Thanks to visit codestin.com
Credit goes to github.com

Skip to content
This repository was archived by the owner on Mar 24, 2025. It is now read-only.

Refactor accountExists function to include error handling and ensure consistent return values #554

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Mar 20, 2025
Merged

Refactor accountExists function to include error handling and ensure consistent return values #554

merged 5 commits into from
Mar 20, 2025

Conversation

@sainthiago
Copy link
Member

@sainthiago sainthiago commented Mar 20, 2025 •
edited by mintbase-codium-pr-agent bot
Loading

PR Type

bug_fix, enhancement

Description

  • Refactored the accountExists function to include a try-catch block for improved error handling.
  • Ensured consistent return values by returning true when an error is caught, addressing potential issues with error responses.
  • Improved the reliability and robustness of the accountExists function by handling exceptions properly.

Changes walkthrough 📝

Relevant files
Bug fix
account.ts
Enhance error handling in `accountExists` function             

packages/rpc/src/methods/account.ts

  • Added try-catch block for error handling in accountExists function.
  • Ensured consistent return values by returning true in case of
    exceptions.
  • Refactored the function to improve error handling and reliability.
    		•  +15/-12 

    💡 PR-Agent usage:
    Comment /help on the PR to get a list of all available PR-Agent tools and their descriptions

    @sainthiago sainthiago self-assigned this Mar 20, 2025
    @mintbase-codium-pr-agent mintbase-codium-pr-agent bot added enhancement New feature or request bug_fix labels Mar 20, 2025
    @mintbase-codium-pr-agent
    Copy link

    mintbase-codium-pr-agent bot commented Mar 20, 2025

    PR Reviewer Guide 🔍

    ⏱️ Estimated effort to review: 2 🔵🔵⚪⚪⚪
    🧪 No relevant tests
    🔒 No security concerns identified
    ⚡ Key issues to review

    Error Handling Logic
    Returning true in the catch block (line 19) might mask underlying issues. Consider logging the error or returning false to indicate failure.

    @mintbase-codium-pr-agent
    Copy link

    mintbase-codium-pr-agent bot commented Mar 20, 2025

    PR Code Suggestions ✨

    CategorySuggestion                                                                                                                                    Score
    Possible bug
    Change the return value in the catch block to false to avoid incorrect positive confirmations of account existence

    In the catch block, returning true when an error occurs might lead to incorrect
    behavior if the account does not exist but an error prevented the check. It's safer
    to return false to indicate that the account's existence could not be verified.

    packages/rpc/src/methods/account.ts [20]

     } catch (error) {
-  return true;
+  return false;
    Suggestion importance[1-10]: 9

    Why: Returning true in the catch block can lead to incorrect assumptions about account existence when an error occurs. Changing it to false is a critical fix to prevent false positives.

    		9
    Enhancement
    Add error logging in the catch block to aid in debugging and error tracking

    Consider adding logging for the error inside the catch block. This will help in
    debugging and understanding why the error occurred, which is crucial for maintaining
    robust error handling in production environments.

    packages/rpc/src/methods/account.ts [20]

     } catch (error) {
-  return true;
+  console.error('Failed to check account existence:', error);
+  return false;
    Suggestion importance[1-10]: 8

    Why: Adding logging in the catch block is a valuable enhancement for debugging and maintaining robust error handling, especially in production environments.

    		8
    Enhance the error checking logic to handle potential changes in the response object structure

    The res?.error check might not be sufficient if the res object structure changes or
    if error is not the only key indicating an error. It's recommended to check for both
    the presence of an error key and the absence of expected data.

    packages/rpc/src/methods/account.ts [16]

    -if (res?.error) {
+if (res?.error || !res?.result) {
   return false;
    Suggestion importance[1-10]: 7

    Why: Improving the error checking logic by considering both the presence of an error and the absence of expected data increases robustness against changes in the response structure.

    		7
    Maintainability
    Simplify parameter destructuring by using the object directly in the function signature

    The destructuring of the AccountParams type in the function parameter can be
    simplified by directly using the properties in the callNearRpc call, reducing
    redundancy and improving code readability.

    packages/rpc/src/methods/account.ts [4]

    -export const accountExists = async ({ accountId, rpcUrl }: AccountParams): Promise<boolean> => {
+export const accountExists = async (params: AccountParams): Promise<boolean> => {
+  const { accountId, rpcUrl } = params;
    Suggestion importance[1-10]: 6

    Why: Simplifying parameter destructuring improves code readability and maintainability, though it is a minor enhancement compared to functional changes.

    		6

    @sainthiago sainthiago merged commit 62cdcb8 into beta Mar 20, 2025
    2 checks passed
    @sainthiago sainthiago deleted the fix-account-exists-error branch March 20, 2025 16:38
    Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.

    Reviewers

    @GAllen98 GAllen98 Awaiting requested review from GAllen98 GAllen98 is a code owner

    @bh2smith bh2smith Awaiting requested review from bh2smith bh2smith is a code owner

    @marcelokunze marcelokunze Awaiting requested review from marcelokunze marcelokunze is a code owner

    @tifrel tifrel Awaiting requested review from tifrel tifrel is a code owner

    @SurgeCode SurgeCode Awaiting requested review from SurgeCode SurgeCode is a code owner

    @microchipgnu microchipgnu Awaiting requested review from microchipgnu microchipgnu is a code owner

    @nategeier nategeier Awaiting requested review from nategeier nategeier is a code owner

    @Jxnis Jxnis Awaiting requested review from Jxnis Jxnis is a code owner

    1 more reviewer

    @rubenmarcus rubenmarcus rubenmarcus approved these changes

    Reviewers whose approvals may not affect merge requirements

    Assignees

    @sainthiago sainthiago

    Labels

    bug_fix enhancement New feature or request Review effort [1-5]: 2

    Projects

    None yet

    Milestone

    No milestone

    Development

    Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

    3 participants

    @sainthiago @rubenmarcus