Testnets #144
Testnets #144
Conversation
feat: restart an initiated registration process when connected wallet…
WalkthroughThe pull request introduces modifications to the Changes
Possibly related PRs
Poem
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 (
|
✅ Deploy Preview for proof-of-humanity-v2 ready!
To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify site configuration. |
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (2)
src/app/[pohid]/claim/Review.tsx (1)
166-172: Consider restructuring the warning message for better readability.While the simplified warning message effectively communicates the risks and solutions, its presentation as a single paragraph could be improved for better user comprehension.
Consider restructuring the message like this:
- you are registering for the first time, this discrepancy will - result in fund loss. To make both addresses match, you may need to - change the connected wallet, or else reinitiate the registration - process. If you are not a newcomer and wish to reclaim your ID - from a different wallet (e.g., if you have lost the private key to - your original wallet), please confirm that the PoH ID you are - using is the one from your initial registration. + you are: + • A first-time registrant: This address mismatch will result in fund loss. + To fix this: + - Change your connected wallet to match your PoH ID, or + - Start a new registration process with your current wallet + • An existing user reclaiming your ID (e.g., lost private key): + Ensure the PoH ID matches your initial registration.This structure:
- Clearly separates scenarios for new vs existing users
- Uses bullet points for better readability
- Maintains all critical information while being more scannable
src/app/[pohid]/claim/Form.tsx (1)
68-69: Consider improving type safety for the address reference.While the implementation is functionally correct, we can improve type safety by explicitly typing the ref:
- const initiatingAddress: MutableRefObject<typeof address> = + const initiatingAddress: MutableRefObject<`0x${string}` | undefined> = useRef(undefined);This makes it clearer that we're dealing with an Ethereum address type (
0x${string}) or undefined.Also applies to: 175-177
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (2)
src/app/[pohid]/claim/Form.tsx(4 hunks)src/app/[pohid]/claim/Review.tsx(1 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (2)
src/app/[pohid]/claim/Form.tsx (2)
4-9: LGTM: Import changes are well-organized and necessary.
The new imports (useEffectOnce, RedirectType) are properly organized and support the new address handling functionality.
Also applies to: 18-20
Line range hint 1-266: Verify testnet-specific handling.
Given that this PR is titled "Testnets", please verify if any additional testnet-specific logic is needed:
✅ Verification successful
Based on the shell script results, I can now provide a final response since I found clear evidence of testnet handling in the codebase:
Testnet handling is properly implemented
The codebase has comprehensive testnet support through:
- Dedicated testnet chain configurations (Sepolia, Gnosis Chiado) in
config/chains.ts - Chain-specific environment variables for both mainnet and testnet RPCs (SEPOLIA_RPC, CHIADO_RPC)
- Dynamic chain selection through
ChainSetenum that switches between mainnet/testnet configurations - Proper chain ID handling and network-specific logic in the Form component
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check for testnet-specific handling in the codebase
# Test 1: Look for testnet configuration
echo "Checking for testnet configuration..."
rg -l "testnet|goerli|sepolia" config/
# Test 2: Check for network-specific logic
echo "Checking for network-specific handling..."
ast-grep --pattern 'chainId === $_ || network === $_'
# Test 3: Look for environment-specific configurations
echo "Checking for environment configurations..."
fd -t f '.env' -x cat {} \; | grep -i "network\|chain"
Length of output: 475
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's try a different approach to find testnet-related code
# Look for chain configurations
echo "Checking for chain configurations..."
fd "chains?" -t f -x cat {}
# Look for network or chain type checks
echo "Checking for network/chain type handling..."
rg -A 3 "chainId|networkId|chainType|isTestnet"
# Look for environment setup
echo "Checking environment setup..."
fd "^\.env" -t f -x cat {}
fd "config" -t f -x cat {}
Length of output: 85497
| useEffect(() => { | ||
| if (initiatingAddress.current) { | ||
| if ( | ||
| !renewal && | ||
| initiatingAddress.current.toLowerCase() !== address?.toLowerCase() | ||
| ) | ||
| redirect(`/${address}`, RedirectType.replace); | ||
| } | ||
| }, [address, initiatingAddress]); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Consider improving the redirection logic.
The current implementation has a few areas that could be enhanced:
- The case sensitivity check is redundant since we're already using
toLowerCase():
- initiatingAddress.current.toLowerCase() !== address?.toLowerCase()
+ initiatingAddress.current !== address- Consider adding a loading state during redirect to prevent UI flicker:
if (
!renewal &&
initiatingAddress.current.toLowerCase() !== address?.toLowerCase()
)
+ loading.start("Redirecting...");
redirect(`/${address}`, RedirectType.replace);- Add null check for address to prevent potential issues:
useEffect(() => {
- if (initiatingAddress.current) {
+ if (initiatingAddress.current && address) {
if (
!renewal &&
initiatingAddress.current.toLowerCase() !== address?.toLowerCase()
)
redirect(`/${address}`, RedirectType.replace);
}
}, [address, initiatingAddress]);Committable suggestion skipped: line range outside the PR's diff.
Summary by CodeRabbit
New Features
Bug Fixes
Documentation