Skip to content

Conversation

jjramirezn
Copy link
Contributor

Claim flow as still using old token selector. This PR removes that token selector and uses the new one that is already used in others flows (request)

Copy link

vercel bot commented Nov 18, 2024

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎

Name Status Preview Comments Updated (UTC)
peanut-ui ✅ Ready (Inspect) Visit Preview 💬 Add feedback Nov 18, 2024 9:45pm

Copy link
Contributor

coderabbitai bot commented Nov 18, 2024

📝 Walkthrough
📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

The pull request introduces significant modifications to the Claim component and related files to enhance state management and control flow, particularly concerning cross-chain interactions. The checkLink function has been streamlined to directly set the selected chain ID and token address from the Peanut SDK, simplifying error handling and state updates. The InitialClaimLinkView component has been updated to utilize new utility functions, improving code organization. Additionally, the TokenSelectorXChain component has been removed, and a new state variable for refetching cross-chain routes has been added to the context provider.

Changes

File Path Change Summary
src/components/Claim/Claim.tsx Modified checkLink function for direct setting of chain ID and token address; streamlined error handling and state updates.
src/components/Claim/Link/Initial.view.tsx Added utility functions; updated state management for token selection; modified error handling and rendering logic.
src/components/Global/TokenSelector/TokenSelectorXChain.tsx Component removed; previously managed token selection across different networks.
src/context/tokenSelector.context.tsx Added refetchXchainRoute state and setter; updated logic in useEffect for cross-chain route refetching.

Possibly related PRs

Suggested labels

Being worked on

Suggested reviewers

  • Hugo0
  • nezz0746

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>, please review it.
    • 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 gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
    • @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.
    • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

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)

  • @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
  • @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
  • @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
  • @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
  • @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
  • @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

  • Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
  • Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
  • Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

CodeRabbit Configuration 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

Copy link
Contributor

@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: 3

🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (4)
src/context/tokenSelector.context.tsx (1)

Line range hint 117-124: Optimize loading state management

There's a potential race condition with setIsFetchingTokenData(true) being called twice:

  1. Before setRefetchXchainRoute
  2. Inside fetchAndSetTokenPrice

This could lead to inconsistent loading states if the component unmounts between these calls.

Consider consolidating the loading state management:

 if (selectedTokenAddress && selectedChainID) {
-    setIsFetchingTokenData(true)
     setSelectedTokenData(undefined)
     setRefetchXchainRoute(true)
     setSelectedTokenPrice(undefined)
     setSelectedTokenDecimals(undefined)
     setInputDenomination('TOKEN')
     fetchAndSetTokenPrice(selectedTokenAddress, selectedChainID)
     return () => {
         isCurrent = false
     }
 }
src/components/Claim/Claim.tsx (3)

139-141: Consider cleaning up states before early return.

When a link is already claimed, we should reset any previously set states (like selectedChainID and selectedTokenAddress) before returning, to prevent stale state issues.

 if (linkDetails.claimed) {
     setLinkState(_consts.claimLinkStateType.ALREADY_CLAIMED)
+    setSelectedChainID(undefined)
+    setSelectedTokenAddress(undefined)
     return
 }

147-157: Simplify user-specific logic and improve null safety.

The code can be improved by:

  1. Removing redundant address check in estimatePoints
  2. Simplifying the USD amount calculation
 if (address) {
     setRecipient({ name: '', address })

     const estimatedPoints = await estimatePoints({
-        address: address ?? '',
+        address,
         chainId: linkDetails.chainId,
-        amountUSD: Number(linkDetails.tokenAmount) * (tokenPrice?.price ?? 0),
+        amountUSD: Number(linkDetails.tokenAmount) * tokenPrice,
         actionType: ActionType.CLAIM,
     })
     setEstimatedPoints(estimatedPoints)
 }

159-162: Fix indentation in the else block.

The indentation in the else block is inconsistent with the surrounding code.

 if (address && linkDetails.senderAddress === address) {
     setLinkState(_consts.claimLinkStateType.CLAIM_SENDER)
 } else {
-    setLinkState(_consts.claimLinkStateType.CLAIM)
+     setLinkState(_consts.claimLinkStateType.CLAIM)
 }
📜 Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between eaeec4c and 7bcebcd.

📒 Files selected for processing (4)
  • src/components/Claim/Claim.tsx (1 hunks)
  • src/components/Claim/Link/Initial.view.tsx (11 hunks)
  • src/components/Global/TokenSelector/TokenSelectorXChain.tsx (0 hunks)
  • src/context/tokenSelector.context.tsx (1 hunks)
💤 Files with no reviewable changes (1)
  • src/components/Global/TokenSelector/TokenSelectorXChain.tsx
🧰 Additional context used
📓 Learnings (1)
src/context/tokenSelector.context.tsx (1)
Learnt from: jjramirezn
PR: peanutprotocol/peanut-ui#413
File: src/context/tokenSelector.context.tsx:118-123
Timestamp: 2024-11-12T09:39:20.720Z
Learning: In the `TokenContextProvider` component within `src/context/tokenSelector.context.tsx`, in the TypeScript React application, when data changes and before calling `fetchAndSetTokenPrice`, it is necessary to reset `selectedTokenData`, `selectedTokenPrice`, `selectedTokenDecimals`, and `inputDenomination` to discard stale data.
🔇 Additional comments (5)
src/context/tokenSelector.context.tsx (3)

Line range hint 12-19: LGTM: Context interface changes are well-structured

The new refetchXchainRoute state and its setter are properly integrated into the context interface with appropriate typing.


Line range hint 45-54: LGTM: State management is consistent

The new refetchXchainRoute state is properly initialized and integrated into the existing state management pattern.


117-117: Verify integration with claim flow

Since this change is part of updating the claim flow, let's verify the integration with the claim components.

✅ Verification successful

Let me check the specific usage context in the Initial.view.tsx to understand how refetchXchainRoute is being used.


Integration with claim flow is properly implemented

The verification shows that refetchXchainRoute is correctly integrated in the claim flow:

  • It's properly consumed in Initial.view.tsx where it triggers route fetching when set to true
  • The context update in tokenSelector.context.tsx correctly triggers a re-fetch of cross-chain routes when token or chain selection changes
  • The state reset and cleanup is handled appropriately in both components
🏁 Scripts executed

The following scripts were executed for the analysis:

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Search for components using the token selector context in the claim flow
echo "Searching for claim components using tokenSelectorContext..."
rg -l "tokenSelectorContext" "src/components/Claim"

# Search for specific usage of refetchXchainRoute
echo "Checking usage of refetchXchainRoute..."
rg "refetchXchainRoute" "src/components/Claim"

Length of output: 725


Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Get the context around refetchXchainRoute usage in Initial.view
echo "Checking context of refetchXchainRoute usage in Initial.view.tsx..."
rg -B 5 -A 5 "refetchXchainRoute" "src/components/Claim/Link/Initial.view.tsx"

# Check the token selector context implementation
echo "Checking token selector context implementation..."
rg -B 5 -A 5 "setRefetchXchainRoute" "src/context/tokenSelector.context.tsx"

Length of output: 3642

src/components/Claim/Claim.tsx (2)

134-135: LGTM: Token selector state initialization is properly placed.

The immediate state updates for chain ID and token address after link validation ensure correct initialization of the token selector.


134-162: Verify integration with the new token selector across the codebase.

The changes successfully integrate the new token selector into the claim flow. Let's verify that all components consuming these states are updated accordingly.

✅ Verification successful

Based on the search results, I can now provide a final response:

The token selector integration is properly implemented across the codebase

The changes in the Claim component correctly integrate with the token selector context. The context is consistently used across all relevant components including:

  • Claim flow components (Claim.tsx, Initial.view.tsx)
  • Token selector components
  • Related features (Create, Request, Offramp)

All components are using the same context (tokenSelectorContext) and accessing the state variables (selectedChainID, selectedTokenAddress) in a consistent manner.

🏁 Scripts executed

The following scripts were executed for the analysis:

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Search for components using the token selector context
rg -l "tokenSelectorContext" --type tsx

# Search for any remaining references to the old TokenSelectorXChain component
rg -l "TokenSelectorXChain"

Length of output: 155


Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Search for components using the token selector context with correct file extension
rg -l "tokenSelectorContext" --type ts --type tsx

# Search for token selector related state variables in Claim component
rg "setSelectedChainID|setSelectedTokenAddress" -A 2 -B 2 src/components/Claim/

Length of output: 1945


Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Search for the token selector context definition and usage
rg "tokenSelectorContext" -A 5 -B 5

# Search for any other components that might be using the token selector states
rg "selectedChainID|selectedTokenAddress" --type ts --type tsx

Length of output: 24063

Copy link
Contributor

@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

🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (3)
src/components/Claim/Link/Initial.view.tsx (3)

Line range hint 116-135: Consider enhancing error message handling

While the error handling is good, the generic "Error claiming link" message could be more informative. Consider passing through the specific error details from the ErrorHandler.

-                throw new Error('Error claiming link')
+                throw new Error('Failed to claim link: Transaction unsuccessful')

Line range hint 152-171: Simplify route availability check logic

The nested conditions for checking route availability could be simplified for better readability.

-            if (!tokenName || !chainName) {
-                if (!crossChainDetails) {
-                    setErrorState({
-                        showError: true,
-                        errorMessage: 'offramp unavailable',
-                    })
-                    return
-                }
+            if ((!tokenName || !chainName) && !crossChainDetails) {
+                setErrorState({
+                    showError: true,
+                    errorMessage: 'offramp unavailable',
+                })
+                return
+            }

294-305: Consider memoizing chain comparison values

The chain and token address comparisons in the useEffect could benefit from memoization to prevent unnecessary re-renders.

+    const isSameChain = useMemo(
+        () =>
+            selectedChainID === claimLinkData.chainId &&
+            areTokenAddressesEqual(selectedTokenAddress, claimLinkData.tokenAddress),
+        [selectedChainID, selectedTokenAddress, claimLinkData.chainId, claimLinkData.tokenAddress]
+    )

     useEffect(() => {
-        if (
-            selectedChainID === claimLinkData.chainId &&
-            areTokenAddressesEqual(selectedTokenAddress, claimLinkData.tokenAddress)
-        ) {
+        if (isSameChain) {
             setIsXChain(false)
             setSelectedRoute(null)
             setHasFetchedRoute(false)
         } else {
             setIsXChain(true)
         }
-    }, [selectedChainID, selectedTokenAddress, claimLinkData.chainId, claimLinkData.tokenAddress])
+    }, [isSameChain])
📜 Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 7bcebcd and 8264929.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • src/components/Claim/Link/Initial.view.tsx (12 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (3)
src/components/Claim/Link/Initial.view.tsx (3)

12-20: LGTM! Improved import organization

The change to import utility functions individually rather than using a catch-all import improves code maintainability and makes dependencies explicit.


73-82: LGTM! Enhanced token selector context

The expanded context usage properly handles cross-chain functionality with clear state management for chain ID, token address, and cross-chain route refetching.


426-434: LGTM! Clean token selector implementation

The new TokenSelector implementation with reset functionality properly aligns with the PR objectives of replacing the old token selector.

@jjramirezn jjramirezn requested a review from Hugo0 November 18, 2024 21:48
Copy link
Contributor

@Hugo0 Hugo0 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

frontend PRs are a bit hard to review. There's so much state to think about

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.

2 participants