Skip to content
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

Feature/backend test sara #4

Open
wants to merge 6 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

AkaiSara
Copy link

@AkaiSara AkaiSara commented May 1, 2023

Alcuni piccoli appunti ed una veloce panoramica: ho implementato il progetto cercando di utilizzare l'onion architecture e utilizzando qualche nozione di Domain Drive Design; entrambe le ho studiare per conto mio un po' di mesi fa e avevo avuto poche occasioni per metterle in pratica, quindi potrebbero esserci degli errorini (nel caso sono molto lieta di ricevere dritte a riguardo!). Per questioni di tempistiche non ho separato le Entity del layer di dominio dalle Entity del layer repository e anche lo strato di Service presente condensa sia quello di dominio che di application.
Per quanto riguarda lo strato di Rest controller ci sono parecchi nice to have che sarebbe stato carino implementare ma per cui non ho avuto abbastanza tempo, ossia un Controller Advice, della documentazione sui servizi utilizzando Swagger o OpenAPI, validazione dei dati in entrata (per esempio controllare che la categoria utilizzata come filtro sia una categoria valida ed esistente e in caso contrario dare un messaggio appropriato all'utente) e utilizzare un wrapper come response nei servizi.
Per lo strato invece di persistenza, assumendo che i dati non cambino così spesso, sarebbe stato più opportuno implementare un upsert temporizzato, cioè salvare solo i dati che non si hanno già e aggiornare quelli che ci sono solo dopo un certo tempo. Una cache tipo Redis sarebbe stata più appropriata a mio avviso.
Per ultimi ma non di importanza, mancano log e gestione delle eccezioni (annesso creazione di eccezioni custom puntuali).
Ho scelto di non creare unit test per il layer di repository su database perché do per scontato che i metodi offerti da JPA siano corretti e funzionanti.

AkaiSara added 6 commits May 1, 2023 18:53
Defined Drink as an entity and Category as a value object.
- create DTOs, they map the API responses
- create service with 3 public method that map 3 endpoints: list of categories, list of drink with specific catergory, list of drink with specific name keyword
- test happy path for all the public method and two edge cases for the method with params
persists the results from external API
@pull-request-quantifier-deprecated

This PR has 1299 quantified lines of changes. In general, a change size of upto 200 lines is ideal for the best PR experience!


Quantification details

Label      : Extra Large
Size       : +1298 -1
Percentile : 100%

Total files changed: 24

Change summary by file extension:
.gitignore : +28 -1
.properties : +28 -0
.cmd : +153 -0
.xml : +52 -0
.java : +757 -0
mvnw : +280 -0

Change counts above are quantified counts, based on the PullRequestQuantifier customizations.

Why proper sizing of changes matters

Optimal pull request sizes drive a better predictable PR flow as they strike a
balance between between PR complexity and PR review overhead. PRs within the
optimal size (typical small, or medium sized PRs) mean:

  • Fast and predictable releases to production:
    • Optimal size changes are more likely to be reviewed faster with fewer
      iterations.
    • Similarity in low PR complexity drives similar review times.
  • Review quality is likely higher as complexity is lower:
    • Bugs are more likely to be detected.
    • Code inconsistencies are more likely to be detected.
  • Knowledge sharing is improved within the participants:
    • Small portions can be assimilated better.
  • Better engineering practices are exercised:
    • Solving big problems by dividing them in well contained, smaller problems.
    • Exercising separation of concerns within the code changes.

What can I do to optimize my changes

  • Use the PullRequestQuantifier to quantify your PR accurately
    • Create a context profile for your repo using the context generator
    • Exclude files that are not necessary to be reviewed or do not increase the review complexity. Example: Autogenerated code, docs, project IDE setting files, binaries, etc. Check out the Excluded section from your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
    • Understand your typical change complexity, drive towards the desired complexity by adjusting the label mapping in your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
    • Only use the labels that matter to you, see context specification to customize your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
  • Change your engineering behaviors
    • For PRs that fall outside of the desired spectrum, review the details and check if:
      • Your PR could be split in smaller, self-contained PRs instead
      • Your PR only solves one particular issue. (For example, don't refactor and code new features in the same PR).

How to interpret the change counts in git diff output

  • One line was added: +1 -0
  • One line was deleted: +0 -1
  • One line was modified: +1 -1 (git diff doesn't know about modified, it will
    interpret that line like one addition plus one deletion)
  • Change percentiles: Change characteristics (addition, deletion, modification)
    of this PR in relation to all other PRs within the repository.


Was this comment helpful? 👍  :ok_hand:  :thumbsdown: (Email)
Customize PullRequestQuantifier for this repository.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant