Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
[WIP] Add support for RSC #1644
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
[WIP] Add support for RSC #1644
Changes from 7 commits
4b08b73
d6c607c
8a2a300
44f5b87
d975912
193fd1b
d9d9cf4
268d49d
3352a1a
5d05df3
4600fbd
b3c0a38
fa343a8
06fbffe
8b931c1
205af95
0b84950
0f9ec1d
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Enhance error handling and type safety for RSC
The RSC implementation should include:
📝 Committable suggestion
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This will be fixed later on the PR that fixes
https://github.com/shakacode/react_on_rails_pro/issues/465
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Implement error handling for RSC streams
The TODO comment indicates that error handling for RSC streams is not yet implemented. This is critical for production reliability as unhandled errors in server-side rendering could lead to silent failures or degraded user experience.
Consider implementing error handling similar to the existing streaming error handling logic above.
Would you like help implementing the error handling logic for RSC streams? I can provide a solution that follows the existing patterns in the codebase.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This looks like it could easily raise an error itself. Any way around it?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I added enough specs in
utils_spec.rb
to ensure that it doesn't cause errors if the packer iswebpacker
orshaka packer'. For now, React on Rails only supports these packers. If we plan to add support for more packers, we can refactor the
PackerUtils` module in a follow-up PR.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Improve error handling specificity
The current error handling using
Object.const_get
is overly broad and could mask other legitimate errors. Consider being more specific about the error type.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
💡 Codebase verification
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
RSC bundle configuration should follow existing pattern for server bundle
The review suggestion is valid. Based on the configuration class implementation:
server_bundle_js_file
, which is already a configurable attribute.rsc_bundle_js_file
as a new configuration option.Specific changes needed:
rsc_bundle_js_file
to the Configuration class attributesself.configuration
ensure_webpack_generated_files_exists
method to include the RSC bundle file🔗 Analysis chain
Add configuration support and documentation for RSC bundle
The RSC bundle implementation needs attention in two areas:
Consider adding configuration support like this:
Also, please add documentation explaining:
Let me gather more information about the configuration setup to provide a comprehensive verification.
Let me check the configuration class implementation to see the existing configuration pattern.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
Length of output: 754
Script:
Length of output: 1771
Script:
Length of output: 12660
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Avoid assigning
AsyncLocalStorage
toglobalThis
; consider alternative approaches.Assigning to
globalThis.AsyncLocalStorage
can pollute the global namespace and may lead to conflicts or unintended side effects. Additionally, using an asynchronous IIFE ((async () => { ... })()
) for this purpose might introduce race conditions since other parts of the code might accessAsyncLocalStorage
before it's available.Consider importing
AsyncLocalStorage
synchronously where needed without modifyingglobalThis
. For example:This approach avoids modifying the global scope and ensures
AsyncLocalStorage
is available synchronously.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Specify a more precise type instead of
any
fornewBundleConfig
.Using
any
defeats the purpose of TypeScript's type safety. Specifying a more precise type enhances code reliability and maintainability.Apply this diff to specify a more accurate type:
This ensures that
newBundleConfig
has the same value types as the originalbundleConfig
. Adjust the type as needed based on the actual structure of the config.🧰 Tools
🪛 eslint
[error] 32-32: Unexpected any. Specify a different type.
(@typescript-eslint/no-explicit-any)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Improve robustness of
getBundleConfig
function.The function has several areas for improvement:
any
type should be more specific as flagged by ESLintConsider applying these improvements:
📝 Committable suggestion
🧰 Tools
🪛 eslint
[error] 32-32: Unexpected any. Specify a different type.
(@typescript-eslint/no-explicit-any)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
debugConsole
is not defined; useconsole
or import the appropriate logger.The variable
debugConsole
is used but not defined or imported, which will lead to aReferenceError
at runtime.Apply this diff to correct the issue:
Alternatively, if
debugConsole
is intended to be a custom logging utility, ensure it is properly imported or defined.📝 Committable suggestion
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Replace recursion with iteration in
processStream
.The current recursive implementation could lead to stack overflow for large streams. Consider using a loop instead.
📝 Committable suggestion
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
💡 Codebase verification
Missing test coverage for RSC implementation
The implementation requires test coverage for:
serverRenderRSCReactComponent
methodrsc_react_component
Ruby helperKey files needing tests:
node_package/src/ReactOnRailsRSC.ts
lib/react_on_rails/helper.rb
🔗 Analysis chain
Verify RSC implementation completeness
Since this is a WIP PR implementing RSC support, let's verify the complete implementation:
RSC implementation needs additional test coverage
The implementation appears incomplete as it requires:
rsc_react_component
serverRenderRSCReactComponent
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
Length of output: 2688
Script:
Length of output: 380