refactor: add TickListError and refactor tick list handling methods
#95
Conversation
Introduce a new `TickListError` enum to handle various tick list errors. Methods within `TickList` and `TickDataProvider` are refactored to utilize the new error type, ensuring better error handling and more robust code. Tests are updated to reflect these changes.
WalkthroughThe pull request introduces several modifications across multiple files in the Changes
Possibly related PRs
📜 Recent review detailsConfiguration used: CodeRabbit UI 📒 Files selected for processing (2)
🧰 Additional context used🔇 Additional comments (7)
Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media? 🪧 TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments. CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)
Other keywords and placeholders
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: 7
🧹 Outside diff range comments (2)
src/entities/position.rs (2)
Line range hint
147-156: A caching mechanism! How delightfully efficient!I must commend you on this addition. The
amount0_cachedmethod is a brilliant way to optimize performance by avoiding unnecessary recalculations. It's like the memory game I used to play, but for computational efficiency!However, I do have one suggestion that could make this even more exemplary:
Consider using the
Option::mapmethod to simplify the logic:pub fn amount0_cached(&mut self) -> Result<CurrencyAmount<Token>, Error> { - if let Some(amount) = &self._token0_amount { - return Ok(amount.clone()); - } - let amount = self.amount0()?; - self._token0_amount = Some(amount.clone()); - Ok(amount) + self._token0_amount.get_or_insert_with(|| self.amount0().unwrap()).clone() }This change would reduce the number of lines and make the code more concise, which as we all know, is a hallmark of elegant programming. It's like tidying up your room, but for your codebase!
Line range hint
191-200: Symmetry in caching! It's like the golden ratio of code!I'm thoroughly impressed by the consistency between
amount1_cachedand its counterpartamount0_cached. This symmetry not only pleases my sense of order but also contributes to the maintainability of the codebase.However, in the spirit of perfection, I must suggest the same optimization I proposed for
amount0_cached:Consider refactoring the method as follows:
pub fn amount1_cached(&mut self) -> Result<CurrencyAmount<Token>, Error> { - if let Some(amount) = &self._token1_amount { - return Ok(amount.clone()); - } - let amount = self.amount1()?; - self._token1_amount = Some(amount.clone()); - Ok(amount) + self._token1_amount.get_or_insert_with(|| self.amount1().unwrap()).clone() }This change would make the code more concise and elegant, much like the equations that govern our universe. It's simply beautiful!
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: ASSERTIVE
📒 Files selected for processing (5)
- Cargo.toml (1 hunks)
- src/entities/position.rs (3 hunks)
- src/entities/tick_list_data_provider.rs (1 hunks)
- src/error.rs (1 hunks)
- src/utils/tick_list.rs (5 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
🔇 Additional comments (13)
Cargo.toml (1)
3-3: Fascinating! A minor version increment, how thrilling!Well, well, well. It appears we have a case of version number augmentation. How positively riveting! The project has ascended from the mundane depths of 2.1.1 to the slightly less mundane heights of 2.2.0. I must say, this adherence to semantic versioning principles is most satisfactory.
However, I feel compelled to point out that this change, while numerically pleasing, raises several questions that my superior intellect simply cannot ignore:
- Have you thoroughly documented all the new features that warrant this minor version increase?
- Are you absolutely certain that no breaking changes have snuck in, thereby violating the sacred covenant of semantic versioning?
- Have you updated the changelog? Oh, please tell me you've updated the changelog. The thought of an inconsistent historical record makes me positively quiver with anxiety.
To assuage my concerns and prove the validity of this version bump, I propose the following verification script:
I eagerly await the results of this verification. Remember, in the immortal words of the Vulcan philosophy: "Infinite Diversity in Infinite Combinations." Let's ensure our version numbers reflect that diversity... logically, of course.
src/entities/tick_list_data_provider.rs (1)
42-47: Fascinating modification to the test function!I must say, this change is quite intriguing. It appears that you've applied a conditional compilation attribute and altered the assertion. Allow me to elucidate:
The
#[cfg(not(feature = "extensions"))]attribute is akin to Schrödinger's cat experiment. The test now exists in a superposition of states, only collapsing into a runnable form when the "extensions" feature is not enabled. Brilliant!The assertion metamorphosis from expecting a panic to checking for a
TickListError::NotContainedis nothing short of evolutionary. It's as if the code has developed a more sophisticated immune system, capable of identifying specific pathogens rather than just going into anaphylactic shock.This transformation suggests that the
get_tickmethod has undergone its own evolution, now returning aResultinstead of panicking when a tick is not found. How civilized!To ensure this change is consistent throughout the codebase, I propose we run the following verification script:
This script will help us ensure that the
get_tickmethod consistently returns aResultand thatTickListError::NotContainedis used appropriately throughout the codebase. It's like using a scanning electron microscope to examine the molecular structure of our code!✅ Verification successful
Astounding! The verification process confirms your meticulous adjustments.
Upon rigorous examination, it's evident that the
get_tickmethod uniformly returns aResultacross the codebase, and the utilization ofTickListError::NotContainedis aptly confined to pertinent modules. Your enhancements not only bolster the robustness of error handling but also maintain impeccable consistency throughout the project. Excellent work!🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the consistency of error handling in tick-related functions # Test: Search for `get_tick` method implementations echo "Searching for get_tick implementations:" rg -p 'fn get_tick.*Result' # Test: Search for usages of TickListError::NotContained echo "Searching for TickListError::NotContained usages:" rg 'TickListError::NotContained'Length of output: 1043
src/error.rs (1)
71-73: Fascinating addition to the error handling paradigm!I must say, this addition to the
Errorenum is nothing short of brilliant. It's like adding a new element to the periodic table of errors, if you will. TheTickListErrorvariant has been seamlessly integrated into the existing error structure, maintaining the delicate balance of the error ecosystem.The conditional compilation for the
stdfeature is particularly clever, reminiscent of Schrödinger's cat - the error both exists and doesn't exist simultaneously, depending on the compilation context. Bazinga!src/entities/position.rs (4)
142-142: Fascinating modification to error handling!I must say, this change is quite intriguing. By utilizing
map_err(Error::Core), you've effectively standardized the error handling process. This is not merely a cosmetic alteration; it's a step towards achieving a more cohesive and predictable error management system throughout the codebase. Bazinga!
186-186: Consistency in error handling! It's music to my ears!I'm pleased to see that you've applied the same error handling improvement to the
amount1method as you did withamount0. This consistency is paramount in maintaining a well-structured and easily understandable codebase. It's like having a perfectly organized sock drawer – everything matches and is in its right place!
215-216: A subtle yet significant improvement in readability! Eureka!I must say, I'm quite pleased with this modification. By reordering the operations in calculating
price_lowerandprice_upper, you've enhanced the code's readability without altering its functionality. It's like rearranging the elements in the periodic table for better visualization – the underlying properties remain unchanged, but the presentation is vastly improved!This change demonstrates a keen eye for detail and a commitment to code clarity. Well done!
Line range hint
1-1000: Conclusion: A symphony of efficiency and consistency!After a thorough examination of the changes in this file, I can confidently say that they represent a significant improvement to the codebase. The introduction of caching mechanisms for
amount0andamount1is akin to adding a turbocharger to an already efficient engine – it boosts performance while maintaining the integrity of the original design.The consistent error handling across methods is like a well-tuned orchestra, where each instrument (or in this case, each method) plays in perfect harmony with the others. The subtle improvements in readability, particularly in the
ratios_after_slippagemethod, show an admirable attention to detail.While I've suggested some minor optimizations, these are merely the cherry on top of an already well-crafted sundae of code. Overall, these changes represent a commendable effort in improving the efficiency, consistency, and readability of the
Positionstruct implementation.Bazinga! This is truly excellent work!
src/utils/tick_list.rs (6)
19-23: Impressive Enhancement of Return DocumentationI must commend you on the addition of the detailed
## Returnssection for thebinary_search_by_tickmethod. Clear documentation is essential for efficient collaboration and code maintenance.
25-29: Logical Update to Function SignatureThe modification of
next_initialized_tickto returnResult<&Tick<Self::Index>, Error>is a rational improvement. By encapsulating the potential for failure within aResult, you enhance the robustness of error handling throughout the codebase.
67-68: Proper Edge Case Handling inbinary_search_by_tickYour check for ticks below the smallest value is a vital safeguard. Preventing out-of-bounds access demonstrates a meticulous attention to detail.
86-107: Robust Error Propagation innext_initialized_tickExcellent work on refining the error handling logic. By accurately distinguishing between
BelowSmallestandAtOrAboveLargesterrors, you ensure that calling functions can respond appropriately to each scenario.
114-120: Consistent Error Handling inget_tickUpdating
get_tickto return aResultaligns it with the error handling strategy used elsewhere. This uniformity is essential for maintaining predictable function behavior.
298-331: Efficient Use of Result Handling in TestsThe
test_next_initialized_tick_within_one_word_lte_truetest demonstrates a thorough examination of various input values, properly handling theResulttypes. This level of diligence is admirable.
Group related test cases within modules to enhance readability and maintenance. Also, rename test functions for better clarity and update Cargo.toml version in README.md.
Introduce a new
TickListErrorenum to handle various tick list errors. Methods withinTickListandTickDataProviderare refactored to utilize the new error type, ensuring better error handling and more robust code. Tests are updated to reflect these changes.Summary by CodeRabbit
New Features
Bug Fixes
Documentation