.py(4 hunks)src/services/rocket.py(5 hunks)src/settings/gunicorn.py(2 hunks)src/utils.py(3 hunks)src/views/environment.py(1 hunks)src/views/flight.py(1 hunks)src/views/interface.py(1 hunks)src/views/motor.py(1 hunks)src/views/rocket.py(1 hunks)tests/test_routes/test_environments_route.py(0 hunks)tests/test_routes/test_flights_route.py(0 hunks)tests/test_routes/test_motors_route.py(0 hunks)tests/test_routes/test_rockets_route.py(0 hunks)tests/unit/test_controllers/test_controller_interface.py(1 hunks)tests/unit/test_repositories/test_repository_interface.py(1 hunks)tests/unit/test_routes/conftest.py(5 hunks)tests/unit/test_routes/test_environments_route.py(1 hunks)tests/unit/test_routes/test_flights_route.py(1 hunks)tests/unit/test_routes/test_motors_route.py(1 hunks)tests/unit/test_routes/test_rockets_route.py(1 hunks)
💤 Files with no reviewable changes (26)
- lib/controllers/init.py
- lib/repositories/environment.py
- tests/test_routes/test_motors_route.py
- tests/test_routes/test_rockets_route.py
- lib/models/environment.py
- lib/repositories/motor.py
- lib/controllers/flight.py
- tests/test_routes/test_environments_route.py
- lib/views/rocket.py
- tests/test_routes/test_flights_route.py
- lib/views/environment.py
- lib/repositories/init.py
- lib/controllers/rocket.py
- lib/routes/motor.py
- lib/views/flight.py
- lib/views/motor.py
- lib/models/rocket.py
- lib/repositories/flight.py
- lib/models/flight.py
- lib/models/motor.py
- lib/repositories/rocket.py
- lib/routes/environment.py
- lib/controllers/motor.py
- lib/routes/flight.py
- lib/controllers/environment.py
- lib/routes/rocket.py
✅ Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (6)
- src/repositories/init.py
- src/controllers/init.py
- src/views/interface.py
- src/main.py
- src/settings/gunicorn.py
- src/init.py
🧰 Additional context used
🧠 Learnings (1)
src/routes/motor.py (1)
Learnt from: GabrielBarberini
PR: RocketPy-Team/Infinity-API#38
File: lib/routes/motor.py:75-75
Timestamp: 2024-11-15T15:12:21.314Z
Learning: When modifying API route paths in `lib/routes/motor.py`, changing from `/rocketpy/{motor_id}` to `/{motor_id}/rocketpy` is acceptable when no external consumers are affected. It's acceptable to introduce this breaking change if the team has decided to adopt the new approach, provided that the `README` and related documentation are updated accordingly.
🪛 GitHub Actions: Pylint
src/models/environment.py
[warning] 37-37: C0415: Import outside toplevel (src.views.environment.EnvironmentCreated) (import-outside-toplevel)
[warning] 43-43: C0415: Import outside toplevel (src.views.environment.EnvironmentRetrieved, src.views.environment.EnvironmentView) (import-outside-toplevel)
src/utils.py
[warning] 104-104: W0101: Unreachable code (unreachable)
[warning] 118-118: W0101: Unreachable code (unreachable)
[warning] 132-132: W0101: Unreachable code (unreachable)
src/models/rocket.py
[warning] 50-50: C0415: Import outside toplevel (src.views.rocket.RocketCreated) (import-outside-toplevel)
[warning] 56-56: C0415: Import outside toplevel (src.views.rocket.RocketRetrieved, src.views.rocket.RocketView) (import-outside-toplevel)
src/models/motor.py
[warning] 82-82: C0415: Import outside toplevel (src.views.motor.MotorCreated) (import-outside-toplevel)
[warning] 88-88: C0415: Import outside toplevel (src.views.motor.MotorRetrieved, src.views.motor.MotorView) (import-outside-toplevel)
src/models/flight.py
[warning] 57-57: C0415: Import outside toplevel (src.views.flight.FlightCreated) (import-outside-toplevel)
[warning] 63-63: C0415: Import outside toplevel (src.views.flight.FlightRetrieved, src.views.flight.FlightView) (import-outside-toplevel)
🔇 Additional comments (48)
pyproject.toml (2)
26-29: Establish Testing Environment with Pytest Configurations
The new[tool.pytest.ini_options]section correctly sets the testing parameters by specifying thepythonpath,testpaths, andaddopts(using the--import-mode=importlibflag). This configuration should help standardize test discovery and execution.
65-65: Ruff Ignore List Updated with N802
The inclusion ofN802in the[tool.ruff.lint]ignore list relaxes naming convention checks for function and variable names. This is acceptable provided it aligns with the team’s coding style guidelines. It might be beneficial to note this deviation in the project’s style guide to maintain consistency across the codebase.src/models/interface.py (1)
50-53: Confirm usage ofSelftype hints
def RETRIEVED(model_instance: type(Self)):relies on Python 3.11’sSelfsupport. If older Python versions are needed, consider aTypeVaror generic pattern.Would you like me to open a new issue to address type hints for broader compatibility?
src/controllers/interface.py (1)
58-69: Verify concurrency aspects
Fragments of code dynamically generate and call repository methods. In high-concurrency scenarios, ensure that the approach remains thread/async-safe, especially if repository state is shared.Would you like me to produce a shell script to analyze concurrency usage patterns in the controllers?
src/services/rocket.py (2)
103-112: Implementation aligns with docstring
get_rocket_simulationreturns aRocketSimulationas described. The naming and docstring are coherent, and the approach is straightforward.
160-168:✅ Verification successful
Confirm Python version for
match
This pattern matching requires Python 3.10 or newer. Ensure that your deployment environment meets this requirement.
🏁 Script executed:
#!/bin/bash python --versionLength of output: 32
Python Version Compliance Confirmed
The deployment environment uses Python 3.11.2, which supports the match-case construct required by this code. No modifications are necessary.
src/views/flight.py (1)
1-7: No immediate issues in the imports.
These lines look fine as they import the required modules and types for the file's functionality.src/repositories/interface.py (5)
36-63: Centralized exception handling is well-structured.
Using a decorator to handle repository exceptions centralizes error handling. However, you might consider providing more informative error responses forPyMongoErrorand other specific error types to aid debugging clients.
83-112: Assess potential concurrency implications of the singleton pattern.
The repository uses a custom singleton approach guarded by locks. This can get complicated in high-concurrency environments and may lead to bottlenecks or unexpected behavior; consider whether a per-request or context-based repository instance might be safer.
174-175: Check for potential naming collisions in_collection.
Usingself.model.NAMEto define the collection name is clear. Ensure that model “names” are unique across your codebase; otherwise, collisions might occur in your Mongo schema.
223-227: Check MongoDB update results.
Theupdate_onecall does not capture whether any documents were matched or modified. Consider verifying themodified_countto detect outdated or nonexistent records.
246-253: Provide pagination or safe query limits.
find_by_querycan potentially fetch large data sets. Consider implementing pagination, query limits, or partial fields to reduce memory usage and response times.
[performance]src/repositories/motor.py (2)
21-23: Handle potential duplicate inserts.
create_motorsimply inserts data. If duplicates are possible, consider indexing or unique checks to avoid confusion or collisions.
28-31: Check update results for changes.
When performingupdate_motor_by_id, verifyingmodified_countcan help confirm an actual update occurred.src/repositories/rocket.py (1)
9-19: LGTM! Clean implementation of the repository pattern.The class follows SOLID principles and properly implements the repository pattern with clear separation of concerns.
src/repositories/environment.py (1)
1-41: Implementation follows consistent repository pattern.The implementation is consistent with other repository classes, reinforcing the need for a common base implementation.
src/models/sub/tanks.py (1)
18-49: Well-organized parameter grouping.The clear separation of parameters by tank type and their optional nature makes the model flexible and maintainable. The use of appropriate types and computed parameters is commendable.
Consider adding validators to ensure:
- Positive values for masses and rates
- Valid geometry coordinates
- Compatible mass flow rates
src/controllers/motor.py (1)
10-60: Well-structured controller implementation!The controller is well-implemented with:
- Clear documentation
- Proper error handling using decorators
- Clean separation of concerns between binary and simulation retrieval
src/controllers/rocket.py (1)
10-21: LGTM! Clean implementation of the ControllerInterface.The class is well-structured and follows the interface pattern consistently.
src/services/environment.py (1)
45-55: LGTM! Clean implementation of the simulation conversion.The method effectively converts RocketPy environment attributes to the simulation view model.
src/services/flight.py (2)
8-11: LGTM! Import paths updated to reflect new structure.The import paths have been correctly updated to use the new "src" directory structure, aligning with the PR's restructuring objectives.
21-21: LGTM! Improved type safety and simplified implementation.The changes enhance type safety with explicit parameter typing and simplify the equations_of_motion handling.
Also applies to: 38-38
src/views/rocket.py (1)
8-39: LGTM! Well-structured simulation class with comprehensive attributes.The RocketSimulation class provides a thorough set of attributes with proper type hints and default values. The inheritance from MotorSimulation is appropriate for the domain.
src/views/environment.py (1)
52-63: LGTM! Clean and focused view classes.The view classes are well-structured with clear responsibilities and consistent messaging.
src/api.py (1)
36-36:❓ Verification inconclusive
Consider using semantic versioning for version updates.
The version jump from 2.2.0 to 3.0.0 suggests a major breaking change. Ensure this is documented in the changelog and that all breaking changes are properly communicated to API consumers.
🌐 Web query:
What are the best practices for API versioning and when should major version numbers be incremented?💡 Result:
API versioning is crucial for maintaining compatibility while evolving services. Best practices focus on clear communication, strategic planning, and minimizing disruption to existing users.
Best Practices for API Versioning
1. Use Semantic Versioning (SemVer)
AdoptMAJOR.MINOR.PATCHnumbering ([1][6]):
- Major: Increment for breaking changes (e.g., removing endpoints or altering response structures).
- Minor: Add backward-compatible features (e.g., new optional fields).
- Patch: Backward-compatible bug fixes.
2. Version via URI Path
Embed the major version in URLs (e.g.,/v1/users) for clarity and caching benefits[2][5]. Avoid exposing minor/patch versions in URIs[2].3. Prioritize Backward Compatibility
- Deprecate fields gradually using warnings instead of immediate removal[2][5].
- For GraphQL APIs, use
@deprecateddirectives[2].4. Communication & Documentation
- Notify users 6+ months before deprecating a version[2][5].
- Publish detailed changelogs and migration guides[1][5][8].
5. Testing & Security
- Conduct regression tests for new versions[1].
- Apply security patches to all supported versions[1][8].
When to Increment Major Versions
Major versions must increase when introducing breaking changes such as:
Breaking Change Example Source Removing/renaming endpoints [2][4][5] Changing authentication requirements [1][4] Modifying response schema (e.g., removing fields) [2][4][6] For non-breaking changes (e.g., adding optional parameters), increment minor or patch versions instead[2][6].
Versioning Strategies Comparison
Method Pros Cons URI Path ( /v1/data)Easy caching/exploration Requires codebase duplication Headers Clean URLs Harder to test/debug Query Params Simple implementation Poor cacheability Sources recommend URI path versioning for most use cases[5].
By following these practices, teams can balance innovation with stability while minimizing friction for API consumers[1][2][5]. Always prioritize backward compatibility where possible and reserve major version increments for unavoidable breaking changes[6][9].
Citations:
- 1: https://liblab.com/blog/api-versioning-best-practices
- 2: https://docs.devland.is/technical-overview/api-design-guide/versioning
- 3: https://google.aip.dev/185
- 4: https://cloud.google.com/endpoints/docs/openapi/versioning-an-api
- 5: https://www.xmatters.com/blog/api-versioning-strategies
- 6: https://semver.org
- 7: https://kodekloud.com/blog/api-versioning-best-practices/
- 8: https://daily.dev/blog/api-versioning-strategies-best-practices-guide
- 9: https://apibestpractices.info/versioning
- 10: https://www.postman.com/api-platform/api-versioning/
API Versioning Validation – Verify Documentation and Intent
The version string in
src/api.py(line 36) now reads as follows:version="3.0.0",This major version bump implies breaking changes according to semantic versioning best practices. Please verify that:
- Changelog Updates: All breaking changes are clearly documented in the changelog, including details on endpoint removals, response schema modifications, or changes to authentication.
- Consumer Communication: API consumers have been or will be adequately notified about the breaking changes.
- Version Accuracy: If the changes are not breaking, consider adjusting the versioning (e.g., a minor version bump) to reflect backward-compatible modifications instead.
src/utils.py (2)
13-23: LGTM! Well-structured type conversion function.The function handles different types appropriately:
- numpy arrays are converted to lists
- numpy generic types are converted to their primitive values
- other types are converted to strings
26-30: LGTM! Clear type alias definition.The type alias effectively combines validation and serialization using Pydantic decorators.
src/services/motor.py (3)
18-20: LGTM! Clear and organized imports.The imports are well-organized and follow the new src directory structure.
30-30: LGTM! Improved type safety with MotorModel.The changes improve type safety by:
- Using MotorModel instead of MotorView for better type checking.
- Directly accessing attributes without unnecessary string operations.
Also applies to: 45-46
136-145: LGTM! Clear method renaming and return type update.The method has been renamed to better reflect its purpose and updated to use the new MotorSimulation type.
tests/unit/test_controllers/test_controller_interface.py (1)
1-228: LGTM! Comprehensive test coverage.The test file demonstrates excellent practices:
- Well-organized fixtures for test setup
- Thorough exception handling tests
- Complete coverage of CRUD operations
- Effective use of mocking
tests/unit/test_repositories/test_repository_interface.py (1)
1-287: LGTM! Comprehensive test coverage.The test file demonstrates excellent practices:
- Well-organized fixtures for test setup
- Thorough exception handling tests
- Complete coverage of repository operations
- Effective use of mocking and async testing
tests/unit/test_routes/test_flights_route.py (1)
1-366: Well-structured test suite with comprehensive coverage!The test suite demonstrates excellent practices:
- Thorough coverage of CRUD operations
- Consistent error handling patterns
- Well-organized test fixtures
- Clear separation of concerns in mocking
requirements-dev.txt (2)
1-1: Dependency Addition: pytest_asyncio
The new dependency for asynchronous testing is a valuable addition in light of upcoming async controllers and services.
7-7: Dependency Addition: black
Adding Black ensures a consistent code format across the project. Consider adding a configuration file (e.g. pyproject.toml) if not already present.Dockerfile (2)
17-17: Update COPY Command to New Directory
The command now copies the./srcdirectory into the image, aligning with the refactored project structure. Please verify no oldlibreferences remain.
19-19: Update CMD for Gunicorn Server Launch
The CMD now referencessrc/settings/gunicorn.pyand starts the app withsrc.api:app, which is consistent with the directory changes. Ensure that the Gunicorn configuration insrc/settings/gunicorn.pyis fully compatible.Makefile (5)
5-6: Update Code Formatting Command
Theblackcommand now targets the./srcdirectory (with a fallback on./tests), ensuring that new source files are properly formatted.
9-10: Update Linting Command for Flake8
The lint command now inspects the./srcfolder instead of the old directory. Confirm that this change captures all active code while maintaining the ignore patterns.
13-14: Update Static Analysis Command with Pylint
Pylint is now set to check the./srcdirectory, in sync with the project refactoring. Ensure that any project-specific pylint configurations still apply.
17-18: Update Static Analysis Command with Ruff
The Ruff command has been updated to check./src. This promotes consistency with the new code layout.
24-24: Update Development Server Command
Thedevcommand now starts the server usingsrc:app—this aligns the Makefile with the refactored module structure.README.md (6)
28-29: Update Server Start Instructions
The standalone commands for both development and production have been updated to usesrc:app, which is in line with the new project structure.
60-62: Project Structure Documentation: Repositories Update
Including aninterface.pyin repositories supports a modular design for data access layers. As with controllers, verify that the directory label reflects the new structure if appropriate.
67-77: Project Structure Documentation: Models Enhancement
The models section now includes aninterface.pyand introduces a newsubdirectory withaerosurfaces.pyandtanks.py. This enhances modularity and extensibility. Double-check the parent directory name to ensure consistency with the newsrcstructure if applicable.
78-80: Project Structure Documentation: Views Update
The newinterface.pyadded in views standardizes the view layer’s structure. Ensure that similar documentation changes are made across all layers for consistency.
102-107: API Flowchart Enhancements
The API flowchart now includes explicit HTTP status codes for CRUD operations (e.g.201,200,204), which improves clarity for API consumers. Verify that these statuses are correctly implemented on the backend.
129-136: API Flowchart: Simulation Sequence Diagram Update
The simulation diagram now clarifies the process of initializing and simulating the RocketPy native class. This update improves the documentation’s precision—ensure that the implementation aligns with these steps.
Co-authored-by: coderabbitai[bot] <136622811+coderabbitai[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: coderabbitai[bot] <136622811+coderabbitai[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
🧹 Nitpick comments (3)
src/utils.py (3)
13-23: Add type hints and docstring for better maintainability.The function logic is good, but could benefit from:
- Type hints for parameters and return value
- Docstring explaining the purpose and supported types
- Error handling for attribute access
Apply this diff to improve the function:
-def to_python_primitive(v): +def to_python_primitive(v: Any) -> Any: + """Convert complex types to Python primitives. + + Args: + v: Any value, particularly those with a 'source' attribute + containing numpy arrays or generic types. + + Returns: + The primitive representation of the input value. + """ + try: if hasattr(v, "source"): if isinstance(v.source, np.ndarray): return v.source.tolist() if isinstance(v.source, (np.generic,)): return v.source.item() return str(v.source) return str(v) + except AttributeError: + return str(v)
26-30: Optimize BeforeValidator usage.The BeforeValidator lambda function
lambda v: vis redundant as it simply returns the input value without any transformation.Consider removing it if no validation is needed:
AnyToPrimitive = Annotated[ Any, - BeforeValidator(lambda v: v), PlainSerializer(to_python_primitive), ]
148-148: Remove unnecessary explicit return.The explicit
returnstatement at the end of the method is unnecessary in Python.- return
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (2)
pyproject.toml(3 hunks)src/utils.py(5 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (7)
pyproject.toml (3)
26-29: Enhance Test Configuration OptionsThe new
[tool.pytest.ini_options]section correctly configures the testing environment by setting:
pythonpathto include the repository root,testpathsto run tests from thetestsdirectory, andaddoptsfor the import mode configuration.This approach standardizes how tests are discovered and executed, promoting consistency across development workflows.
55-57: Linter Configuration Update for PylintThe additions of
no-member,protected-access, andimport-outside-toplevelin thedisablelist are appropriate if these checks are causing undesired false positives in your codebase. Ensure that this aligns with your team’s linting policies.
66-66: Ruff Linter Naming Convention UpdateAdding
N802to theignorelist under[tool.ruff.lint]relaxes the naming rule enforcement for functions and variables. This is acceptable if it better fits the project's coding style guidelines.src/utils.py (4)
5-5: LGTM!The import statements are well-organized and include all necessary types and validators for the new functionality.
Also applies to: 8-8
98-98: LGTM!The operator precedence fix correctly clarifies the condition evaluation.
151-151: LGTM!The simplified type hint improves readability while maintaining the same functionality.
104-104:❓ Verification inconclusive
Investigate unreachable code warnings.
Multiple instances of
# pylint: disable=unreachablesuggest that pylint detects unreachable code. This could indicate a potential logic issue in the control flow.Let's verify the control flow:
Also applies to: 118-118, 132-132
🏁 Script executed:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Check for similar patterns in the codebase that might help understand the intended flow. # Search for similar patterns of send calls rg -A 5 "await.*send.*message.*unreachable" # Search for related tests rg -l "send_with_gzip.*test"Length of output: 1215
Action Required: Revisit Unreachable Code in
src/utils.pyThe
await self.send(message)calls (notably at lines 104, 118, and 132) are marked with# pylint: disable=unreachable. Static analysis shows these patterns consistently appear, which suggests that pylint is flagging these calls as unreachable—possibly due to preceding control flow decisions (e.g., early returns or conditional branches that never fall through).Please verify that the intended execution paths are correct:
- Confirm whether these code paths are meant to be unreachable.
- If they are reachable under specific conditions, adjust the control flow so that pylint’s warning is addressed without needing the disable comment.
- Otherwise, if they are intentionally unreachable, please document the rationale clearly to make future maintenance easier.
Co-authored-by: coderabbitai[bot] <136622811+coderabbitai[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: coderabbitai[bot] <136622811+coderabbitai[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: coderabbitai[bot] <136622811+coderabbitai[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
♻️ Duplicate comments (1)
src/repositories/interface.py (1)
226-230: 🛠️ Refactor suggestionAlign validation approach with insert method.
The
assertstatement inupdate_by_idcould be bypassed if Python is run with optimizations enabled (-O flag). Consider using the same try-catch validation approach as in the insert method.- assert self.model.model_validate(data) - await collection.update_one({"_id": ObjectId(data_id)}, {"$set": data}) + try: + self.model.model_validate(data) + except ValidationError as e: + raise HTTPException(status_code=422, detail=str(e)) + await collection.update_one({"_id": ObjectId(data_id)}, {"$set": data})
🧹 Nitpick comments (7)
src/controllers/flight.py (2)
24-45: Remove redundant explicit return statement.The explicit
returnstatement on line 44 is unnecessary as the function implicitly returns None.flight = await self.get_flight_by_id(flight_id) flight.environment = environment await self.update_flight_by_id(flight_id, flight) - return
46-67: Consider extracting common update pattern.This method is very similar to
update_environment_by_flight_id. Consider extracting the common pattern into a generic update method to reduce code duplication.async def _update_flight_attribute(self, flight_id: str, *, attribute_name: str, value: Any) -> None: flight = await self.get_flight_by_id(flight_id) setattr(flight, attribute_name, value) await self.update_flight_by_id(flight_id, flight)Also, remove the redundant explicit
returnstatement.flight = await self.get_flight_by_id(flight_id) flight.rocket = rocket await self.update_flight_by_id(flight_id, flight) - returnsrc/routes/environment.py (4)
19-23: Consider adding more specific error responses.While the current error responses cover common scenarios, consider adding more specific error descriptions and response schemas for better API documentation:
- 404: Add specific cases when this occurs (e.g., "Environment not found")
- 422: Specify validation error scenarios
- 500: Include potential internal error cases
responses={ - 404: {"description": "Not found"}, - 422: {"description": "Unprocessable Entity"}, - 500: {"description": "Internal Server Error"}, + 404: { + "description": "Environment not found", + "content": { + "application/json": { + "example": {"detail": "Environment with ID {id} not found"} + } + } + }, + 422: { + "description": "Validation error", + "content": { + "application/json": { + "example": {"detail": "Invalid environment configuration"} + } + } + }, + 500: { + "description": "Internal server error", + "content": { + "application/json": { + "example": {"detail": "Error processing environment"} + } + } + }, },
33-38: Enhance API documentation with request/response examples.The current documentation lacks examples that would help API consumers understand the expected request/response format.
""" Creates a new environment ## Args - ``` models.Environment JSON ``` + ``` models.Environment JSON + Example: + { + "name": "Sample Environment", + "latitude": 32.990722, + "longitude": -106.975038, + "elevation": 1401 + } + ``` + + ## Returns + ``` + { + "id": "123e4567-e89b-12d3-a456-426614174000", + "name": "Sample Environment", + "created_at": "2025-02-20T12:00:00Z" + } + ``` """
103-104: Make architecture limitation more prominent.The architecture limitation is important information that should be more prominently displayed in the documentation.
- Loads rocketpy.environment as a dill binary. - Currently only amd64 architecture is supported. + Loads rocketpy.environment as a dill binary. + + ⚠️ IMPORTANT: This endpoint only supports amd64 architecture. + Attempting to use the binary on other architectures will result in errors.
129-134: Consider adding simulation control parameters.The simulation endpoint could benefit from query parameters to control simulation behavior (e.g., duration, time step, etc.).
""" Simulates an environment ## Args - ``` environment_id: Environment ID``` + ``` + environment_id: Environment ID + + Optional Query Parameters: + - duration: float (simulation duration in seconds) + - time_step: float (simulation time step in seconds) + - max_iterations: int (maximum number of iterations) + ``` + + ## Returns + ``` + { + "environment_id": "123e4567-e89b-12d3-a456-426614174000", + "simulation_results": { + "duration": 100.0, + "time_step": 0.1, + "iterations": 1000, + "data": [...] + } + } + ``` """src/repositories/interface.py (1)
170-171: Consider increasing the minimum connection pool size.Setting
minPoolSize=1might be insufficient for production workloads, potentially leading to connection establishment overhead during traffic spikes.- minPoolSize=1, + minPoolSize=3,
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (5)
src/controllers/flight.py(1 hunks)src/models/sub/tanks.py(1 hunks)src/repositories/interface.py(7 hunks)src/routes/environment.py(1 hunks)src/utils.py(5 hunks)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (2)
- src/utils.py
- src/models/sub/tanks.py
🔇 Additional comments (7)
src/controllers/flight.py (3)
1-23: LGTM! Well-structured imports and class definition.The imports are well-organized, the class documentation clearly states its purpose, and the inheritance from ControllerInterface aligns with the PR's objective of abstracting common features.
68-90: LGTM! Well-implemented binary retrieval.The method is well-documented and properly implements the binary retrieval functionality using FlightService.
91-113: LGTM! Well-implemented simulation retrieval.The method is well-documented and properly implements the simulation retrieval functionality using FlightService.
src/repositories/interface.py (4)
1-22: LGTM! Well-organized imports.The imports are properly organized and all are necessary for the implementation.
36-62: LGTM! Well-implemented error handling decorator.The decorator effectively centralizes error handling with proper logging and appropriate HTTP status codes for different error scenarios.
207-214: LGTM! Clean implementation of dynamic repository loading.The implementation provides a clean way to dynamically load repository classes based on model names.
232-257: LGTM! Well-implemented query methods.The find and delete methods are properly implemented with appropriate error handling, ID management, and model validation.
| for action in model.METHODS: | ||
| method_name = ( | ||
| f"{action.lower()}_{model.NAME}" | ||
| if action == "POST" | ||
| else f"{action.lower()}_{model.NAME}_by_id" | ||
| ) | ||
| method = self._generate_method(action.lower(), model) | ||
| setattr(self, method_name, method) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why include the model name in the controller methods name? Why not simply make it get_by_id, for instance?
It seems a bit counterintuitive to make use of, since the Controller childs need to know the name of a method that is "runtime defined" (I don't know if there is a better term).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thank you for the question!
In summary, this is all about a design choice that prioritizes convention over configuration at the cost of some explicitness. I'll tackle your questions in order:
Why not simply make it get_by_id, for instance?
As I said I think it is just a matter of design choice, no hard pros or cons, just a trade off. Some intuition behind it is that since controllers, repositories, views and routes are now tightly orbiting models I think it is reasonable to expect models to be the new pivot for the whole framework.
(...) childs need to know the name of a method that is "runtime defined" (I don't know if there is a better term).
I'm not sure if I got the point of children needing to know the name of the method, but what is happening under the hood is a flavor of Metaprogramming called Reflection. Children controllers don't really knows the name of the methods, they know the name of the model and the model is now the principal entity of the entire framework.
In the future this also enables us to move to automatic route generation like:
- post_user → POST /user
- get_user_by_id → GET /user/{id}
@coderabbitai would like to hear your thoughts on that as well
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@GabrielBarberini I think your approach of including model names in method signatures makes sense for this architecture. This design pattern follows the "convention over configuration" principle that has proven successful in frameworks like Ruby on Rails and Django.
Some advantages I see:
- Self-documenting code: Methods like
get_environment_by_idclearly communicate what entity they operate on - Collision prevention: When controllers handle multiple models, this prevents method name conflicts
- Future extensibility: As you mentioned, this pattern aligns well with automatic route generation
- Consistent mental model: Maintaining the model name throughout the stack (repository, controller, route) creates a consistent pattern
The trade-off with verbosity is reasonable given the clarity it provides, especially as the system grows in complexity. The use of reflection for method generation is also elegant - it allows the framework to be both flexible and predictable.
For developers using this pattern, good IDE tooling with autocomplete will mitigate the discovery challenges that might otherwise exist.
✏️ Learnings added
Learnt from: GabrielBarberini
PR: RocketPy-Team/Infinity-API#44
File: src/controllers/interface.py:49-56
Timestamp: 2025-02-25T21:53:37.155Z
Learning: In the Infinity-API architecture, controller methods are intentionally named with the model name included (e.g., `get_environment_by_id` rather than just `get_by_id`) to maintain a convention over configuration approach, enable future automatic route generation, prevent method name collisions, and provide self-documenting code.
Note: Learnings are effective only in the context of similar code segments. To apply general coding guidelines, please configure review instructions. You can manage existing learnings in the app.
|
Partial review only. Some quick other comments:
|
Thank you for the prompt review, even if partial!
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
PR Overview
This PR refactors the API V3 implementation by removing legacy controllers, repositories, models, and route files and replacing them with interface-based abstractions while updating route semantics and documentation. Key changes include:
- Updating the README with new module paths and revised endpoints.
- Adding interface.py files in controllers, repositories, models, and views.
- Removing legacy implementation files in favor of the new abstracted design.
Reviewed Changes
| File | Description |
|---|---|
| README.md | Updates to standalone commands, endpoint response codes, and docs. |
| lib/routes/.py, lib/controllers/.py, etc. | Removal of legacy implementation files in favor of interface abstractions. |
Copilot reviewed 76 out of 76 changed files in this pull request and generated no comments.
Comments suppressed due to low confidence (2)
README.md:131
- [nitpick] The endpoint 'GET model/:id/simulate/' is missing a leading slash compared to other endpoints. Consider updating it to '/model/:id/simulate/' for consistency.
User ->> API: GET model/:id/simulate/
lib/routes/flight.py:1
- This legacy route file has been completely removed. Please ensure that its functionality is fully covered by the new interface-based implementation and that corresponding tests have been updated accordingly.
diff --git a/lib/routes/flight.py b/lib/routes/flight.py
Makefile
Outdated
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can we create a job on GitHub Actions to automatically run all these tests every Pull Request?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@coderabbitai please create a gh issue with that specification so we can address it later
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🧩 Analysis chain
🏁 Script executed:
#!/bin/bash
# Create a GitHub issue for setting up GitHub Actions to run tests on PRs
gh issue create \
--title "Set up GitHub Actions CI workflow for automated testing on PRs" \
--body "## Overview
As discussed in PR #44, we need to set up a GitHub Actions workflow to automatically run all tests on each Pull Request.
## Specifications
The workflow should:
- Trigger on each PR and push to main branch
- Run the following commands from the Makefile:
- \`black\` for code formatting check
- \`flake8\` for linting
- \`pylint\` for static code analysis
- \`ruff\` for additional linting/checking
- \`pytest\` for running all tests
- Fail the check if any of these commands fail
- Show test results in the PR
## Additional considerations
- Consider caching dependencies to speed up workflow
- Consider using separate jobs for linting vs testing
- Ensure it works with the new source directory structure (\`src\` instead of \`lib\`)
## Reference
- Originally requested by @Gui-FernandesBR in PR #44
- URL: https://github.com/RocketPy-Team/Infinity-API/pull/44#discussion_r1978372522" \
--assignee "GabrielBarberini"
Length of output: 1076
@GabrielBarberini I've created a GitHub issue as requested for setting up GitHub Actions to run automated tests on each PR. The issue has been assigned to you and can be found here: #45
The issue includes specifications for running all the tests from the Makefile (black, flake8, pylint, ruff, and pytest) when PRs are created or updated. I've also included some additional considerations about caching dependencies and ensuring compatibility with the new src directory structure.
(_/)
(•ᴥ•)
/ >📝
src/models/sub/aerosurfaces.py
Outdated
There was a problem hiding this comment.
the kind of nosecone could easily be an enum. However, I think we should define this enum within the lib itself
| interpolation_method: Literal[ | ||
| 'linear', 'spline', 'akima', 'polynomial', 'shepard', 'rbf' | ||
| ] = 'linear' |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
maybe you're going to need these "interpolation options" elsewhere?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
So far we don't so I rather keep it like this if you don't mind.
Co-authored-by: Gui-FernandesBR <63590233+Gui-FernandesBR@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Gui-FernandesBR <63590233+Gui-FernandesBR@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Gui-FernandesBR <63590233+Gui-FernandesBR@users.noreply.github.com>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
🧹 Nitpick comments (12)
src/models/flight.py (3)
7-9: Consider separating HTTP method constants from the data model.It might be more logical to keep route-related metadata (like
METHODS) in controllers or routing modules, leaving the model focused solely on data structure and validation.
22-22: Address the TODO comment.There's a
# TODO: implement initial_solutionmarker. Ensure it doesn't get overlooked in later iterations.Do you want me to propose a sample implementation or open a new issue to track this?
30-45: Refine or centralize excluded fields configuration.
get_additional_parameterscurrently hardcodes a list of fields to exclude. For maintainability, consider centralizing these fields in a class-level constant or using a pydanticfieldconfiguration if suitable, simplifying future changes.tests/unit/test_routes/test_flights_route.py (1)
60-366: Comprehensive test coverage with uniform patterns.You've tested normal, invalid, not found, and server error scenarios for flight creation, retrieval, updates, and deletions. This thorough coverage is commendable. For additional maintainability, consider parametrizing repeated 404 and 500 test patterns to reduce duplication.
tests/unit/test_routes/test_environments_route.py (2)
25-37: Consider using an async test client orpytest.mark.asynciofor better realism.
WhileTestClientworks for simplicity, your controller methods are asynchronous (AsyncMockusage). To ensure you're accurately testing async behavior end-to-end, consider leveraging an async test client (e.g.,async with AsyncClient(...)) or marking tests withpytest.mark.asyncio.
137-144: Parametrize the “not found” or “server error” scenarios for DRY tests.
You replicate a similar structure in multiple tests (e.g., 404, 500 errors). Consider usingpytest.mark.parametrizeto unify repeated error-scenario tests, reducing code duplication.src/routes/motor.py (2)
29-40: Possible improvement: injectMotorControllerrather than instantiating it inside each route.
Currently, each route creates a newMotorController()instance. For better testability and a cleaner design, consider injecting the controller as a dependency (e.g., via FastAPI’s dependency injection or a factory function).
84-95: Mention or verify multi-architecture support in future.
The docstring explicitly says "Currently only amd64 architecture is supported." This is acceptable for now, but you might consider clarifying (in docs or code) if additional architectures will be supported later.src/routes/rocket.py (2)
29-40: Consider a shared pattern withmotor.pyto reduce duplication.
Routes inmotor.pyandrocket.pyfollow nearly the same CRUD pattern. Extracting shared logic or using a base router could improve maintainability without rewriting the same error handling and docstrings in each file.
117-128: Ensure rocket simulation route covers erroneous or partial states.
You’ve covered the happy path for simulation. To be thorough, consider adding fallback or error-handling coverage for incomplete rocket specs or invalidrocket_id.tests/unit/test_routes/test_motors_route.py (2)
250-259: Inconsistent mock error setup across tests.There's inconsistency in how HTTP exceptions are mocked across different test functions. Some tests use direct
AsyncMock(side_effect=...)pattern while others assign to theside_effectattribute later.For consistency, consider standardizing on one approach throughout the test file. For example:
- mock_response = AsyncMock(side_effect=HTTPException(status_code=500)) - mock_controller_instance.post_motor = mock_response + mock_controller_instance.post_motor.side_effect = HTTPException(status_code=500)Or consistently use the current approach:
mock_response = AsyncMock(side_effect=HTTPException(status_code=500)) mock_controller_instance.post_motor = mock_response
274-289: Consider using HTTPStatus constants for status codes.Using numeric literals (404, 500) for HTTP status codes makes the code less readable and maintainable.
Consider using constants from
statusmodule for HTTP status codes, as seen in thetest_rockets_route.pyfile:- mock_response = AsyncMock(side_effect=HTTPException(status_code=404)) + mock_response = AsyncMock(side_effect=HTTPException(status_code=status.HTTP_404_NOT_FOUND)) - assert response.status_code == 404 + assert response.status_code == status.HTTP_404_NOT_FOUND
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (10)
src/models/environment.py(1 hunks)src/models/flight.py(1 hunks)src/routes/environment.py(1 hunks)src/routes/flight.py(1 hunks)src/routes/motor.py(1 hunks)src/routes/rocket.py(1 hunks)tests/unit/test_routes/test_environments_route.py(1 hunks)tests/unit/test_routes/test_flights_route.py(1 hunks)tests/unit/test_routes/test_motors_route.py(1 hunks)tests/unit/test_routes/test_rockets_route.py(1 hunks)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (2)
- src/routes/flight.py
- src/models/environment.py
🧰 Additional context used
🧠 Learnings (1)
src/routes/motor.py (1)
Learnt from: GabrielBarberini
PR: RocketPy-Team/Infinity-API#38
File: lib/routes/motor.py:75-75
Timestamp: 2024-11-15T15:12:21.314Z
Learning: When modifying API route paths in `lib/routes/motor.py`, changing from `/rocketpy/{motor_id}` to `/{motor_id}/rocketpy` is acceptable when no external consumers are affected. It's acceptable to introduce this breaking change if the team has decided to adopt the new approach, provided that the `README` and related documentation are updated accordingly.
🔇 Additional comments (13)
src/models/flight.py (2)
47-54: Clarify the intent of empty static methods.
UPDATEDandDELETEDreturnNone. If they’re placeholders, please add docstrings or raise aNotImplementedErrorto communicate their future usage or significance.
57-63: Fix circular imports in static methods.This is the same concern raised in a previous review. To avoid potential circular imports, move these imports to the top of the file or rely on forward references in type hints.
tests/unit/test_routes/test_flights_route.py (1)
1-20: Great use of FastAPI TestClient and fixtures.The initial setup for mocking controllers and using fixtures is well structured, making the tests clear and maintainable.
tests/unit/test_routes/test_environments_route.py (2)
40-54: Test coverage appears solid; ensurestub_environment_dumpis defined and verified.
The test referencesstub_environment_dumpfrom a fixture, but it's not shown here. Confirm that it is declared elsewhere (likeconftest.py) and thoroughly tested to avoid silent test failures if renamed or removed.
81-86: Great negative test coverage for validation errors.
This test ensures the correct 422 response for invalid input. The approach is concise and confirms robust validation logic.src/routes/motor.py (1)
96-115: Binary download endpoint is well-structured.
Clearly returning a binary response with correct headers is a best practice. The usage of a custom filename inContent-Dispositionis a nice detail.src/routes/rocket.py (1)
84-95: Consistent binary serving approach.
Like the motor route, you’re specifying a well-formed binary response with headers. This consistency across modules is good practice.src/routes/environment.py (2)
90-122: Environment binary response is well-structured.The implementation for the binary file download endpoint is correctly configured with appropriate headers, media type, and status code. It's good to see that the status code has been set to 200 (OK) as it's the standard for successful responses with the requested content.
125-138: Well-defined environment simulation endpoint.The simulation endpoint is structured appropriately with clear documentation and proper use of OpenTelemetry for tracing. The controller pattern is used consistently with other endpoints in this file.
tests/unit/test_routes/test_motors_route.py (1)
240-248: Good test for model validation after instantiation.Testing validation that occurs after model instantiation catches errors that simple input validation would miss. This is a valuable test case.
tests/unit/test_routes/test_rockets_route.py (3)
312-321: Well-structured error handling test.Good approach using HTTPException with status constants from the status module. This is more maintainable than using numeric status codes directly.
445-455: Binary content test looks good.This test correctly validates both the binary content and the content-type header in the response, which is important for binary data endpoints.
357-366:✅ Verification successful
Verify motor_kind is set before test execution.
In line 358, you're updating the rocket's motor kind to 'SOLID' without first verifying that the stub_rocket_dump contains a 'motor' key. This could potentially cause a KeyError if the fixture doesn't initialize the motor dictionary.
Make sure the fixture
stub_rocket_dumpincludes a 'motor' key with at least an empty dictionary:
🏁 Script executed:
#!/bin/bash # Check if the stub_rocket_dump fixture initializes the motor dictionary grep -A20 "def stub_rocket_dump" tests/unit/conftest.pyLength of output: 113
I'll perform an additional repository-wide search for the
stub_rocket_dumpfixture definition to determine whether it's defined elsewhere and if it includes the expected'motor'key. This will help us verify if there's a potential risk of a KeyError when updating'motor_kind'.Once we have the output from this script, we can decide whether the test should be updated to first verify that a
'motor'key exists or if the fixture needs adjustments. Please run the above script and share the results so that we can finalize the review comment.
🏁 Script executed:
#!/bin/bash # Search the entire repository for the definition of stub_rocket_dump grep -R -C 5 "def stub_rocket_dump" .Length of output: 851
Confirmation: Fixture Ensures 'motor' Key Existence
After investigating the definition of the
stub_rocket_dumpfixture intests/unit/test_routes/conftest.py, we determined that the fixture constructs the rocket with amotorfield using thestub_motor_dumpdependency. As long asstub_motor_dumpreliably returns a dictionary, the'motor'key will be present, and updating its'motor_kind'value in the test will not raise a KeyError.
- The
stub_rocket_dumpfixture assigns its motor usingmotor=stub_motor_dump.- Verify that
stub_motor_dumpcontinues to return a valid dictionary. If this changes in the future, consider adding an explicit assertion (e.g.,assert 'motor' in stub_rocket_dump) before updating its contents.No modifications are required to the test code as implemented.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
🧹 Nitpick comments (14)
src/controllers/motor.py (2)
10-17: Clarify class purpose in docstring.
The high-level documentation is concise, but consider elaborating on the scope of responsibilities (e.g., if it also orchestrates external dependencies). This can help new contributors quickly understand the controller’s role.
22-42: Validate motor existence handling.
Currently, a missing motor raises a 404, but additional logging or context (e.g., including the motor_id in the error detail) can aid debugging if multiple services query this endpoint.src/controllers/flight.py (3)
12-19: Expand on route usage in docstring.
Although the docstring references CRUD for Flight, specifying which endpoints rely on these methods can help clarify how external clients interact with them.
68-90: Add explanation for binary serialization format.
The docstring mentions returning a dill binary, but clarifying how or why dill is used (versus other serialization methods) may benefit maintainers and future debugging of potential unpickling issues.
91-113: Consider partial or on-demand data retrieval.
Simulations for large datasets might be expensive or memory-intensive. If you anticipate large flight data, you could explore partial retrieval or chunking.src/controllers/interface.py (5)
12-36: Consider refining final log statements.
The final log line logs "Call to method completed" even if an exception occurred. You could split this into success/failure logs to improve diagnostic clarity.
45-57: Ensure consistency between model actions and methods.
By generating method names (e.g.,post_MyModelandget_MyModel_by_id), the code strongly depends on the naming conventions inmodel.METHODS. Consider adding validation or warnings if the model actions are not recognized, to avoid silent mismatches.
83-100: Explicitly log resource not found.
Whenmodel_instanceis None, you raise an HTTP 404. You could also log the specificmodel_idto help triage failures when large volumes of requests come in.
101-114: Clarify concurrency expectations.
If multiple requests can update the same record simultaneously, confirm that your repository method (update_{model.NAME}_by_id) handles concurrency (e.g., optimistic locking).
115-125: Document delete conditions.
Betting on a simple 404 or success might not be enough for certain domain contexts. If important relationships exist, a more detailed check or a soft-delete approach might be warranted.tests/unit/test_controllers/test_controller_interface.py (4)
117-131: Consider simplifying the test setup with a fixture.While the test is correct, the nested patch structure makes it somewhat harder to read. Consider extracting the common mocking setup to a fixture for cleaner tests.
-@pytest.mark.asyncio -async def test_controller_interface_generate_available_method( - stub_controller, stub_model -): - with patch('src.controllers.interface.RepositoryInterface') as mock_repo: - with patch( - 'src.controllers.interface.ControllerBase._get_model' - ) as mock_get: - mock_get.return_value = stub_model - method = stub_controller._generate_method('get', stub_model) - assert ( - await method(None, stub_model, mock_repo, 'arg', key='bar') - == stub_model - ) +@pytest.fixture +def mocked_repository(): + with patch('src.controllers.interface.RepositoryInterface') as mock_repo: + yield mock_repo + +@pytest.mark.asyncio +async def test_controller_interface_generate_available_method( + stub_controller, stub_model, mocked_repository +): + with patch( + 'src.controllers.interface.ControllerBase._get_model' + ) as mock_get: + mock_get.return_value = stub_model + method = stub_controller._generate_method('get', stub_model) + assert ( + await method(None, stub_model, mocked_repository, 'arg', key='bar') + == stub_model + )
143-156: Consider a more direct assertion for the post model test.The test is effective but could benefit from more explicit verification of the repository interaction.
@pytest.mark.asyncio async def test_controller_interface_post_model(stub_controller, stub_model): with patch('src.controllers.interface.RepositoryInterface') as mock_repo: with patch( 'src.controllers.interface.RepositoryInterface.get_model_repo' ) as mock_get_repo: mock_get_repo.return_value = mock_repo + mock_repo_instance = mock_repo.return_value.__aenter__.return_value + mock_repo_instance.create_test_model.return_value = None assert ( await stub_controller._post_model( stub_model, mock_repo, stub_model ) == 'Created' ) + mock_repo_instance.create_test_model.assert_called_once_with(stub_model)
167-169: Simplify repository mock setup for better readability.The long chain of mock setups makes the code harder to read. Consider creating a helper variable for the mock.
-mock_repo.return_value.__aenter__.return_value.read_test_model_by_id.return_value = ( - stub_model -) +mock_repo_instance = mock_repo.return_value.__aenter__.return_value +mock_repo_instance.read_test_model_by_id.return_value = stub_model
1-228: Consider adding tests for edge cases.The test suite is comprehensive for the happy path and basic error handling, but could benefit from testing edge cases like:
- Empty model list initialization
- Models without required attributes (NAME, METHODS)
- Models with only partial method support
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (6)
src/controllers/environment.py(1 hunks)src/controllers/flight.py(1 hunks)src/controllers/interface.py(1 hunks)src/controllers/motor.py(1 hunks)src/controllers/rocket.py(1 hunks)tests/unit/test_controllers/test_controller_interface.py(1 hunks)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (2)
- src/controllers/rocket.py
- src/controllers/environment.py
🔇 Additional comments (16)
src/controllers/motor.py (1)
43-59: Confirm simulation side effects.
When retrieving simulations or motor binaries, ensure there are no hidden side effects in theMotorService(e.g., caching or queuing tasks). If so, document them clearly for maintainers.src/controllers/flight.py (2)
24-45: Perform input validation on environment.
Before assigningenvironmentto the flight, consider ensuring it is valid or complete. This prevents partially updated or malformed records from being written to the database.
46-67: Ensure rocket references are updated consistently.
Parallel to validating the environment, confirm that the rocket model is properly verified or tested. If the rocket is missing mandatory fields, this might lead to unexpected behavior downstream.src/controllers/interface.py (1)
58-69: Handle unknown actions gracefully.
The code raisesNotImplementedErrorif_action_modelis not found. Ensure this is documented so developers realize they must define the handler inControllerBasefor new actions (e.g., PATCH).tests/unit/test_controllers/test_controller_interface.py (12)
1-9: LGTM, appropriate imports for controller interface testing.The imports are well-organized, pulling in the necessary modules for mocking, testing, and handling MongoDB and HTTP exceptions.
11-20: Well-structured test fixture.The stub_model fixture creates a comprehensive mock with all the necessary attributes and lambda functions required for testing the controller interface.
23-25: Clean controller fixture implementation.This fixture effectively initializes a ControllerBase with the stub_model for testing.
28-47: Good test coverage for the happy path scenario.The test properly verifies that when no exception occurs, the controller_exception_handler preserves the original method's return value and logs appropriately.
50-64: Complete test for database exception handling.This test effectively verifies that PyMongoError is properly converted to a 503 HTTP exception with the appropriate message and logging.
66-80: LGTM - HTTP exception pass-through test.The test confirms that HTTPExceptions are passed through without modification and no error logging occurs.
82-95: Good coverage of unexpected exception handling.The test verifies that unexpected exceptions like ValueError are correctly converted to 500 HTTP exceptions with appropriate logging.
98-114: Complete test for controller initialization.The test comprehensively verifies that the controller initializes correctly, registering models and generating the expected methods.
133-141: LGTM, properly tests unavailable method handling.The test correctly verifies that attempting to generate an unsupported method raises NotImplementedError.
176-192: Complete test for model not found scenario.This test properly verifies that when a model is not found, an HTTP 404 exception is raised with the appropriate message.
194-210: Good test for model update functionality.The test ensures that the update operation returns the expected result and interacts correctly with the repository.
212-227: Well-structured test for delete model operation.The test correctly verifies the delete operation's behavior and return value.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
♻️ Duplicate comments (2)
src/models/interface.py (1)
19-24:⚠️ Potential issueRemove deprecated
validate_all_in_rootfrommodel_config.Pydantic v2 no longer supports
validate_all_in_root. Leaving this key may lead to runtime errors.Please remove it:
model_config = ConfigDict( use_enum_values=True, validate_default=True, - validate_all_in_root=True, validate_assignment=True, )src/repositories/interface.py (1)
237-237: 🛠️ Refactor suggestionReplace assert-based validation with explicit handling.
Using
assert self.model.model_validate(data)can be bypassed if Python is run with optimizations (-O). Explicitly validate and handle or raise instead.- assert self.model.model_validate(data) + try: + self.model.model_validate(data) + except ValidationError as e: + raise HTTPException(status_code=422, detail=str(e))
🧹 Nitpick comments (2)
src/models/interface.py (1)
26-30: Add type annotations to improve clarity and maintainability.Methods
set_idandget_iddo not have return or parameter type annotations. Explicit type hints will help maintain code clarity.Example:
- def set_id(self, value): + def set_id(self, value: str) -> None: - def get_id(self): + def get_id(self) -> Optional[str]: return self._idsrc/repositories/interface.py (1)
183-183: Consider making the database name configurable.Hardcoding
rocketpyas the database name can limit flexibility. Using a configurable setting would allow overriding in different environments (e.g., dev, staging, prod).- self._collection = self._client.rocketpy[self.model.NAME] + database_name = Secrets.get_secret("DATABASE_NAME", default="rocketpy") + self._collection = self._client[database_name][self.model.NAME]
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (3)
src/controllers/interface.py(1 hunks)src/models/interface.py(1 hunks)src/repositories/interface.py(7 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
🧠 Learnings (1)
src/models/interface.py (2)
Learnt from: GabrielBarberini
PR: RocketPy-Team/Infinity-API#44
File: src/models/interface.py:12-17
Timestamp: 2025-02-22T21:53:21.139Z
Learning: In Pydantic v2, both bare dict and ConfigDict can be used for model_config, but ConfigDict is recommended for better type hints and IDE support.
Learnt from: GabrielBarberini
PR: RocketPy-Team/Infinity-API#44
File: src/models/interface.py:12-17
Timestamp: 2025-02-22T21:53:21.139Z
Learning: Pydantic v2 requires using ConfigDict for model configuration. Plain dictionaries lack type safety, proper validation, and full feature support.
🔇 Additional comments (1)
src/controllers/interface.py (1)
91-93: Avoid constructing repo method names with string interpolation.Using
await getattr(repo, f'create_{model.NAME}')can break if naming conventions change. Consider a centralized registry or map that validates permissible actions, or directly call a known method on the repository.- inserted_id = await getattr(repo, f'create_{model.NAME}')(model_instance) + # Potential approach using a method map: + create_method = getattr(repo, "create", None) + if create_method is None: + raise NotImplementedError("create method not defined on repository") + inserted_id = await create_method(model.NAME, model_instance)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
🧹 Nitpick comments (1)
requirements.txt (1)
5-5: Addition ofuvloopDependencyThe new dependency
uvloophas been added to support the updated Gunicorn command in the Dockerfile. Consider pinning it to a specific version for consistency and reproducible builds, similar to hownumpyis version-locked.
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (2)
Dockerfile(1 hunks)requirements.txt(1 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (2)
Dockerfile (2)
17-17: Update Source Directory Copy InstructionThe Dockerfile now copies the
srcdirectory (COPY ./src /app/src) instead of the oldlibdirectory. This change aligns the build context with the new project structure. Ensure that the entire source code and necessary resources are correctly located undersrc.
19-19: Revise Gunicorn Startup CommandThe updated CMD instruction now references the new configuration file (
src/settings/gunicorn.py) and application module (src.api:app), and it includes the--loopargument withuvloopfor enhanced event loop performance. Confirm that these changes have been tested across all deployment environments and that all documentation has been updated accordingly.
High level view
Summary by CodeRabbit