matous-volf/todo-baggins
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues 26 Pull Requests Actions Projects 1 Activity

feat: ability to delete a task #39

Merged
matous-volf merged 4 commits from feat/task-delete into main 2024-09-08 08:07:42 +00:00
Conversation 3 Commits 4 Files Changed 5 +60 -8
matous-volf commented 2024-09-08 07:56:53 +00:00 (Migrated from github.com)
Copy Link

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • New Features
    • Introduced a delete functionality for tasks, allowing users to remove tasks directly or move them to the Trash.
  • Bug Fixes
    • Removed an unused import to streamline the code and improve maintainability.
  • Refactor
    • Reordered parameters in the NewTask constructor for improved clarity.
    • Adjusted the formatting of function signatures for better readability in project management functions.
<!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **New Features** - Introduced a delete functionality for tasks, allowing users to remove tasks directly or move them to the Trash. - **Bug Fixes** - Removed an unused import to streamline the code and improve maintainability. - **Refactor** - Reordered parameters in the `NewTask` constructor for improved clarity. - Adjusted the formatting of function signatures for better readability in project management functions. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
coderabbitai[bot] commented 2024-09-08 07:57:05 +00:00 (Migrated from github.com)
Copy Link

Walkthrough

The changes in this pull request involve multiple modifications across several files. Notably, a new task deletion feature has been introduced in the TaskForm component, allowing tasks to be deleted or moved to a "Trash" category. Additionally, the NewTask constructor's parameter order has been adjusted for clarity, and formatting improvements have been made to function signatures in the projects module for better readability. An unused import has been removed from the category_input file, and a new asynchronous function for deleting tasks has been added to the tasks server module.

Changes

Files Change Summary
src/components/category_input.rs Removed unused import: use chrono::NaiveDate;
src/components/task_form.rs Added task deletion functionality, including delete_task import and button for task deletion or categorization.
src/models/task.rs Reordered parameters in NewTask::new constructor for improved clarity.
src/server/projects.rs Aligned return types in edit_project and delete_project function signatures for better readability.
src/server/tasks.rs Added new asynchronous function delete_task for deleting tasks from the database.

Possibly related issues

  • matous-volf/todo-baggins#31: This issue requests the ability to delete a task, which aligns directly with the new task deletion functionality introduced in this pull request.

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>.
    • 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 generate interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table.
    • @coderabbitai show all the console.log statements in this repository.
    • @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.
<!-- This is an auto-generated comment: summarize by coderabbit.ai --> <!-- walkthrough_start --> ## Walkthrough The changes in this pull request involve multiple modifications across several files. Notably, a new task deletion feature has been introduced in the `TaskForm` component, allowing tasks to be deleted or moved to a "Trash" category. Additionally, the `NewTask` constructor's parameter order has been adjusted for clarity, and formatting improvements have been made to function signatures in the `projects` module for better readability. An unused import has been removed from the `category_input` file, and a new asynchronous function for deleting tasks has been added to the `tasks` server module. ## Changes | Files | Change Summary | |--------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | `src/components/category_input.rs` | Removed unused import: `use chrono::NaiveDate;` | | `src/components/task_form.rs` | Added task deletion functionality, including `delete_task` import and button for task deletion or categorization. | | `src/models/task.rs` | Reordered parameters in `NewTask::new` constructor for improved clarity. | | `src/server/projects.rs` | Aligned return types in `edit_project` and `delete_project` function signatures for better readability. | | `src/server/tasks.rs` | Added new asynchronous function `delete_task` for deleting tasks from the database. | ## Possibly related issues - **matous-volf/todo-baggins#31**: This issue requests the ability to delete a task, which aligns directly with the new task deletion functionality introduced in this pull request. <!-- walkthrough_end --><!-- This is an auto-generated comment: raw summary by coderabbit.ai --> <!-- src/components/category_input.rs: ## AI-generated summary of changes The provided diff indicates a modification in the `src/components/category_input.rs` file, specifically the removal of an unused import statement. The line `use chrono::NaiveDate;` has been deleted, suggesting that the `NaiveDate` type from the `chrono` crate is no longer required within this module. This change likely reflects a refactoring effort to streamline the code by eliminating unnecessary dependencies, which can enhance maintainability and reduce potential confusion regarding the module's functionality. The remaining imports, including `Category`, `rsx`, `Element`, and the prelude from `dioxus`, remain intact, indicating that the core functionality related to these components is still preserved. Overall, this change simplifies the module's interface and may contribute to improved compile times and reduced binary size by not including unused libraries. ## Alterations to the declarations of exported or public entities - Removed: `use chrono::NaiveDate;` in `src/components/category_input.rs` --- src/components/task_form.rs: ## AI-generated summary of changes The provided diff introduces significant modifications to the `TaskForm` component in `src/components/task_form.rs`. The most notable change is the addition of a delete functionality for tasks. The `delete_task` function is now imported from the `tasks` module, indicating that the component can now handle task deletions. Within the `TaskForm` function, a new button has been added that allows users to delete a task. This button is conditionally rendered based on the task's category. If the task's category is `Trash`, the `delete_task` function is invoked directly using the task's ID. If the task is not in the `Trash` category, a new task is created with the same title and deadline but categorized as `Trash`, and the `edit_task` function is called to update the task. The button's `onclick` event handler is asynchronous, ensuring that the task deletion or editing occurs without blocking the UI. After the operation, the query client is instructed to invalidate specific queries related to tasks, ensuring that the UI reflects the most current state of the task list. The overall layout of the buttons has also been adjusted, changing the class from "justify-end" to "justify-between" to improve the visual alignment of the buttons. ## Alterations to the declarations of exported or public entities - Added: `delete_task(task.id())` in `src/components/task_form.rs` within the `TaskForm` function. - Added: `use crate::server::tasks::delete_task;` in `src/components/task_form.rs`. --- src/models/task.rs: ## AI-generated summary of changes The changes in the provided diff focus on the constructor of the `NewTask` struct in the `src/models/task.rs` file. The primary modification involves the reordering of parameters in the `new` function. Specifically, the `title` parameter has been moved to the first position, followed by `deadline`, `category`, and `project_id`. This adjustment enhances the clarity of the constructor's signature by placing the most significant parameter, `title`, at the forefront, which is likely to improve usability and readability for developers instantiating `NewTask` objects. The overall functionality remains unchanged, as the constructor still initializes the struct with the same fields. However, the reordering may facilitate better alignment with common practices or conventions in parameter ordering, potentially reducing confusion when creating new instances of `NewTask`. ## Alterations to the declarations of exported or public entities - Modified: `pub fn new(title: String, deadline: Option<chrono::NaiveDate>, category: Category, project_id: Option<i32>)` in `impl NewTask` in `src/models/task.rs` (reordered parameters) --- src/server/projects.rs: ## AI-generated summary of changes The provided diff introduces modifications to the signatures of two asynchronous functions, `edit_project` and `delete_project`, within the `src/server/projects.rs` file. The primary change involves the formatting of the function signatures, specifically the alignment of the return type. This adjustment enhances the readability of the code by aligning the return type with the function parameters, which is a common practice in Rust to improve code clarity. In the `edit_project` function, the return type was previously aligned with the opening parenthesis of the parameters. The new format aligns the return type with the closing parenthesis, making it visually clearer and more consistent with Rust's style guidelines. This change does not alter the functionality or logic of the method; it remains an asynchronous function that takes a project ID and a new project structure, returning a result that either contains the updated project or an error. Similarly, the `delete_project` function underwent the same formatting change. The return type was realigned to improve readability, ensuring that the function's signature is consistent with the updated style. The function continues to perform the same operations: it establishes a database connection, attempts to delete a project based on the provided ID, and returns a result indicating success or failure. Overall, these changes focus on enhancing code readability without impacting the underlying logic or control flow of the functions. ## Alterations to the declarations of exported or public entities - Modified: `pub(crate) async fn edit_project(project_id: i32, new_project: NewProject) -> Result<Project, ServerFnError<ErrorVec<ProjectError>>>` in `src/server/projects.rs` (alignment change) - Modified: `pub(crate) async fn delete_project(project_id: i32) -> Result<(), ServerFnError<ErrorVec<Error>>>` in `src/server/projects.rs` (alignment change) --- src/server/tasks.rs: ## AI-generated summary of changes The provided diff introduces a new asynchronous function, `delete_task`, to the `src/server/tasks.rs` file, which enhances the server's task management capabilities. This function is designed to delete a task identified by its `task_id`. The implementation establishes a database connection and utilizes the Diesel ORM to execute a delete operation on the `tasks` table, filtering by the specified `task_id`. The function returns a `Result` type, indicating success with an empty tuple or an error encapsulated in a `ServerFnError` type, which can contain a vector of errors. This addition signifies an expansion of the server's API, allowing clients to remove tasks from the database, thereby improving the overall functionality of the task management system. The diff also includes a comment indicating a future intention to remove code suppression for duplicated code, suggesting ongoing maintenance and potential refactoring efforts. Overall, the changes enhance the server's capabilities by providing a mechanism for task deletion, which is a critical operation in task management systems. ## Alterations to the declarations of exported or public entities - Added: `pub(crate) async fn delete_task(task_id: i32) -> Result<(), ServerFnError<ErrorVec<Error>>>` in `src/server/tasks.rs` --> <!-- end of auto-generated comment: raw summary by coderabbit.ai --><!-- This is an auto-generated comment: pr objectives by coderabbit.ai --> <!-- Title: feat: ability to delete a task Number: 39 User: matous-volf --> <!-- end of auto-generated comment: pr objectives by coderabbit.ai --><!-- commit_ids_reviewed_start --> <!-- 7ac3c6e136959a00d7ea3f066e36aa5f655c596c --> <!-- commit_ids_reviewed_end --><!-- tips_start --> --- 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? <details> <summary>Share</summary> - [X](https://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=I%20just%20used%20%40coderabbitai%20for%20my%20code%20review%2C%20and%20it%27s%20fantastic%21%20It%27s%20free%20for%20OSS%20and%20offers%20a%20free%20trial%20for%20the%20proprietary%20code.%20Check%20it%20out%3A&url=https%3A//coderabbit.ai) - [Mastodon](https://mastodon.social/share?text=I%20just%20used%20%40coderabbitai%20for%20my%20code%20review%2C%20and%20it%27s%20fantastic%21%20It%27s%20free%20for%20OSS%20and%20offers%20a%20free%20trial%20for%20the%20proprietary%20code.%20Check%20it%20out%3A%20https%3A%2F%2Fcoderabbit.ai) - [Reddit](https://www.reddit.com/submit?title=Great%20tool%20for%20code%20review%20-%20CodeRabbit&text=I%20just%20used%20CodeRabbit%20for%20my%20code%20review%2C%20and%20it%27s%20fantastic%21%20It%27s%20free%20for%20OSS%20and%20offers%20a%20free%20trial%20for%20proprietary%20code.%20Check%20it%20out%3A%20https%3A//coderabbit.ai) - [LinkedIn](https://www.linkedin.com/sharing/share-offsite/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcoderabbit.ai&mini=true&title=Great%20tool%20for%20code%20review%20-%20CodeRabbit&summary=I%20just%20used%20CodeRabbit%20for%20my%20code%20review%2C%20and%20it%27s%20fantastic%21%20It%27s%20free%20for%20OSS%20and%20offers%20a%20free%20trial%20for%20proprietary%20code) </details> <details> <summary>Tips</summary> ### Chat There are 3 ways to chat with [CodeRabbit](https://coderabbit.ai): - Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example: - `I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>.` - `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 generate interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table.` - `@coderabbitai show all the console.log statements in this repository.` - `@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](https://docs.coderabbit.ai/guides/configure-coderabbit) 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](https://coderabbit.ai/docs) for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit. - Join our [Discord Community](https://discord.com/invite/GsXnASn26c) to get help, request features, and share feedback. - Follow us on [X/Twitter](https://twitter.com/coderabbitai) for updates and announcements. </details> <!-- tips_end -->
coderabbitai[bot] (Migrated from github.com) requested changes 2024-09-08 07:59:56 +00:00
coderabbitai[bot] (Migrated from github.com) left a comment
Copy Link

Actionable comments posted: 3

Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: ASSERTIVE

Commits

Files that changed from the base of the PR and between 1c0b3a4196 and 7ac3c6e136.

Files selected for processing (5)
  • src/components/category_input.rs (1 hunks)
  • src/components/task_form.rs (2 hunks)
  • src/models/task.rs (1 hunks)
  • src/server/projects.rs (2 hunks)
  • src/server/tasks.rs (1 hunks)
Additional comments not posted (5)
src/models/task.rs (1)

66-69: Constructor parameter reordering approved.

The reordering of parameters in the NewTask constructor enhances clarity and readability. Ensure that all instances where NewTask is instantiated are updated to reflect this new order.

Run the following script to verify the constructor usage:

Verification successful

Constructor parameter reordering verified successfully.

The instances of NewTask::new in the codebase have been updated to reflect the new parameter order. No discrepancies were found in the usage of the constructor.

  • src/components/task_form.rs: Both instances of NewTask::new use the correct parameter order.
Scripts executed

The following scripts were executed for the analysis:

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify all constructor calls to `NewTask` match the new parameter order.

# Test: Search for the constructor usage. Expect: Only occurrences of the new order.
rg --type rust -A 5 $'NewTask::new'

Length of output: 1139

src/server/projects.rs (2)

54-54: Function signature formatting approved.

The alignment of the return type in the edit_project function signature enhances readability and adheres to Rust's style guidelines.

79-79: Function signature formatting approved.

The alignment of the return type in the delete_project function signature enhances readability and adheres to Rust's style guidelines.

src/components/category_input.rs (1)

1-1: Removal of unused import approved.

The removal of the use chrono::NaiveDate; import is a good practice as it simplifies the codebase and potentially improves compile times.

src/components/task_form.rs (1)

339-339: Approve the layout adjustment for better visual alignment.

The change in the class from "justify-end" to "justify-between" for the button container improves the visual alignment and spacing of the buttons, enhancing the user interface.

**Actionable comments posted: 3** <details> <summary>Review details</summary> **Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI** **Review profile: ASSERTIVE** <details> <summary>Commits</summary> Files that changed from the base of the PR and between 1c0b3a419613b01136e2cb3757fa85d873481f5a and 7ac3c6e136959a00d7ea3f066e36aa5f655c596c. </details> <details> <summary>Files selected for processing (5)</summary> * src/components/category_input.rs (1 hunks) * src/components/task_form.rs (2 hunks) * src/models/task.rs (1 hunks) * src/server/projects.rs (2 hunks) * src/server/tasks.rs (1 hunks) </details> <details> <summary>Additional comments not posted (5)</summary><blockquote> <details> <summary>src/models/task.rs (1)</summary><blockquote> `66-69`: **Constructor parameter reordering approved.** The reordering of parameters in the `NewTask` constructor enhances clarity and readability. Ensure that all instances where `NewTask` is instantiated are updated to reflect this new order. Run the following script to verify the constructor usage: <details> <summary>Verification successful</summary> --- <!-- [monologue] [task review_file_1/3 review_function_1/1] The task is to verify if the constructor `NewTask::new` is being used with the correct parameter order throughout the codebase. [observations] - The `rg` command output shows two instances of `NewTask::new` being used in `src/components/task_form.rs`. - The first instance uses `event.values().get("title").unwrap().as_value()` for the `title`, `event.values().get("deadline").unwrap().as_value().parse().ok()` for the `deadline`, and so on, which seems to match the new order. - The second instance uses `task.title().to_owned()` for the `title`, `task.deadline()` for the `deadline`, and so on, which also seems to match the new order. [analysis] - Both instances of `NewTask::new` appear to be using the correct parameter order as per the new constructor definition. - There are no other instances of `NewTask::new` in the output, suggesting that these are the only places where this constructor is used. - Since the output matches the expected parameter order, it seems that the codebase has been updated correctly. [actions] Generate a final response indicating that the verification is successful and no issues are found. --> **Constructor parameter reordering verified successfully.** The instances of `NewTask::new` in the codebase have been updated to reflect the new parameter order. No discrepancies were found in the usage of the constructor. - `src/components/task_form.rs`: Both instances of `NewTask::new` use the correct parameter order. </details> <details> <summary>Scripts executed</summary> The following scripts were executed for the analysis: Script: ```shell #!/bin/bash # Description: Verify all constructor calls to `NewTask` match the new parameter order. # Test: Search for the constructor usage. Expect: Only occurrences of the new order. rg --type rust -A 5 $'NewTask::new' ``` Length of output: 1139 </details> </blockquote></details> <details> <summary>src/server/projects.rs (2)</summary><blockquote> `54-54`: **Function signature formatting approved.** The alignment of the return type in the `edit_project` function signature enhances readability and adheres to Rust's style guidelines. --- `79-79`: **Function signature formatting approved.** The alignment of the return type in the `delete_project` function signature enhances readability and adheres to Rust's style guidelines. </blockquote></details> <details> <summary>src/components/category_input.rs (1)</summary><blockquote> `1-1`: **Removal of unused import approved.** The removal of the `use chrono::NaiveDate;` import is a good practice as it simplifies the codebase and potentially improves compile times. </blockquote></details> <details> <summary>src/components/task_form.rs (1)</summary><blockquote> `339-339`: **Approve the layout adjustment for better visual alignment.** The change in the class from "justify-end" to "justify-between" for the button container improves the visual alignment and spacing of the buttons, enhancing the user interface. </blockquote></details> </blockquote></details> </details> <!-- This is an auto-generated comment by CodeRabbit for review status -->
src/components/task_form.rs
coderabbitai[bot] (Migrated from github.com) commented 2024-09-08 07:59:56 +00:00
Copy Link

Approve the integration of delete_task with suggestions for improvement.

The integration of the delete_task function in the TaskForm component is well-implemented, with appropriate use of asynchronous handling and conditional rendering. Consider adding error handling within the onclick event handler to manage potential failures from the delete_task or edit_task functions more gracefully.

**Approve the integration of `delete_task` with suggestions for improvement.** The integration of the `delete_task` function in the `TaskForm` component is well-implemented, with appropriate use of asynchronous handling and conditional rendering. Consider adding error handling within the `onclick` event handler to manage potential failures from the `delete_task` or `edit_task` functions more gracefully. <!-- This is an auto-generated comment by CodeRabbit -->
src/server/tasks.rs
@@ -137,2 +137,4 @@
Ok(updated_task)
}
// TODO: Get rid of this suppression.
coderabbitai[bot] (Migrated from github.com) commented 2024-09-08 07:59:56 +00:00
Copy Link

Acknowledge the TODO comment regarding code suppression.

The TODO comment about removing code suppression for duplicated code is noted. It's important to prioritize this task to improve code maintainability and reduce technical debt.

Would you like me to help identify areas of code duplication and suggest refactoring opportunities?

**Acknowledge the TODO comment regarding code suppression.** The TODO comment about removing code suppression for duplicated code is noted. It's important to prioritize this task to improve code maintainability and reduce technical debt. Would you like me to help identify areas of code duplication and suggest refactoring opportunities? <!-- This is an auto-generated comment by CodeRabbit -->
src/server/tasks.rs
@@ -139,0 +151,4 @@
.map_err::<ErrorVec<Error>, _>(|error| vec![error.into()].into())?;
Ok(())
}
coderabbitai[bot] (Migrated from github.com) commented 2024-09-08 07:59:56 +00:00
Copy Link

Approve the implementation of delete_task.

The function delete_task is implemented correctly and uses standard practices for database operations and error handling in Rust. However, consider adding more specific error handling for different types of database errors to improve the robustness of the function.

**Approve the implementation of `delete_task`.** The function `delete_task` is implemented correctly and uses standard practices for database operations and error handling in Rust. However, consider adding more specific error handling for different types of database errors to improve the robustness of the function. <!-- This is an auto-generated comment by CodeRabbit -->
coderabbitai[bot] (Migrated from github.com) approved these changes 2024-09-08 08:07:27 +00:00
Sign in to join this conversation.
Reviewers
No Reviewers
coderabbitai[bot]
Labels
Clear labels
bug
feature
refactor
No Label
Milestone
No items
No Milestone
Projects
Clear projects
No project
Assignees
Clear assignees
matous-volf
No Assignees
1 Participants
Notifications
Due Date
No due date set.
Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: matous-volf/todo-baggins#39
No description provided.
Delete Branch "feat/task-delete"

Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?