🧹 chore: Handle defaults only when field missing by ReneWerner87 · Pull Request #25 · gofiber/schema

ReneWerner87 · 2025-05-25T13:34:45Z

Summary

adjust setDefaults to check if form field is provided before applying default values
add fieldProvided helper
ensure decoder uses new behaviour and update recursive calls
test bool default behaviour with missing vs provided values

Testing

go test ./...

Summary by CodeRabbit

Bug Fixes
- Default values for fields are now only applied when the input value is missing, preventing user-supplied values from being overwritten.
Tests
- Added a test to ensure default values are applied only when input values are missing, preserving explicit zero and empty values.

coderabbitai · 2025-05-25T13:34:52Z

Walkthrough

The setDefaults method in the decoder logic is updated to accept the source map and a prefix, ensuring default values are only applied to fields not present in the input. A helper function checks if a field is provided in the source data. A new test verifies that defaults are applied only when corresponding input values are missing, preserving explicit zero or empty values.

Changes

File(s)	Change Summary
decoder.go	Updated `setDefaults` method signature and logic to accept source map and prefix; added `fieldProvided` helper to check field presence before applying defaults.
decoder_test.go	Added `TestDefaultsAppliedOnlyWhenMissing` to verify defaults apply only when input values are absent, preserving explicit zero and empty values.

Poem

In the warren of code, where defaults may hide,
A rabbit ensures user values abide.
Only when missing, defaults hop in,
With careful checks, the tests begin.
Boolean fields now behave just right—
The carrot of logic, crisp and bright! 🥕

📜 Recent review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between f69649c and bad39e1.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)

decoder_test.go (1 hunks)

🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)

decoder_test.go

⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms (1)

GitHub Check: unit (1.24.x, windows-latest)

✨ Finishing Touches

📝 Generate Docstrings

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ 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.
- Explain this complex logic.
- 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 explain this code block.
- @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 explain its main purpose.
- @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.

Support

Need help? Create a ticket on our support page for assistance with any issues or questions.

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 generate docstrings to generate docstrings for this PR.
@coderabbitai generate sequence diagram to generate a sequence diagram of the changes in this 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 or @coderabbitai title 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.

codecov · 2025-05-25T13:35:35Z

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 88.39%. Comparing base (452f46c) to head (bad39e1).
Report is 3 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main      #25      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   88.31%   88.39%   +0.07%     
==========================================
  Files           4        4              
  Lines         933      939       +6     
==========================================
+ Hits          824      830       +6     
  Misses         91       91              
  Partials       18       18

Flag	Coverage Δ
unittests	`88.39% <100.00%> (+0.07%)`	⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

Copilot

Pull Request Overview

This PR adjusts the decoder's default value handling so that default values for boolean fields are only applied when the form field is missing, instead of overwriting provided values. Key changes include:

Updating setDefaults to accept the input source and a prefix for proper field detection.
Adding a helper function fieldProvided to determine if a field was supplied.
Introducing a new test to validate the bool default behaviour.

Reviewed Changes

Copilot reviewed 2 out of 2 changed files in this pull request and generated 1 comment.

File	Description
decoder_test.go	Added test for verifying bool default is applied only if missing.
decoder.go	Modified setDefaults signature and logic; added fieldProvided.

Copilot · 2025-05-25T13:49:59Z

decoder.go

 	return !v.IsZero() && v.Type().Kind() == reflect.Ptr && v.Elem().Type().Kind() == reflect.Struct
 }

+func fieldProvided(src map[string][]string, prefix string, f *fieldInfo) bool {


[nitpick] Consider adding a doc comment for the fieldProvided function to explain its purpose and the expected format of the prefix argument, enhancing maintainability.

gaby

👍 LGTM

sixcolors

LGTM!

ReneWerner87 · 2025-05-25T16:35:11Z

                                     │   old.txt    │                new.txt                │
                                     │    sec/op    │    sec/op      vs base                │
All-12                                 77.14n ± ∞ ¹    78.35n ± ∞ ¹       ~ (p=0.700 n=3) ²
DecoderMultipartFiles-12               5.078µ ± ∞ ¹    5.101µ ± ∞ ¹       ~ (p=1.000 n=3) ²
IsMultipartFile/IsMultipartFile-0-12   3.625n ± ∞ ¹    3.595n ± ∞ ¹       ~ (p=0.400 n=3) ²
IsMultipartFile/IsMultipartFile-1-12   3.629n ± ∞ ¹    3.607n ± ∞ ¹       ~ (p=1.000 n=3) ²
IsMultipartFile/IsMultipartFile-2-12   3.025n ± ∞ ¹    2.992n ± ∞ ¹       ~ (p=0.400 n=3) ²
IsMultipartFile/IsMultipartFile-3-12   3.638n ± ∞ ¹    3.680n ± ∞ ¹       ~ (p=0.700 n=3) ²
IsMultipartFile/IsMultipartFile-4-12   2.126n ± ∞ ¹    2.141n ± ∞ ¹       ~ (p=1.000 n=3) ²
IsMultipartFile/IsMultipartFile-5-12   3.618n ± ∞ ¹    3.786n ± ∞ ¹       ~ (p=0.700 n=3) ²
IsMultipartFile/IsMultipartFile-6-12   6.647n ± ∞ ¹    6.770n ± ∞ ¹       ~ (p=0.400 n=3) ²
HandleMultipartField-12                98.23n ± ∞ ¹   102.10n ± ∞ ¹       ~ (p=0.200 n=3) ²
LargeStructDecode-12                   5.785µ ± ∞ ¹    5.813µ ± ∞ ¹       ~ (p=0.400 n=3) ²
LargeStructDecodeParallel-12           2.786µ ± ∞ ¹    2.911µ ± ∞ ¹       ~ (p=0.100 n=3) ²
SimpleStructDecode-12                  2.470µ ± ∞ ¹    2.611µ ± ∞ ¹       ~ (p=0.100 n=3) ²
CheckRequiredFields-12                 868.6n ± ∞ ¹    847.7n ± ∞ ¹       ~ (p=0.400 n=3) ²
TimeDurationDecoding-12                519.8n ± ∞ ¹    522.1n ± ∞ ¹       ~ (p=0.400 n=3) ²
SimpleStructEncode-12                  1.306µ ± ∞ ¹    1.280µ ± ∞ ¹       ~ (p=0.600 n=3) ²
SimpleStructEncodeParallel-12          193.3n ± ∞ ¹    192.8n ± ∞ ¹       ~ (p=1.000 n=3) ²
LargeStructEncode-12                   2.293µ ± ∞ ¹    2.265µ ± ∞ ¹       ~ (p=0.400 n=3) ²
LargeStructEncodeParallel-12           369.8n ± ∞ ¹    345.4n ± ∞ ¹       ~ (p=0.100 n=3) ²
TimeDurationEncoding-12                230.4n ± ∞ ¹    228.7n ± ∞ ¹       ~ (p=1.000 n=3) ²

benchmark is not really changed

fix default bool behavior

f69649c

ReneWerner87 requested a review from a team as a code owner May 25, 2025 13:34

ReneWerner87 requested review from efectn, gaby and sixcolors and removed request for a team May 25, 2025 13:34

ReneWerner87 added the codex label May 25, 2025 — with ChatGPT Codex Connector

ReneWerner87 added the 🧹 Updates label May 25, 2025

gaby requested a review from Copilot May 25, 2025 13:49

Copilot AI reviewed May 25, 2025

View reviewed changes

gaby changed the title ~~Handle bool defaults only when field missing~~ 🧹 chore: Handle bool defaults only when field missing May 25, 2025

gaby approved these changes May 25, 2025

View reviewed changes

This comment was marked as outdated.

Sign in to view

sixcolors approved these changes May 25, 2025

View reviewed changes

add more tests

bad39e1

ReneWerner87 changed the title ~~🧹 chore: Handle bool defaults only when field missing~~ 🧹 chore: Handle defaults only when field missing May 25, 2025

ReneWerner87 merged commit 713caa4 into main May 25, 2025
18 checks passed

ReneWerner87 deleted the codex/überprüfe-default-feature-und-tests-erstellen branch May 25, 2025 16:35

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

🧹 chore: Handle defaults only when field missing#25

Hidden character warning

🧹 chore: Handle defaults only when field missing#25
ReneWerner87 merged 2 commits intomainfrom
codex/überprüfe-default-feature-und-tests-erstellen

ReneWerner87 commented May 25, 2025 •

edited by coderabbitai bot

Loading

Uh oh!

coderabbitai bot commented May 25, 2025 •

edited

Loading

Chat

Support

CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)

Other keywords and placeholders

CodeRabbit Configuration File (`.coderabbit.yaml`)

Documentation and Community

Uh oh!

codecov bot commented May 25, 2025 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

Copilot AI left a comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI May 25, 2025

Uh oh!

gaby left a comment

Uh oh!

This comment was marked as outdated.

Uh oh!

sixcolors left a comment •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

ReneWerner87 commented May 25, 2025

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

4 participants

Conversation

ReneWerner87 commented May 25, 2025 • edited by coderabbitai bot Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Summary

Testing

Summary by CodeRabbit

Uh oh!

coderabbitai bot commented May 25, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Walkthrough

Changes

Poem

Chat

Support

CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)

Other keywords and placeholders

CodeRabbit Configuration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

Documentation and Community

Uh oh!

codecov bot commented May 25, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Codecov Report

Uh oh!

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Pull Request Overview

Reviewed Changes

Uh oh!

Copilot AI May 25, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

gaby left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

This comment was marked as outdated.

Uh oh!

sixcolors left a comment • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

ReneWerner87 commented May 25, 2025

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

4 participants

ReneWerner87 commented May 25, 2025 •

edited by coderabbitai bot

Loading

coderabbitai bot commented May 25, 2025 •

edited

Loading

CodeRabbit Configuration File (`.coderabbit.yaml`)

codecov bot commented May 25, 2025 •

edited

Loading

sixcolors left a comment •

edited

Loading