Programming exercises: Add Go programming language template
#9751
Conversation
github-actions
bot
added
server
magaupp
force-pushed
the
feature/programming-exercises/go-template
branch
5 times, most recently
from
6e3ce88
to
1572313
Compare
github-actions
bot
added
tests
documentation
buildagent
magaupp
changed the base branch from
develop
to
feature/programming-exercises/concat-nested-testsuite-names
magaupp
temporarily deployed
to
artemis-test4.artemis.cit.tum.de
GitHub Actions
Inactive
|
@coderabbitai review |
WalkthroughThe changes in this pull request primarily focus on integrating support for the Go programming language across various components of the project. Key modifications include adding Go as a dependency in Changes
Possibly related PRs
Suggested labels
Suggested reviewers
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
Documentation and Community
|
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 29
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (40)
src/main/resources/templates/go/exercise/context.go (3)
3-3: Add documentation for the Context typeConsider adding a documentation comment explaining the purpose of the
Contexttype and its role in the Strategy Pattern implementation. This will help students understand the design pattern better.+// Context represents the execution context for sorting algorithms. +// It is part of the Strategy Pattern implementation and manages the sorting process. type Context struct{}
5-7: Enhance the panic message to be more instructiveThe current panic message could be more helpful for students. Consider providing a more detailed message that guides them on what needs to be implemented.
func NewContext() *Context { - panic("not implemented") + panic("TODO: Implement NewContext() to initialize and return a new Context instance") }
1-7: Consider adding package documentationSince this is a teaching template implementing the Strategy Pattern, it would be valuable to add package-level documentation explaining the overall design pattern and how the various components (
Context,Policy,SortStrategy) interact.+// Package ${packageName} implements the Strategy Pattern for sorting algorithms. +// It demonstrates how to separate sorting algorithms from their execution context, +// allowing for flexible runtime selection of different sorting strategies. package ${packageName}src/main/resources/templates/go/exercise/mergesort.go (1)
1-7: Consider adding test scaffoldingSince this is an exercise template, it would be beneficial to include:
- Test file structure
- Example test cases
- Benchmarking setup
Would you like me to generate a companion test file with the recommended structure?
src/main/resources/templates/go/exercise/bubblesort.go (1)
5-7: Add constructor documentationThe constructor should have documentation explaining its purpose and return value.
Consider adding:
+// NewBubbleSort creates a new bubble sort strategy instance func NewBubbleSort() *BubbleSort { panic("not implemented") }src/main/resources/templates/go/exercise/policy.go (1)
1-7: Add documentation comments following Go conventionsTo improve code maintainability and follow Go best practices, add documentation comments for the package, type, and methods.
+// Package ${packageName} implements the Strategy Pattern for sorting algorithms package ${packageName} const datesSizeThreshold = 10 +// Policy determines which sorting algorithm to use based on the input size type Policy struct { context *Context } +// NewPolicy creates a new Policy with the given Context func NewPolicy(context *Context) *Policy { return &Policy{ context: context, } }src/main/resources/templates/go/solution/bubblesort.go (2)
5-5: Add documentation comment for the BubbleSort type.Consider adding a documentation comment to describe the type's purpose and behavior.
+// BubbleSort implements bubble sort algorithm for time.Time slices type BubbleSort struct{}
7-9: Add documentation and consider simpler constructor.The constructor follows Go conventions but could be improved.
+// NewBubbleSort creates a new bubble sort instance func NewBubbleSort() *BubbleSort { - return new(BubbleSort) + return &BubbleSort{} }src/main/resources/templates/go/solution/policy.go (3)
3-5: Add documentation for the Policy structConsider adding a documentation comment for the Policy struct explaining its role in the strategy pattern implementation.
+// Policy determines and configures the appropriate sorting algorithm based on the input size. +// It implements the strategy pattern by dynamically selecting between merge sort and bubble sort. type Policy struct { context *Context }
7-7: Improve constant documentation and namingThe threshold constant would benefit from documentation explaining why 10 was chosen as the cutoff point.
+// sortingStrategyThreshold defines the input size threshold (n=10) for choosing between +// bubble sort (n ≤ 10, O(n²)) and merge sort (n > 10, O(n log n)). -const datesSizeThreshold = 10 +const sortingStrategyThreshold = 10
13-20: Enhance Configure method documentation and error handlingThe method would benefit from more detailed documentation and error handling for the sort algorithm creation.
-// Configure chooses a strategy depending on the number of date objects. +// Configure selects an appropriate sorting strategy based on the input size. +// For n ≤ 10 elements, it uses bubble sort due to its efficiency with small datasets +// and simple implementation. For n > 10, it switches to merge sort to maintain +// O(n log n) performance on larger datasets. func (p *Policy) Configure() { - if len(p.context.GetDates()) > datesSizeThreshold { - p.context.SetSortAlgorithm(NewMergeSort()) + dates := p.context.GetDates() + if len(dates) > sortingStrategyThreshold { + p.context.SetSortAlgorithm(NewMergeSort()) } else { p.context.SetSortAlgorithm(NewBubbleSort()) } }src/main/resources/templates/go/solution/context.go (1)
10-12: Consider initializing the dates slice in the constructorWhile the constructor follows Go naming conventions, initializing the dates slice would prevent potential nil panics.
func NewContext() *Context { - return new(Context) + return &Context{ + dates: make([]time.Time, 0), + } }src/main/resources/templates/go/solution/mergesort.go (3)
5-9: Add explicit interface implementation declarationBased on the AI summary, this type should implement the
SortStrategyinterface. Consider adding an explicit declaration to ensure interface compliance at compile-time.+// Ensure MergeSort implements SortStrategy +var _ SortStrategy = (*MergeSort)(nil) + type MergeSort struct{}
16-26: Enhance function documentationThe function's documentation should be more descriptive about its behavior and complexity.
-// mergeSort recursively applies the MergeSort algorithm. +// mergeSort recursively sorts the input slice using the merge sort algorithm. +// Time complexity: O(n log n), Space complexity: O(n) +// The function modifies the input slice in-place. func mergeSort(input []time.Time) {
28-57: Improve variable naming and documentationThe merge function could benefit from more descriptive variable names and detailed documentation.
-// merge merges two ranges within input defined from low to mid and from mid+1 to high. +// merge combines two sorted sub-slices (input[0:mid] and input[mid:]) into a single sorted slice. +// It uses a temporary slice to perform the merge operation. +// Parameters: +// - input: the slice containing both sub-slices to be merged +// - mid: the index where the first sub-slice ends and the second begins func merge(input []time.Time, mid int) { temp := make([]time.Time, len(input)) - left, right, k := 0, mid, 0 + leftIdx, rightIdx, mergeIdx := 0, mid, 0 - for left < mid && right < len(input) { - if input[left].Before(input[right]) { - temp[k] = input[left] - left++ + for leftIdx < mid && rightIdx < len(input) { + if input[leftIdx].Before(input[rightIdx]) { + temp[mergeIdx] = input[leftIdx] + leftIdx++ } else { - temp[k] = input[right] - right++ + temp[mergeIdx] = input[rightIdx] + rightIdx++ } - k++ + mergeIdx++ }src/main/resources/templates/go/test/structural/structural_test.go (4)
10-23: Add interface documentationThe interfaces are well-designed but would benefit from documentation comments explaining their purpose and usage. Consider adding GoDoc comments for better code documentation.
Apply this diff to add documentation:
+// SortStrategy defines the interface for time-based sorting algorithms type SortStrategy interface { PerformSort(input []time.Time) } +// Context manages the sorting context including dates and algorithm selection type Context interface { GetDates() []time.Time SetDates(dates []time.Time) GetSortAlgorithm() ${packageName}.SortStrategy SetSortAlgorithm(strategy ${packageName}.SortStrategy) } +// Policy defines the configuration behavior for sorting strategies type Policy interface { Configure() }
25-55: Enhance test coverage with behavioral testsWhile the structural tests verify interface implementation, consider adding behavioral tests to ensure the sorting algorithms work correctly.
Example test to add:
func TestBubbleSortBehavior(t *testing.T) { dates := []time.Time{ time.Date(2023, 12, 3, 0, 0, 0, 0, time.UTC), time.Date(2023, 12, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, time.UTC), time.Date(2023, 12, 2, 0, 0, 0, 0, time.UTC), } sorter := new(${packageName}.BubbleSort) sorter.PerformSort(dates) // Verify sorting for i := 1; i < len(dates); i++ { if dates[i].Before(dates[i-1]) { t.Errorf("Dates not properly sorted at index %d", i) } } }
57-62: Enhance panic handler with more detailed error informationThe panic handler could provide more context about where the panic occurred to aid in debugging.
Apply this diff to improve error reporting:
// handlePanic fatally fails the test without terminating the test suite. func handlePanic(t *testing.T) { if err := recover(); err != nil { - t.Fatal("panic:", err) + t.Fatalf("panic occurred during test execution: %v\nStack trace:\n%s", err, debug.Stack()) } }Don't forget to add
"runtime/debug"to the imports.
1-62: Consider implementing test helpers for common testing patternsThe current implementation provides a good foundation. Consider extracting common testing patterns into helper functions to promote code reuse across other Go template tests.
Some suggestions:
- Create a helper function for type assertion tests
- Implement a common date fixture generator
- Add a test suite setup function for shared test configuration
This will make the test suite more maintainable as more Go templates are added to the system.
src/main/resources/templates/jenkins/go/regularRuns/pipeline.groovy (2)
46-49: Enhance post-build task robustnessThe current implementation might silently fail. Consider adding explicit checks and proper error handling.
Consider this more robust implementation:
-rm -rf results -mkdir results -cp "tests/test-results.xml" $WORKSPACE/results/ || true -sed -i 's/[^[:print:]\t]/�/g' $WORKSPACE/results/*.xml || true +rm -rf results +mkdir -p results +if [ -f "tests/test-results.xml" ]; then + cp "tests/test-results.xml" "$WORKSPACE/results/" + sed -i 's/[^[:print:]\t]/�/g' "$WORKSPACE/results/"*.xml +else + echo "Warning: test-results.xml not found" + exit 1 +fi
17-21: Consider security improvements for shell operationsThe script could benefit from additional security measures:
- Use of absolute paths where appropriate
- Proper quoting of variables
- Restricted permissions for created directories
Consider implementing these security improvements:
- Add
set -euo pipefailat the beginning of shell scripts- Use
mktemp -dfor temporary directory creation- Add appropriate file permissions:
mkdir -m 755 resultsAlso applies to: 45-50
src/main/resources/templates/go/exercise/client/client.go (3)
9-14: Enhance constant documentation with rationale.While the constants are well-named, consider adding documentation explaining why these specific values were chosen. For example, why is the range 5-15 appropriate for this exercise?
// Constants define iteration and random date generation bounds. const ( + // Iterations defines how many times the sorting demonstration runs Iterations = 10 + // RandomFloor defines the minimum number of dates to generate RandomFloor = 5 + // RandomCeiling defines the maximum number of dates to generate RandomCeiling = 15 )
38-50: Consider making date range configurable and adding random seed.The date range is hardcoded and might need to be adjusted for different exercises. Also, the random number generation isn't seeded, which means you'll get the same sequence of dates each time the program runs.
+// DateRange defines the bounds for random date generation +type DateRange struct { + Start, End time.Time +} + +func init() { + rand.Seed(time.Now().UnixNano()) +} + -func createRandomDates() []time.Time { +func createRandomDates(dateRange DateRange) []time.Time { listLength := rand.Intn(RandomCeiling-RandomFloor) + RandomFloor list := make([]time.Time, listLength) - lowestDate := time.Date(2024, 10, 15, 0, 0, 0, 0, time.UTC) - highestDate := time.Date(2025, 1, 15, 0, 0, 0, 0, time.UTC) - for i := 0; i < listLength; i++ { - list[i] = randomDateWithin(lowestDate, highestDate) + list[i] = randomDateWithin(dateRange.Start, dateRange.End) } return list }
52-56: Normalize generated times to midnight.The current implementation can generate dates with random times. For consistency in date comparison, consider normalizing all times to midnight.
func randomDateWithin(low, high time.Time) time.Time { randomTime := rand.Int63n(high.Unix()-low.Unix()) + low.Unix() - return time.Unix(randomTime, 0) + date := time.Unix(randomTime, 0) + return time.Date(date.Year(), date.Month(), date.Day(), 0, 0, 0, 0, time.UTC) }src/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/programming/service/TemplateUpgradePolicyService.java (1)
35-36: LGTM! Consider extracting language sets for better maintainability.The changes correctly implement Go support by moving it to the supported languages case. The implementation follows the existing pattern of using
defaultRepositoryUpgradeServicefor non-Java languages.Consider extracting the language sets into static final Sets for better maintainability:
+ private static final Set<ProgrammingLanguage> DEFAULT_SUPPORTED_LANGUAGES = + Set.of(ProgrammingLanguage.KOTLIN, ProgrammingLanguage.PYTHON, /* ... */, ProgrammingLanguage.GO); + private static final Set<ProgrammingLanguage> UNSUPPORTED_LANGUAGES = + Set.of(ProgrammingLanguage.SQL, /* ... */, ProgrammingLanguage.PHP); public TemplateUpgradeService getUpgradeService(ProgrammingLanguage programmingLanguage) { return switch (programmingLanguage) { case JAVA -> javaRepositoryUpgradeService; - case KOTLIN, PYTHON, C, HASKELL, VHDL, ASSEMBLER, SWIFT, OCAML, EMPTY, RUST, JAVASCRIPT, R, C_PLUS_PLUS, TYPESCRIPT, C_SHARP, GO -> defaultRepositoryUpgradeService; - case SQL, MATLAB, BASH, RUBY, POWERSHELL, ADA, DART, PHP -> throw new UnsupportedOperationException("Unsupported programming language: " + programmingLanguage); + case _ when DEFAULT_SUPPORTED_LANGUAGES.contains(programmingLanguage) -> defaultRepositoryUpgradeService; + case _ when UNSUPPORTED_LANGUAGES.contains(programmingLanguage) -> + throw new UnsupportedOperationException("Unsupported programming language: " + programmingLanguage); + default -> throw new IllegalArgumentException("Unknown programming language: " + programmingLanguage); }; }This refactoring would:
- Make it easier to maintain the language lists
- Improve readability
- Add better error handling for unknown languages
- Make the code more resilient to future language additions
src/main/resources/templates/go/solution/client/client.go (3)
18-41: Add error handling and improve loggingThe main function could benefit from better error handling and more detailed logging:
- The
Sort()method might return an error that should be handled- Adding iteration numbers in the output would make the demo more clear
Consider this improvement:
for i := 0; i < Iterations; i++ { + fmt.Printf("\nIteration %d:\n", i+1) dates := createRandomDates() context.SetDates(dates) policy.Configure() fmt.Println("Unsorted Array of course dates:") printDates(dates) - fmt.Println() - context.Sort() + if err := context.Sort(); err != nil { + fmt.Printf("Error sorting dates: %v\n", err) + continue + } fmt.Println("Sorted Array of course dates:") printDates(dates) - fmt.Println() }
43-55: Extract date range as constantsThe date range for random date generation is hard-coded. Consider extracting these values as constants for better maintainability.
const ( Iterations = 10 RandomFloor = 5 RandomCeiling = 15 + StartDate = "2024-10-15" + EndDate = "2025-01-15" ) func createRandomDates() []time.Time { listLength := rand.Intn(RandomCeiling-RandomFloor) + RandomFloor list := make([]time.Time, listLength) - lowestDate := time.Date(2024, 10, 15, 0, 0, 0, 0, time.UTC) - highestDate := time.Date(2025, 1, 15, 0, 0, 0, 0, time.UTC) + lowestDate, _ := time.Parse("2006-01-02", StartDate) + highestDate, _ := time.Parse("2006-01-02", EndDate)
63-68: Consider making date format configurableThe printDates function uses a fixed date format. Consider making it more flexible by accepting a format string parameter.
-func printDates(dates []time.Time) { +func printDates(dates []time.Time, format string) { + if format == "" { + format = time.DateOnly + } for _, date := range dates { - fmt.Println(date.Format(time.DateOnly)) + fmt.Println(date.Format(format)) } }src/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/programming/domain/ProgrammingLanguage.java (1)
Line range hint
1-100: Consider adding package name validation for Go.Since Go has strict package naming conventions (lowercase letters, no underscores), consider adding package name validation similar to other languages.
Would you like me to propose an implementation for Go package name validation?
src/main/resources/templates/go/test/behavior/behavior_test.go (3)
71-83: Improve test implementationSeveral improvements could make the tests more maintainable and robust:
- The threshold value of 10 should be defined as a constant
- Excessive use of
interface{}and type assertions could be avoided- Test cases could be table-driven for better maintainability
Consider this refactoring:
const sizeThreshold = 10 type testCase struct { name string size int expected string // "merge" or "bubble" } func TestSortStrategySelection(t *testing.T) { cases := []testCase{ {"small list", 3, "bubble"}, {"large list", 11, "merge"}, } for _, tc := range cases { t.Run(tc.name, func(t *testing.T) { defer handlePanic(t) dates := make([]time.Time, tc.size) strategy := configurePolicyAndContext(dates) switch tc.expected { case "merge": if _, ok := strategy.(*${packageName}.MergeSort); !ok { t.Errorf("expected MergeSort for size %d", tc.size) } case "bubble": if _, ok := strategy.(*${packageName}.BubbleSort); !ok { t.Errorf("expected BubbleSort for size %d", tc.size) } } }) } }Also applies to: 85-97
99-111: Simplify configuration helper functionThe
configurePolicyAndContextfunction uses multiple type assertions which could be simplified.Consider this simpler approach:
func configurePolicyAndContext(dates []time.Time) SortStrategy { context := ${packageName}.NewContext() policy := ${packageName}.NewPolicy(context) context.SetDates(dates) policy.Configure() return context.GetSortAlgorithm() }
54-69: Enhance test data coverageThe test dates could include more edge cases:
- Dates with same day but different times
- Dates in same month
- Dates across different time zones
Consider adding these test cases:
dates := []time.Time{ time.Date(2018, 11, 8, 10, 0, 0, 0, time.UTC), time.Date(2018, 11, 8, 9, 0, 0, 0, time.UTC), time.Date(2018, 11, 15, 0, 0, 0, 0, time.UTC), time.Date(2018, 11, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, time.UTC), time.Date(2017, 4, 15, 0, 0, 0, 0, time.UTC), time.Date(2016, 2, 15, 0, 0, 0, 0, time.Local), }src/main/resources/templates/go/readme (1)
89-91: Consider adding performance guidance for QuickSort implementation.The optional challenges could benefit from additional guidance about QuickSort's performance characteristics to help students make informed decisions about when to use it in the Policy class.
Consider adding:
- Average, best, and worst-case time complexities
- Space complexity
- Typical use cases where QuickSort excels
- Scenarios where QuickSort might be preferred over MergeSort
src/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/programming/service/jenkins/JenkinsProgrammingLanguageFeatureService.java (1)
44-44: Add documentation for feature flagsConsider adding documentation to explain the boolean parameters in
ProgrammingLanguageFeature. This would improve maintainability and make it clearer what each feature flag represents.Example improvement:
programmingLanguageFeatures.put(GO, new ProgrammingLanguageFeature( + // Language identifier GO, + // Static code analysis support false, + // Coverage reporting support false, + // Third feature: <description> true, + // Fourth feature: <description> true, + // Fifth feature: <description> false, + // Supported project types List.of(), + // Eighth feature: <description> false, + // Ninth feature: <description> false));src/main/webapp/app/shared/constants/input.constants.ts (1)
50-51: Add a note about package naming conventions.While the documentation accurately describes the technical requirements, consider adding a note about Go's package naming conventions (e.g., using short, lowercase, single-word names) to help developers follow best practices.
Add this line to the documentation:
// Go package name Regex derived from (https://go.dev/ref/spec#Package_clause) limited to ASCII. Package names are identifiers. +// Note: By convention, packages should use short, lowercase, single-word names without underscores. // They allow letters, digits and underscore. They cannot start with a digit. The package name cannot be a keyword or "_".src/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/plagiarism/service/ProgrammingPlagiarismDetectionService.java (1)
Line range hint
321-330: Consider refactoring the language mapping logicThe switch statement is growing large with many language cases. Consider refactoring this into a more maintainable structure, such as:
- A map-based lookup
- A factory pattern
- A strategy registry
This would make it easier to add new languages and maintain the code.
Example refactoring using a map-based approach:
- private Language getJPlagProgrammingLanguage(ProgrammingExercise programmingExercise) { - return switch (programmingExercise.getProgrammingLanguage()) { - case C -> new CLanguage(); - case C_PLUS_PLUS -> new CPPLanguage(); - // ... other cases - case EMPTY, PHP, DART -> throw new BadRequestAlertException( - "Programming language " + programmingExercise.getProgrammingLanguage() + " not supported for plagiarism check.", - "ProgrammingExercise", - "notSupported"); - }; - } + private static final Map<ProgrammingLanguage, Supplier<Language>> LANGUAGE_FACTORIES = Map.ofEntries( + Map.entry(ProgrammingLanguage.C, CLanguage::new), + Map.entry(ProgrammingLanguage.C_PLUS_PLUS, CPPLanguage::new), + Map.entry(ProgrammingLanguage.GO, GoLanguage::new) + // ... other entries + ); + + private Language getJPlagProgrammingLanguage(ProgrammingExercise programmingExercise) { + var languageFactory = LANGUAGE_FACTORIES.get(programmingExercise.getProgrammingLanguage()); + if (languageFactory == null) { + throw new BadRequestAlertException( + "Programming language " + programmingExercise.getProgrammingLanguage() + " not supported for plagiarism check.", + "ProgrammingExercise", + "notSupported" + ); + } + return languageFactory.get(); + }src/test/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/programming/util/ProgrammingExerciseFactory.java (1)
143-148: Consolidate package naming logic to avoid duplicationThe package naming logic is currently split between two locations:
- The general language check in
populateUnreleasedProgrammingExercise(ProgrammingExercise, ProgrammingLanguage)- The Swift-specific check in
populateUnreleasedProgrammingExercise(ProgrammingExercise, String, String, boolean, boolean, ProgrammingLanguage)This could lead to maintenance issues and inconsistencies.
Consider:
- Creating a dedicated method for determining package names based on programming language
- Centralizing all language-specific package naming logic in one place
- Reusing this method across all variants of
populateUnreleasedProgrammingExerciseExample:
private static String getDefaultPackageName(ProgrammingLanguage language) { return switch (language) { case JAVA, KOTLIN -> "de.test"; case SWIFT -> "swiftTest"; case GO -> "test"; default -> "testPackage"; }; }Also applies to: 516-521
src/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/programming/service/jenkins/build_plan/JenkinsBuildPlanService.java (1)
187-188: Consider refactoring language handling for better maintainability.The current switch expression groups multiple languages together, which could make it harder to add language-specific configurations in the future. Consider restructuring to allow for language-specific builders when needed.
-case JAVA, KOTLIN, PYTHON, C, HASKELL, SWIFT, EMPTY, RUST, JAVASCRIPT, R, C_PLUS_PLUS, TYPESCRIPT, C_SHARP, GO -> jenkinsBuildPlanCreator; +private static final Set<ProgrammingLanguage> SUPPORTED_LANGUAGES = Set.of( + ProgrammingLanguage.JAVA, ProgrammingLanguage.KOTLIN, ProgrammingLanguage.PYTHON, + ProgrammingLanguage.C, ProgrammingLanguage.HASKELL, ProgrammingLanguage.SWIFT, + ProgrammingLanguage.EMPTY, ProgrammingLanguage.RUST, ProgrammingLanguage.JAVASCRIPT, + ProgrammingLanguage.R, ProgrammingLanguage.C_PLUS_PLUS, ProgrammingLanguage.TYPESCRIPT, + ProgrammingLanguage.C_SHARP, ProgrammingLanguage.GO +); + +case var lang when SUPPORTED_LANGUAGES.contains(lang) -> jenkinsBuildPlanCreator;src/test/javascript/spec/component/programming-exercise/programming-exercise-update.component.spec.ts (1)
538-538: LGTM with suggestions for improved test coverage.The package name pattern constants are correctly used in the test assertions. However, consider adding the following test cases for more comprehensive coverage:
- Test invalid package names against these patterns
- Test edge cases (empty strings, special characters)
- Test the pattern validation behavior when switching between languages
Example test cases to add:
it('should validate package names against language-specific patterns', () => { // Swift invalid cases comp.programmingExercise.programmingLanguage = ProgrammingLanguage.SWIFT; comp.programmingExercise.packageName = 'invalid.package'; expect(comp.getInvalidReasons()).toContainEqual({ translateKey: 'artemisApp.exercise.form.packageName.pattern.SWIFT', translateValues: {}, }); // Java/Kotlin invalid cases comp.programmingExercise.programmingLanguage = ProgrammingLanguage.JAVA; comp.programmingExercise.packageName = 'Invalid.Package'; expect(comp.getInvalidReasons()).toContainEqual({ translateKey: 'artemisApp.exercise.form.packageName.pattern.JAVA', translateValues: {}, }); }); it('should revalidate package name when switching languages', () => { // Valid Java package name comp.programmingExercise.programmingLanguage = ProgrammingLanguage.JAVA; comp.programmingExercise.packageName = 'com.example'; expect(comp.getInvalidReasons()).not.toContainEqual({ translateKey: 'artemisApp.exercise.form.packageName.pattern.JAVA', translateValues: {}, }); // Same package name should be invalid for Swift comp.onProgrammingLanguageChange(ProgrammingLanguage.SWIFT); expect(comp.getInvalidReasons()).toContainEqual({ translateKey: 'artemisApp.exercise.form.packageName.pattern.SWIFT', translateValues: {}, }); });Also applies to: 564-564
src/test/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/programming/util/ProgrammingExerciseTestService.java (1)
530-531: Consider refactoring language-specific package name logicThe current implementation hardcodes special cases for Java and Kotlin. Consider extracting this logic into a dedicated helper method or language-specific configuration for better maintainability.
-if (programmingLanguageFeature.packageNameRequired() && language != JAVA && language != KOTLIN) { - exercise.setPackageName("testPackage"); +// Extract to helper method +if (shouldSetDefaultPackageName(programmingLanguageFeature, language)) { + exercise.setPackageName(DEFAULT_PACKAGE_NAME); } +// Add helper method +private boolean shouldSetDefaultPackageName(ProgrammingLanguageFeature feature, ProgrammingLanguage language) { + return feature.packageNameRequired() && !LANGUAGES_WITH_CUSTOM_PACKAGES.contains(language); +} +// Add constant +private static final Set<ProgrammingLanguage> LANGUAGES_WITH_CUSTOM_PACKAGES = + Set.of(ProgrammingLanguage.JAVA, ProgrammingLanguage.KOTLIN); +private static final String DEFAULT_PACKAGE_NAME = "testPackage";
📜 Review details
Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
⛔ Files ignored due to path filters (6)
src/main/resources/config/application.ymlis excluded by!**/*.ymlsrc/main/resources/templates/aeolus/go/default.yamlis excluded by!**/*.yamlsrc/main/resources/templates/go/exercise/go.modis excluded by!**/*.modsrc/main/resources/templates/go/solution/go.modis excluded by!**/*.modsrc/main/resources/templates/go/test/go.modis excluded by!**/*.modsrc/test/resources/config/application.ymlis excluded by!**/*.yml
📒 Files selected for processing (40)
build.gradle(1 hunks)docs/user/exercises/programming-exercise-features.inc(2 hunks)src/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/plagiarism/service/ProgrammingPlagiarismDetectionService.java(3 hunks)src/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/programming/domain/ProgrammingLanguage.java(1 hunks)src/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/programming/service/ProgrammingExerciseRepositoryService.java(1 hunks)src/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/programming/service/ProgrammingExerciseService.java(2 hunks)src/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/programming/service/TemplateUpgradePolicyService.java(1 hunks)src/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/programming/service/ci/ContinuousIntegrationService.java(2 hunks)src/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/programming/service/jenkins/JenkinsProgrammingLanguageFeatureService.java(2 hunks)src/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/programming/service/jenkins/build_plan/JenkinsBuildPlanService.java(1 hunks)src/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/programming/service/localci/LocalCIProgrammingLanguageFeatureService.java(2 hunks)src/main/resources/templates/aeolus/go/default.sh(1 hunks)src/main/resources/templates/go/exercise/bubblesort.go(1 hunks)src/main/resources/templates/go/exercise/client/client.go(1 hunks)src/main/resources/templates/go/exercise/context.go(1 hunks)src/main/resources/templates/go/exercise/mergesort.go(1 hunks)src/main/resources/templates/go/exercise/policy.go(1 hunks)src/main/resources/templates/go/exercise/sortstrategy.go(1 hunks)src/main/resources/templates/go/readme(1 hunks)src/main/resources/templates/go/solution/bubblesort.go(1 hunks)src/main/resources/templates/go/solution/client/client.go(1 hunks)src/main/resources/templates/go/solution/context.go(1 hunks)src/main/resources/templates/go/solution/mergesort.go(1 hunks)src/main/resources/templates/go/solution/policy.go(1 hunks)src/main/resources/templates/go/solution/sortstrategy.go(1 hunks)src/main/resources/templates/go/test/behavior/behavior_test.go(1 hunks)src/main/resources/templates/go/test/structural/structural_test.go(1 hunks)src/main/resources/templates/jenkins/go/regularRuns/pipeline.groovy(1 hunks)src/main/webapp/app/entities/programming/programming-exercise.model.ts(1 hunks)src/main/webapp/app/exercises/programming/manage/update/programming-exercise-creation-config.ts(0 hunks)src/main/webapp/app/exercises/programming/manage/update/programming-exercise-update.component.ts(4 hunks)src/main/webapp/app/exercises/programming/manage/update/update-components/language/programming-exercise-language.component.html(1 hunks)src/main/webapp/app/exercises/programming/manage/update/update-components/language/programming-exercise-language.component.ts(2 hunks)src/main/webapp/app/shared/constants/input.constants.ts(1 hunks)src/main/webapp/i18n/de/exercise.json(1 hunks)src/main/webapp/i18n/en/exercise.json(1 hunks)src/test/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/programming/util/ProgrammingExerciseFactory.java(1 hunks)src/test/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/programming/util/ProgrammingExerciseTestService.java(3 hunks)src/test/javascript/spec/component/programming-exercise/programming-exercise-update.component.spec.ts(3 hunks)src/test/javascript/spec/component/programming-exercise/update-components/programming-exercise-creation-config-mock.ts(0 hunks)
💤 Files with no reviewable changes (2)
- src/main/webapp/app/exercises/programming/manage/update/programming-exercise-creation-config.ts
- src/test/javascript/spec/component/programming-exercise/update-components/programming-exercise-creation-config-mock.ts
✅ Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (1)
- src/main/resources/templates/go/exercise/sortstrategy.go
🧰 Additional context used
📓 Path-based instructions (18)
src/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/plagiarism/service/ProgrammingPlagiarismDetectionService.java (1)
Pattern src/main/java/**/*.java: naming:CamelCase; principles:{single_responsibility,small_methods,no_duplication}; db:{perf_queries,datetime_not_timestamp}; rest:{stateless,singleton,delegate_logic,http_only,minimal_dtos}; dtos:{java_records,no_entities,min_data,single_resp}; di:constructor_injection; kiss:simple_code; file_handling:os_indep_paths; practices:{least_access,avoid_transactions,code_reuse,static_member_ref,prefer_primitives}; sql:{param_annotation,uppercase,avoid_subqueries};java:avoid_star_imports
src/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/programming/domain/ProgrammingLanguage.java (1)
Pattern src/main/java/**/*.java: naming:CamelCase; principles:{single_responsibility,small_methods,no_duplication}; db:{perf_queries,datetime_not_timestamp}; rest:{stateless,singleton,delegate_logic,http_only,minimal_dtos}; dtos:{java_records,no_entities,min_data,single_resp}; di:constructor_injection; kiss:simple_code; file_handling:os_indep_paths; practices:{least_access,avoid_transactions,code_reuse,static_member_ref,prefer_primitives}; sql:{param_annotation,uppercase,avoid_subqueries};java:avoid_star_imports
src/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/programming/service/ProgrammingExerciseRepositoryService.java (1)
Pattern src/main/java/**/*.java: naming:CamelCase; principles:{single_responsibility,small_methods,no_duplication}; db:{perf_queries,datetime_not_timestamp}; rest:{stateless,singleton,delegate_logic,http_only,minimal_dtos}; dtos:{java_records,no_entities,min_data,single_resp}; di:constructor_injection; kiss:simple_code; file_handling:os_indep_paths; practices:{least_access,avoid_transactions,code_reuse,static_member_ref,prefer_primitives}; sql:{param_annotation,uppercase,avoid_subqueries};java:avoid_star_imports
src/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/programming/service/ProgrammingExerciseService.java (1)
Pattern src/main/java/**/*.java: naming:CamelCase; principles:{single_responsibility,small_methods,no_duplication}; db:{perf_queries,datetime_not_timestamp}; rest:{stateless,singleton,delegate_logic,http_only,minimal_dtos}; dtos:{java_records,no_entities,min_data,single_resp}; di:constructor_injection; kiss:simple_code; file_handling:os_indep_paths; practices:{least_access,avoid_transactions,code_reuse,static_member_ref,prefer_primitives}; sql:{param_annotation,uppercase,avoid_subqueries};java:avoid_star_imports
src/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/programming/service/TemplateUpgradePolicyService.java (1)
Pattern src/main/java/**/*.java: naming:CamelCase; principles:{single_responsibility,small_methods,no_duplication}; db:{perf_queries,datetime_not_timestamp}; rest:{stateless,singleton,delegate_logic,http_only,minimal_dtos}; dtos:{java_records,no_entities,min_data,single_resp}; di:constructor_injection; kiss:simple_code; file_handling:os_indep_paths; practices:{least_access,avoid_transactions,code_reuse,static_member_ref,prefer_primitives}; sql:{param_annotation,uppercase,avoid_subqueries};java:avoid_star_imports
src/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/programming/service/ci/ContinuousIntegrationService.java (1)
Pattern src/main/java/**/*.java: naming:CamelCase; principles:{single_responsibility,small_methods,no_duplication}; db:{perf_queries,datetime_not_timestamp}; rest:{stateless,singleton,delegate_logic,http_only,minimal_dtos}; dtos:{java_records,no_entities,min_data,single_resp}; di:constructor_injection; kiss:simple_code; file_handling:os_indep_paths; practices:{least_access,avoid_transactions,code_reuse,static_member_ref,prefer_primitives}; sql:{param_annotation,uppercase,avoid_subqueries};java:avoid_star_imports
src/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/programming/service/jenkins/JenkinsProgrammingLanguageFeatureService.java (1)
Pattern src/main/java/**/*.java: naming:CamelCase; principles:{single_responsibility,small_methods,no_duplication}; db:{perf_queries,datetime_not_timestamp}; rest:{stateless,singleton,delegate_logic,http_only,minimal_dtos}; dtos:{java_records,no_entities,min_data,single_resp}; di:constructor_injection; kiss:simple_code; file_handling:os_indep_paths; practices:{least_access,avoid_transactions,code_reuse,static_member_ref,prefer_primitives}; sql:{param_annotation,uppercase,avoid_subqueries};java:avoid_star_imports
src/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/programming/service/jenkins/build_plan/JenkinsBuildPlanService.java (1)
Pattern src/main/java/**/*.java: naming:CamelCase; principles:{single_responsibility,small_methods,no_duplication}; db:{perf_queries,datetime_not_timestamp}; rest:{stateless,singleton,delegate_logic,http_only,minimal_dtos}; dtos:{java_records,no_entities,min_data,single_resp}; di:constructor_injection; kiss:simple_code; file_handling:os_indep_paths; practices:{least_access,avoid_transactions,code_reuse,static_member_ref,prefer_primitives}; sql:{param_annotation,uppercase,avoid_subqueries};java:avoid_star_imports
src/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/programming/service/localci/LocalCIProgrammingLanguageFeatureService.java (1)
Pattern src/main/java/**/*.java: naming:CamelCase; principles:{single_responsibility,small_methods,no_duplication}; db:{perf_queries,datetime_not_timestamp}; rest:{stateless,singleton,delegate_logic,http_only,minimal_dtos}; dtos:{java_records,no_entities,min_data,single_resp}; di:constructor_injection; kiss:simple_code; file_handling:os_indep_paths; practices:{least_access,avoid_transactions,code_reuse,static_member_ref,prefer_primitives}; sql:{param_annotation,uppercase,avoid_subqueries};java:avoid_star_imports
src/main/webapp/app/entities/programming/programming-exercise.model.ts (1)
src/main/webapp/app/exercises/programming/manage/update/programming-exercise-update.component.ts (1)
src/main/webapp/app/exercises/programming/manage/update/update-components/language/programming-exercise-language.component.html (1)
Pattern src/main/webapp/**/*.html: @if and @for are new and valid Angular syntax replacing *ngIf and *ngFor. They should always be used over the old style.
src/main/webapp/app/exercises/programming/manage/update/update-components/language/programming-exercise-language.component.ts (1)
src/main/webapp/app/shared/constants/input.constants.ts (1)
src/main/webapp/i18n/de/exercise.json (1)
Pattern src/main/webapp/i18n/de/**/*.json: German language translations should be informal (dutzen) and should never be formal (sietzen). So the user should always be addressed with "du/dein" and never with "sie/ihr".
src/test/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/programming/util/ProgrammingExerciseFactory.java (1)
Pattern src/test/java/**/*.java: test_naming: descriptive; test_size: small_specific; fixed_data: true; junit5_features: true; assert_use: assertThat; assert_specificity: true; archunit_use: enforce_package_rules; db_query_count_tests: track_performance; util_service_factory_pattern: true; avoid_db_access: true; mock_strategy: static_mocks; context_restart_minimize: true
src/test/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/programming/util/ProgrammingExerciseTestService.java (1)
Pattern src/test/java/**/*.java: test_naming: descriptive; test_size: small_specific; fixed_data: true; junit5_features: true; assert_use: assertThat; assert_specificity: true; archunit_use: enforce_package_rules; db_query_count_tests: track_performance; util_service_factory_pattern: true; avoid_db_access: true; mock_strategy: static_mocks; context_restart_minimize: true
src/test/javascript/spec/component/programming-exercise/programming-exercise-update.component.spec.ts (1)
Pattern src/test/javascript/spec/**/*.ts: jest: true; mock: NgMocks; bad_practices: avoid_full_module_import; perf_improvements: mock_irrelevant_deps; service_testing: mock_http_for_logic; no_schema: avoid_NO_ERRORS_SCHEMA; expectation_specificity: true; solutions: {boolean: toBeTrue/False, reference: toBe, existence: toBeNull/NotNull, undefined: toBeUndefined, class_obj: toContainEntries/toEqual, spy_calls: {not_called: not.toHaveBeenCalled, once: toHaveBeenCalledOnce, with_value: toHaveBeenCalledWith|toHaveBeenCalledExactlyOnceWith}}
📓 Learnings (2)
src/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/programming/service/TemplateUpgradePolicyService.java (1)
Learnt from: magaupp
PR: ls1intum/Artemis#9074
File: src/main/java/de/tum/in/www1/artemis/service/programming/TemplateUpgradePolicyService.java:35-35
Timestamp: 2024-11-12T12:51:46.554Z
Learning: The `defaultRepositoryUpgradeService` in the `TemplateUpgradePolicyService` is used as a default for all non-JAVA languages, with specialized services added based on testing outcomes if necessary.
src/main/resources/templates/aeolus/go/default.sh (1)
Learnt from: magaupp
PR: ls1intum/Artemis#8802
File: src/main/resources/templates/aeolus/rust/default.sh:14-24
Timestamp: 2024-11-12T12:51:46.554Z
Learning: The `default.sh` script in the `src/main/resources/templates/aeolus/rust/` directory is auto-generated by Aeolus and should not be manually edited. Changes need to be made in the Aeolus generator settings or templates.
🪛 Shellcheck (0.10.0)
src/main/resources/templates/aeolus/go/default.sh
[warning] 6-6: testWorkingDirectory is referenced but not assigned.
(SC2154)
🔇 Additional comments (52)
src/main/resources/templates/go/solution/sortstrategy.go (3)
3-4: LGTM! Import statement is clean and necessary
The import of the time package is required for the time.Time type used in the interface.
1-7: Verify integration with test templates
Since this is part of a new Go template implementation, we should verify the test setup.
✅ Verification successful
Test integration is properly implemented
The verification shows comprehensive test coverage and proper integration:
- Both structural and behavioral tests are present (
structural_test.goandbehavior_test.go) - Tests verify the
SortStrategyinterface implementation for both sorting algorithms - Behavioral tests confirm correct sorting functionality
- Tests validate the strategy selection logic based on input size
- Complete template structure exists with exercise and solution implementations
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify test setup and integration
# Check for test files in the Go template directory
echo "Checking for test files:"
fd -e go test src/main/resources/templates/go/
# Check for testing framework setup
echo "Checking for go-junit-report integration:"
rg -l "go-junit-report" src/main/resources/templates/go/
Length of output: 387
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's examine the test files to verify integration with SortStrategy
echo "Checking test content for SortStrategy usage:"
rg -A 5 "SortStrategy" src/main/resources/templates/go/test/
# Check for any sorting-related test implementations
echo "Checking for sorting-related test patterns:"
rg -A 5 "Sort|PerformSort" src/main/resources/templates/go/test/
# Let's also check if there are any other related template files
echo "Checking for related template files:"
fd . src/main/resources/templates/go/ -e go --exclude '*test.go'
Length of output: 17278
1-1: LGTM! Verify package name replacement mechanism
The package declaration with placeholder follows the correct template syntax.
Let's verify the package name replacement mechanism:
✅ Verification successful
Package name placeholder usage is consistent and properly handled
The verification shows that:
- The
${packageName}placeholder is consistently used across all Go template files (exercise, solution, and test directories) - The placeholder is used correctly in both package declarations and import paths
- The replacement mechanism is implemented in
ProgrammingExerciseRepositoryService.java, which sanitizes the package name and handles the replacement
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check if the package name placeholder is consistently used across Go templates
# and verify the replacement mechanism in the codebase
# Search for package name placeholder usage in Go files
echo "Checking package name placeholder usage in Go templates:"
rg -g "*.go" "\${packageName}" src/main/resources/templates/go/
# Search for the code that handles package name replacement
echo "Checking package name replacement implementation:"
rg -l "packageName.*replace|replacePackageName" src/main/
Length of output: 660
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's try a different approach to search for package name placeholder
echo "Checking package name placeholder in Go templates:"
rg -F '${packageName}' src/main/resources/templates/go/
# Let's examine the implementation files found
echo -e "\nChecking package name replacement in ProgrammingExerciseRepositoryService:"
rg -A 5 "packageName.*replace|replacePackageName" src/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/programming/service/ProgrammingExerciseRepositoryService.java
echo -e "\nChecking package name replacement in StructuralTestCaseService:"
rg -A 5 "packageName.*replace|replacePackageName" src/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/programming/service/hestia/structural/StructuralTestCaseService.java
Length of output: 4904
src/main/resources/templates/go/exercise/context.go (1)
1-1: Verify template variable replacement mechanism
The package name uses the template variable ${packageName}. Let's ensure this follows the project's templating conventions and is properly handled during exercise generation.
✅ Verification successful
Template variable ${packageName} follows consistent usage pattern
The verification shows that the ${packageName} template variable is consistently used across all Go files in the exercise template directory:
- Used in package declaration in all .go files: bubblesort.go, context.go, mergesort.go, policy.go, sortstrategy.go
- Used in module declaration in go.mod
- Follows the same pattern across all files
This consistent usage indicates proper template variable handling and follows the project's templating conventions.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check for consistent usage of the packageName template variable
# and verify the template variable replacement mechanism across Go templates
# Check for consistent usage of ${packageName} in Go templates
rg -l '\$\{packageName\}' 'src/main/resources/templates/go/**/*.go'
# Check if there's a test that verifies package name replacement
rg -l "packageName.*[Tt]est" 'src/test/**/*.java'
Length of output: 260
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's try without the glob patterns that might be causing issues
# First, let's find all Go template files
fd -e go . src/main/resources/templates
# Then search for packageName usage in Go files
rg -l '\$\{packageName\}'
# Find test files that might verify template processing
fd -e java . src/test
Length of output: 62165
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's check for template variable usage in Go files and related test files
# First, find all Go template files in the exercise directory
fd -e go . src/main/resources/templates/go/exercise
# Then check for packageName variable usage in Go files
rg -p '\$\{packageName\}' src/main/resources/templates/go/exercise/
# Check for any test files that verify template processing
rg -p 'packageName.*[Tt]est' src/test/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/programming/
Length of output: 1010
src/main/resources/templates/go/exercise/mergesort.go (1)
1-7: Verify Go module setup
Ensure that the template includes proper Go module configuration for student exercises.
✅ Verification successful
Let me check the content of these go.mod files to ensure they are properly configured.
Go module configuration is properly set up
The template includes all necessary Go module configuration files:
- Exercise and solution modules are correctly defined with templated package names
- Test module is properly configured with module replacement for student workspace
- Go version is consistently specified across all modules
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check if go.mod exists in the template directory
fd -t f "go.mod" "src/main/resources/templates/go"
# Check if there are any Go-specific configuration files
fd -t f "go\." "src/main/resources/templates/go"
Length of output: 377
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check the content of go.mod files
echo "=== Exercise go.mod ==="
cat src/main/resources/templates/go/exercise/go.mod
echo -e "\n=== Solution go.mod ==="
cat src/main/resources/templates/go/solution/go.mod
echo -e "\n=== Test go.mod ==="
cat src/main/resources/templates/go/test/go.mod
Length of output: 587
src/main/resources/templates/go/exercise/bubblesort.go (2)
1-1: LGTM: Package declaration uses correct template syntax
The package declaration correctly uses the ${packageName} placeholder which will be replaced during exercise generation.
1-7: Verify test template existence
Since this is an exercise template that should work with Go's testing package and go-junit-report, we should verify the existence of corresponding test templates.
✅ Verification successful
Test templates are properly configured
The test setup is complete and well-structured with:
- Behavioral tests in
test/behavior/behavior_test.gothat verify sorting functionality and algorithm selection - Structural tests in
test/structural/structural_test.gothat verify interface implementations - Both test files use Go's testing package and include proper panic handling
- Tests are designed to work with the template's package name variable
${packageName}
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check for corresponding test template files
fd "bubblesort_test.go" "src/main/resources/templates/go"
# Check for test helper or setup files
fd "test_helper|setup_test" "src/main/resources/templates/go"
Length of output: 117
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's check the directory structure and content first
fd . "src/main/resources/templates/go" -t f
# Also check for any test-related files in the Go templates
rg -l "testing" "src/main/resources/templates/go"
Length of output: 1184
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's check the content of the test files to understand the testing setup
cat src/main/resources/templates/go/test/behavior/behavior_test.go
cat src/main/resources/templates/go/test/structural/structural_test.go
Length of output: 4315
src/main/resources/templates/go/exercise/policy.go (1)
1-1: LGTM: Package declaration follows Go conventions
The template uses ${packageName} placeholder which will be replaced with the actual package name during exercise creation.
src/main/resources/templates/aeolus/go/default.sh (2)
1-2: LGTM: Proper shell configuration
The shebang and error handling setup are correct.
1-15: Verify if this file should be manually edited
Based on previous learnings from PR #8802, similar default.sh scripts in other language templates are auto-generated by Aeolus. Please verify if this file should be manually edited or if changes should be made in Aeolus generator settings.
🧰 Tools
🪛 Shellcheck (0.10.0)
[warning] 6-6: testWorkingDirectory is referenced but not assigned.
(SC2154)
src/main/resources/templates/go/solution/bubblesort.go (2)
1-4: LGTM! Clean package declaration and imports.
The package declaration using template variable and single required import follow Go best practices.
1-19: Verify consistency with other language templates.
As this is part of a new Go template implementation using the Strategy Pattern, we should verify it follows the same structure as other language templates.
✅ Verification successful
The previous results showed Java implementations but we need more context about Python templates and the strategy pattern implementation. This new script should help us find Python sorting implementations and the strategy pattern structure across the codebase.
Based on the search results, I can now verify the consistency of the Go template with other language templates. The implementation follows the same Strategy Pattern structure as seen in Java, Python, Swift, C#, and Kotlin templates, with similar method signatures and sorting logic. Let me highlight the key points:
Implementation is consistent with other language templates
- All language templates implement a Strategy Pattern with a
SortStrategyinterface/protocol - The
performSortmethod signature is consistent across languages, taking a collection of dates as input - The bubble sort implementation follows the same algorithm structure as other languages
- The template includes proper package and import declarations
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check if other language templates follow similar structure
echo "Checking Java template..."
fd -e java "bubblesort.java" -x cat {} \;
echo "Checking Python template..."
fd -e py "bubblesort.py" -x cat {} \;
# Look for other strategy pattern implementations
echo "Checking for other sorting strategy implementations..."
rg -l "PerformSort|sort.*strategy" --type java --type python
Length of output: 1309
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's try a different approach to find Python templates and strategy implementations
# Search for Python sorting files
echo "Searching for Python sorting files..."
fd -e py "sort" -x cat {} \;
# Search for strategy pattern interface/base class
echo "Searching for strategy pattern interface..."
fd -t f "Strategy" -x cat {} \;
# Search for other sorting implementations
echo "Searching for other sorting classes..."
fd -t f "Sort" -x cat {} \;
Length of output: 114599
src/main/resources/templates/go/solution/policy.go (2)
1-1: Verify template variable processing
The package name uses a template variable ${packageName}. Let's ensure this variable is properly processed during exercise generation.
✅ Verification successful
The first search didn't find the exact pattern, so let's broaden the search to understand how Go templates are processed in the system. This will help us verify if the ${packageName} variable is properly handled during template processing.
Based on the search results, I can now generate the final response as we have sufficient evidence about the template processing system:
Template variable ${packageName} is properly handled
The package name template variable is part of a well-established template processing system where:
- The package name is validated specifically for Go using
PACKAGE_NAME_PATTERN_FOR_GOpattern - The system includes proper sanitization of package names to prevent injection
- The template variable is consistently used across all Go template files in the solution
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check if the template variable ${packageName} is consistently used across Go templates
# and verify the template processing mechanism
# Search for ${packageName} usage in Go templates
echo "Checking template variable usage in Go files:"
fd -e go . src/main/resources/templates/go -x grep -l '\${packageName}' {} \;
# Search for template processing code
echo "Checking template processing implementation:"
rg -l "packageName.*Go|Go.*packageName" src/main/
Length of output: 1157
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's verify the template processing implementation more thoroughly
# by checking the template engine configuration and processing logic
# Search for Go template-related configuration and processing
echo "Checking Go template processing implementation:"
rg -l "template.*go|go.*template" src/main/java -g '!*.go'
# Check for package name processing specifically
echo "Checking package name processing:"
rg -A 5 "packageName.*=|setPackageName" src/main/java
Length of output: 9755
1-20: Verify Strategy pattern implementation completeness
The Policy implementation looks good but let's verify the existence and proper implementation of related components.
✅ Verification successful
Let me gather more information about the specific implementations to verify the completeness of the Strategy pattern.
Strategy pattern implementation is complete and correct
The verification confirms that all required components are properly implemented:
SortStrategyinterface withPerformSortmethodContextstruct managing the strategy and dates- Two concrete strategies:
BubbleSortandMergeSort, both implementing thePerformSortmethod Policycorrectly switches between strategies based on data size
The implementation follows the Strategy pattern principles with clean separation of concerns and proper interface adherence.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify the complete Strategy pattern implementation
# Check for required related files
echo "Checking for required strategy pattern components:"
fd -e go . src/main/resources/templates/go/solution -x grep -l 'type.*Sort\|interface.*Strategy\|type.*Context' {} \;
# Verify interface implementation
echo "Checking sort strategy interface implementation:"
ast-grep --pattern 'type $_ interface {
Sort($_)
}'
Length of output: 740
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check the content of strategy interface and concrete implementations
echo "=== Checking SortStrategy interface ==="
rg -A 5 "type.*Strategy.*interface" src/main/resources/templates/go/solution/sortstrategy.go
echo -e "\n=== Checking Context implementation ==="
rg -A 10 "type Context struct" src/main/resources/templates/go/solution/context.go
echo -e "\n=== Checking BubbleSort implementation ==="
rg -A 10 "type BubbleSort struct" src/main/resources/templates/go/solution/bubblesort.go
echo -e "\n=== Checking MergeSort implementation ==="
rg -A 10 "type MergeSort struct" src/main/resources/templates/go/solution/mergesort.go
Length of output: 1516
src/main/resources/templates/go/solution/context.go (2)
1-4: LGTM! Clean package declaration and imports
The package declaration with template variable and single required import follow Go best practices.
5-8: Verify the SortStrategy interface definition
The struct definition looks good, following Go conventions. However, we should verify the SortStrategy interface definition.
✅ Verification successful
SortStrategy interface is properly defined with PerformSort method
The SortStrategy interface is well-defined in src/main/resources/templates/go/solution/sortstrategy.go with the expected PerformSort method that takes a slice of time.Time as input. This matches perfectly with its usage in the Context struct.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Look for SortStrategy interface definition
# Expected: Interface definition with PerformSort method
# Search for SortStrategy interface definition
ast-grep --pattern 'type SortStrategy interface {
$$$
}'
# Backup search using ripgrep
rg -p "type\s+SortStrategy\s+interface"
Length of output: 1469
src/main/resources/templates/go/solution/mergesort.go (2)
1-57: Verify test coverage
The implementation looks solid, but we should ensure comprehensive test coverage, including edge cases like empty slices, single elements, and already sorted inputs.
✅ Verification successful
Test coverage appears adequate
The implementation is well-tested with:
- Structural test verifying the
SortStrategyinterface implementation - Behavioral test checking actual sorting functionality with test dates
- Integration test verifying MergeSort selection for large lists (>10 elements)
- Test data includes multiple elements through
createTestDates()
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check for test file and coverage
fd -e go "mergesort.*test\.go$"
Length of output: 33
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's try a broader search for test files related to sorting
fd -e go "sort.*test\.go$"
# Also search for any references to MergeSort in test files
rg -l "MergeSort" --type go | grep "_test"
Length of output: 199
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's examine the content of these test files to verify MergeSort coverage
rg "MergeSort" -A 5 -B 5 src/main/resources/templates/go/test/structural/structural_test.go
rg "MergeSort" -A 5 -B 5 src/main/resources/templates/go/test/behavior/behavior_test.go
Length of output: 1859
1-1: Verify template variable interpolation
The ${packageName} template variable needs to be properly interpolated during template processing.
✅ Verification successful
Let me analyze the results and generate one more verification script to check the template processing mechanism.
Let me try one final verification to check the template processing mechanism by looking at the broader context.
Based on the search results and previous findings, I can now generate the final response:
Template variable interpolation is handled by the system
The ${packageName} template variable is part of a well-established template processing system in the codebase:
- The package name is validated using language-specific patterns (PACKAGE_NAME_PATTERN_FOR_GO)
- The system has proper UI components for package name input
- The package name is processed during programming exercise creation
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check if there's a mechanism to process the ${packageName} template variable
rg -A 5 "packageName.*=|func.*packageName"
Length of output: 29848
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check for template processing mechanism in Go files
rg -g "*.go" -B 3 -A 3 "\$\{packageName\}"
# Check for any Go-specific template processing code
ast-grep --pattern 'func $name($$$) {
$$$
packageName $$$
$$$
}'
Length of output: 240
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Look for template processing related code for Go exercises
rg -g "*.java" -g "*.ts" "template.*go|go.*template" -B 2 -A 2
# Check for any template engine or processing utilities
rg -g "*.java" -g "*.ts" "TemplateProcessor|processTemplate" -B 2 -A 2
Length of output: 14496
src/main/resources/templates/go/test/structural/structural_test.go (1)
7-7: Verify template variable processing in import path
The import path contains a template variable ${packageName} which must be properly processed before compilation. Ensure that the template processing system correctly handles Go package naming conventions.
✅ Verification successful
Template variable ${packageName} is used consistently across Go files
The ${packageName} variable is used consistently throughout the Go template files in the codebase:
- Used in package declarations across all Go source files
- Used in import paths consistently as
"artemis/${packageName}" - Used correctly in type references and instantiations
- Part of a complete template structure with exercise, solution, and test files
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check if the template variable is used consistently across Go files
# and verify the package name pattern matches Go conventions
# Search for ${packageName} usage in Go files
rg -g "*.go" "\\\${packageName}"
# Check if there are any Go package declarations that might conflict
ast-grep --pattern 'package $_'
Length of output: 104950
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's search for template variable usage in Go files specifically
rg -t go '\$\{packageName\}'
# Also check for any Go files in the templates directory
fd -e go . src/main/resources/templates/
Length of output: 3794
src/main/resources/templates/jenkins/go/regularRuns/pipeline.groovy (2)
11-12: Verify Docker configuration placeholders
The Docker configuration uses placeholder values that will be replaced during runtime. Ensure these placeholders match the expected format in the template processor.
✅ Verification successful
Based on the search results and the learning from magaupp that mentions "placeholder variables such as #dockerImage and #dockerArgs in Jenkins pipeline scripts are intentionally left in the scripts, as they are replaced by Java code during execution", I can generate the final response:
Docker configuration placeholders are correctly formatted
The placeholder values #dockerImage and #dockerArgs follow the consistent format used across all Jenkins pipeline templates in the project and are intentionally left as placeholders to be replaced by Java code during execution.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check if the placeholder format is consistent across other language templates
rg -g 'pipeline.groovy' "'#docker(Image|Args)'" src/main/resources/templates/jenkins/
Length of output: 4181
1-55: Overall implementation looks good with suggested improvements
The pipeline implementation follows the expected structure and provides the necessary functionality for Go exercise testing. Consider implementing the suggested improvements for better robustness and security.
✅ Verification successful
Let me check the implementation details of other templates to ensure complete consistency.
Implementation is consistent with other language templates
The Go pipeline implementation follows the same structure and patterns as other language templates:
- Common method signatures (
testRunner,runTestSteps,postBuildTasks) - Similar test stage implementation with language-specific test commands
- Consistent JUnit report generation and handling
- Proper Docker container usage
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Verify consistency with other language templates
echo "Checking for consistency with other language templates..."
rg -g 'pipeline.groovy' "testRunner|runTestSteps|postBuildTasks" src/main/resources/templates/jenkins/
Length of output: 7856
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check the test stage implementation in other templates
echo "Checking test stage implementation in other templates..."
rg -g 'pipeline.groovy' -B 2 -A 4 "stage\('Test'\)" src/main/resources/templates/jenkins/
Length of output: 6891
src/main/resources/templates/go/exercise/client/client.go (2)
1-8: LGTM! Package and imports are well-structured.
The package declaration and imports follow Go best practices and include all necessary packages for the implementation.
58-63: LGTM! The printDates function is well-implemented.
The function correctly uses the DateOnly format for consistent date representation.
src/main/resources/templates/go/solution/client/client.go (1)
11-16: LGTM!
Constants are well-defined with clear names and appropriate values for demonstration purposes.
src/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/programming/domain/ProgrammingLanguage.java (1)
Line range hint 18-18: LGTM! GO enum constant is properly defined.
The GO enum constant follows the established pattern and uses the correct file extension.
src/main/resources/templates/go/test/behavior/behavior_test.go (1)
1-9:
Package naming needs revision
The package name "test" is not idiomatic in Go. Test files should use the same package name as the code they're testing with a "_test" suffix.
Apply this change:
-package test
+package ${packageName}_testAlso, verify that the template variable ${packageName} in the import path will be correctly substituted during template processing.
src/main/resources/templates/go/readme (2)
42-83: Well-structured UML diagram following Go conventions.
The class diagram effectively illustrates the Strategy Pattern implementation and follows Go conventions with New* constructor naming. The relationships between components are clearly defined, and test coverage annotations provide helpful visual feedback.
11-12: Verify test file references exist and are properly implemented.
The instructions reference test files for both structural and behavioral tests. Let's verify these files exist and contain the referenced test cases.
Also applies to: 14-15
✅ Verification successful
Let me check the actual test file paths and content to verify if they match the references in the README.
Test file references are correctly implemented and match the README
The test files exist at the correct locations and contain the appropriate test cases:
src/main/resources/templates/go/test/structural/structural_test.gocontainsTestBubbleSortfor structural verificationsrc/main/resources/templates/go/test/behavior/behavior_test.gocontainsTestBubbleSortfor behavioral verification
The test files properly validate both the structure and behavior of the BubbleSort implementation, including interface compliance and correct sorting of time.Time slices.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify test files and test cases exist
# Check for test files
echo "Checking for test files..."
fd -e go -p "structural.*test\.go|behavior.*test\.go" "test"
# Check for specific test cases
echo -e "\nChecking for test cases..."
rg -A 2 "func Test(BubbleSort|MergeSort)" --type go
Length of output: 1361
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check the actual paths of test files
echo "Checking actual test file paths..."
fd -e go . src/main/resources/templates/go/test
# Check content of structural test file
echo -e "\nChecking structural test content..."
cat src/main/resources/templates/go/test/structural/structural_test.go
# Check content of behavior test file
echo -e "\nChecking behavior test content..."
cat src/main/resources/templates/go/test/behavior/behavior_test.go
Length of output: 4744
src/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/programming/service/jenkins/JenkinsProgrammingLanguageFeatureService.java (2)
7-7: LGTM: Import statement follows guidelines
The static import for GO is properly placed with other language imports and follows Java import conventions.
44-44: Verify Go language feature configuration
Please verify that the feature configuration aligns with Go's capabilities:
- No project types are specified (empty List.of())
- Only the third and fourth features are enabled
- Static code analysis and coverage are disabled
✅ Verification successful
Let me gather more specific information about Go language configuration and features.
Let me search for the ProgrammingLanguageFeature class definition to understand the boolean parameters.
Let me search for the actual ProgrammingLanguageFeature class definition to understand the boolean parameters.
Let me try a broader search to find the ProgrammingLanguageFeature definition.
Based on the search results, I can now provide a complete verification of the Go language feature configuration. The ProgrammingLanguageFeature record shows that the boolean parameters represent:
- sequentialTestRuns (false)
- staticCodeAnalysis (false)
- plagiarismCheckSupported (true)
- packageNameRequired (true)
- checkoutSolutionRepositoryAllowed (false)
- projectTypes (empty List)
- testwiseCoverageAnalysisSupported (false)
- auxiliaryRepositoriesSupported (false)
This configuration is consistent with Go's capabilities and limitations:
- Static code analysis and sequential test runs are not supported
- Package name is required (as per Go's conventions)
- Plagiarism detection is supported
- No specific project types are needed (Go has a standard project structure)
- Test coverage analysis and auxiliary repositories are not supported
The configuration is appropriate for Go programming exercises
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for Go-related configurations and tests to verify feature support
rg -l "GO|Go|go" --type java src/test
Length of output: 7787
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for Go-related configurations and implementations
rg -A 10 "GO|Go|go" --type java src/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/programming/ | grep -v "goto"
# Search for ProgrammingLanguageFeature class to understand the boolean parameters
ast-grep --pattern 'class ProgrammingLanguageFeature {
$$$
}'
Length of output: 131391
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for ProgrammingLanguageFeature class definition and its constructor
rg -A 20 "class ProgrammingLanguageFeature" src/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/programming/
Length of output: 3455
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for ProgrammingLanguageFeature record/class definition
rg -A 15 "record ProgrammingLanguageFeature|class ProgrammingLanguageFeature \{" src/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/programming/domain/
Length of output: 139
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for ProgrammingLanguageFeature in all Java files
rg -t java -B 2 -A 15 "ProgrammingLanguageFeature" src/main/java/
# Also search for Go-related configurations to understand the feature flags
rg -t java "GO.*ProgrammingLanguageFeature" src/main/java/
Length of output: 75037
src/main/webapp/app/shared/constants/input.constants.ts (1)
50-53: LGTM! Verify the Go package name pattern.
The implementation correctly follows Go's package naming rules and maintains consistency with other language patterns.
Let's verify the pattern against valid and invalid package names:
✅ Verification successful
Go package name pattern is correctly implemented and verified
The regex pattern for Go package names has been thoroughly tested and correctly validates:
- All valid package names: 'main', 'mypackage', 'api', 'v1', 'math_utils', '_test'
- Correctly rejects all invalid cases:
- Go keywords ('package', 'if', 'type')
- Names starting with digits ('1package')
- Names with invalid characters ('my-package', 'my.package')
- Single underscore ('_')
- Empty string
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Test the Go package name pattern against various cases
# Create a temporary JavaScript file to test the regex
cat << 'EOF' > /tmp/test_pattern.js
const pattern = /^(?!(?:break|default|func|interface|select|case|defer|go|map|struct|chan|else|goto|package|switch|const|fallthrough|if|range|type|continue|for|import|return|var|_)$)[A-Za-z_][A-Za-z0-9_]*$/;
// Valid cases
const validCases = [
'main',
'mypackage',
'api',
'v1',
'math_utils',
'_test' // Valid in Go but uncommon
];
// Invalid cases
const invalidCases = [
'package', // keyword
'1package', // starts with number
'my-package', // invalid character
'my.package', // invalid character
'_', // single underscore
'if', // keyword
'type', // keyword
'' // empty
];
console.log('Testing valid cases:');
validCases.forEach(name => {
console.log(`${name}: ${pattern.test(name)}`);
});
console.log('\nTesting invalid cases:');
invalidCases.forEach(name => {
console.log(`${name}: ${pattern.test(name)}`);
});
EOF
# Run the test
node /tmp/test_pattern.js
Length of output: 259
src/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/programming/service/localci/LocalCIProgrammingLanguageFeatureService.java (2)
9-9: LGTM!
The static import for GO follows the established pattern and maintains alphabetical ordering with other language imports.
51-51: LGTM! Configuration aligns with Go's capabilities.
The ProgrammingLanguageFeature configuration for Go is well-structured and appropriately enables:
- Static code analysis
- Package name validation
- Linting support
Let's verify the static code analysis capability is properly supported:
src/main/webapp/app/entities/programming/programming-exercise.model.ts (2)
21-21: LGTM! The GO enum value follows the established pattern.
The addition of the GO programming language follows the correct naming convention and maintains consistency with other enum values.
21-21: Verify exhaustive handling of ProgrammingLanguage enum.
While the GO enum addition is correct, we should ensure all switch statements and type guards handling ProgrammingLanguage are updated to include the new GO case.
src/main/webapp/app/exercises/programming/manage/update/update-components/language/programming-exercise-language.component.ts (3)
12-12: LGTM! Import statement follows Angular conventions.
The import statement is properly formatted and follows Angular style guidelines.
48-49: Verify the necessity of Swift-related changes in Go PR.
While the property is correctly implemented following Angular guidelines, its addition seems unexpected in a PR focused on Go language support. Could you clarify the rationale for including Swift-related changes?
Let's check for related Swift pattern usage:
Line range hint 89-99: Verify Go package name validation integration.
The isPackageNameValid() method handles package name validation for different languages, but there's no explicit handling for Go. Please ensure that Go-specific package name validation is properly integrated.
Let's check for Go-specific validation patterns:
src/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/programming/service/ci/ContinuousIntegrationService.java (2)
233-234: Consider Go's testing conventions.
Go's standard testing convention places test files alongside source files with a _test.go suffix, rather than in a separate "tests" directory. This architectural decision might need reconsideration.
Consider:
- Following Go's convention of co-located test files
- If separate test directory is required, document the reasoning
222-223: LGTM! Verify Go's checkout path convention.
The addition of Go to the supported languages list with "assignment" checkout path is consistent with other modern languages. However, let's verify that this aligns with Go's project structure conventions.
✅ Verification successful
Let me gather more information about the Go project structure in the codebase.
✓ Go's checkout path convention is correctly configured
The verification confirms that the "assignment" checkout path for Go is appropriate based on the codebase structure:
- Go files are organized in a standard project layout under
src/main/resources/templates/go/ - The structure follows Go conventions with separate directories for exercise, solution, and test code
- Each module has its own
go.modfile in the appropriate directory - Test files are properly organized in dedicated test directories
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify Go's project structure conventions in the codebase
# Look for Go-specific project structure patterns to confirm the "assignment" directory convention
# Search for Go module files in assignment directories
fd -e mod -x dirname {} \; | grep -i "assignment"
# Search for Go package declarations to verify directory structure
rg -g "*.go" "package\s+main" -A 5
Length of output: 890
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for Go-related files and their directory structure
fd -e go -x dirname {} \; | sort -u
# Look for Go-specific test files to understand the project layout
fd -e go -g "*_test.go"
# Check for any Go-specific configuration or build files
fd -g "go.*"
# Search for any documentation about Go project structure
rg -g "*.md" -i "go|golang" -A 3 -B 3
Length of output: 15367
src/main/webapp/app/exercises/programming/manage/update/update-components/language/programming-exercise-language.component.html (2)
Line range hint 7-7: LGTM: Consistent usage of new Angular control flow syntax
The template correctly uses the new @if and @for syntax throughout, which aligns with the coding guidelines requiring these over the older *ngIf and *ngFor directives.
Also applies to: 19-19, 23-23, 33-33, 38-38, 72-72, 91-91, 134-134, 147-147, 157-157, 182-182, 199-199, 217-217, 235-235
125-125: LGTM: Pattern validation moved to constant
The change from programmingExerciseCreationConfig.appNamePatternForSwift to APP_NAME_PATTERN_FOR_SWIFT improves maintainability by using a constant instead of a configuration object property.
Let's verify the constant is properly defined:
✅ Verification successful
Constant is properly defined and imported
The constant APP_NAME_PATTERN_FOR_SWIFT is correctly defined in src/main/webapp/app/shared/constants/input.constants.ts and properly imported in the component. The pattern enforces valid Swift identifiers by excluding Swift keywords and following Swift naming conventions.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify APP_NAME_PATTERN_FOR_SWIFT constant definition
# Expected: Find the constant definition in component or constants file
# Search for the constant definition
rg "APP_NAME_PATTERN_FOR_SWIFT\s*=" -A 2
Length of output: 1258
docs/user/exercises/programming-exercise-features.inc (1)
48-49: LGTM: Go language support entry is correctly formatted and positioned.
The addition of Go to the programming language support table is consistent with the PR objectives and correctly indicates support for both Local CI and Jenkins.
src/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/plagiarism/service/ProgrammingPlagiarismDetectionService.java (2)
36-36: LGTM!
The import statement follows Java conventions and is properly organized with other JPlag language imports.
321-321: LGTM!
The GO case follows the established pattern and is properly placed alphabetically among other supported languages.
src/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/programming/service/jenkins/build_plan/JenkinsBuildPlanService.java (2)
187-188: LGTM! Go language support added correctly.
The addition of GO to the supported languages list follows the existing pattern and is consistent with other language implementations.
187-188: Verify Go-specific build configurations.
Since Go has been added as a supported language, ensure that the jenkinsBuildPlanCreator can handle Go-specific build configurations correctly.
✅ Verification successful
Based on the search results, I can see that there are no explicit Go-specific build configurations in the codebase. The only Go-related information found is that Go is included in a switch statement for language types, but no actual build configuration logic was found.
Let me gather more information by searching for Go-related build files and configurations:
Based on the search results, I can now provide a conclusive response about the Go build configurations:
Go build configurations are properly implemented and verified.
The codebase has appropriate Go-specific build configurations in place:
- Jenkins pipeline configuration exists in
templates/jenkins/go/regularRuns/pipeline.groovy - Aeolus build configuration exists in
templates/aeolus/go/default.yamlanddefault.sh - Standard Go build files (go.mod) are present in the templates
- Test execution is properly configured using
go test ./... -jsonwith JUnit report generation
The build configurations follow Go best practices with:
- Proper test execution and reporting
- Module management via go.mod
- CI/CD integration through Jenkins and Aeolus
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check for Go-specific build configurations in the Jenkins build plan creator
# Search for Go-specific build configurations
ast-grep --pattern 'case GO:
$$$
'
# Search for Go-related test configurations
rg -A 5 'GO.*test'
# Search for Go build command configurations
rg -A 5 'go\s+build|go\s+test'
Length of output: 131288
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for Go-specific build files and configurations
fd -t f '\.go$|go\.mod|go\.sum'
# Search for Go-related build commands and configurations
rg -i 'go\s+build|go\s+test|go\s+run|go\s+install|go\.mod|go\.sum'
# Look for Go-specific Jenkins pipeline configurations
rg -i 'golang|go\s+build|go\s+test' --type yaml
Length of output: 2245
build.gradle (1)
256-256: LGTM! Addition of Go language support is properly configured.
The Go language support is correctly added through the JPlag dependency, maintaining consistency with other language implementations.
Let's verify the JPlag version compatibility:
✅ Verification successful
✓ Go language support is properly configured with compatible JPlag version
The Go language module is being added with JPlag version 5.1.0, which matches the latest available version in the Maven repository. This ensures compatibility and proper functionality of the Go language support.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check if the jplag_version property is defined and get its value
# Look for jplag_version in gradle.properties or similar files
fd -t f "gradle.properties|*.gradle" -x grep -l "jplag_version"
# Verify if the Go language module is available in the specified version
curl -s "https://repo1.maven.org/maven2/de/jplag/golang/maven-metadata.xml" | grep -o "<version>.*</version>" | tail -n 1
Length of output: 534
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's fix the previous command and check for jplag_version in gradle files
fd -e gradle -e properties | xargs grep -l "jplag_version"
# Get the actual jplag_version being used
grep "jplag_version" gradle.properties || grep "jplag_version =" build.gradle
Length of output: 148
src/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/programming/service/ProgrammingExerciseRepositoryService.java (1)
659-659: LGTM! The Go package name handling is correctly implemented.
The implementation follows the same pattern as other languages and correctly sets the package name placeholder for Go files.
src/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/programming/service/ProgrammingExerciseService.java (2)
107-127: LGTM! Well-documented regex patterns for package name validation.
The implementation correctly:
- Follows the Go language specification for package names
- Handles Go keywords and identifier rules
- Uses static final fields for performance
- Includes proper documentation with reference links
438-443: LGTM! Clean and maintainable pattern matching logic.
The switch expression:
- Uses modern Java syntax
- Handles all supported languages consistently
- Has appropriate error handling for unsupported languages
src/test/javascript/spec/component/programming-exercise/programming-exercise-update.component.spec.ts (1)
79-79: LGTM!
The import statement for package name pattern constants is well-organized and follows the project's import conventions.
...main/webapp/app/exercises/programming/manage/update/programming-exercise-update.component.ts
Show resolved
Hide resolved
src/test/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/programming/util/ProgrammingExerciseFactory.java
Show resolved
Hide resolved
src/test/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/programming/util/ProgrammingExerciseTestService.java
Show resolved
Hide resolved
Co-authored-by: coderabbitai[bot] <136622811+coderabbitai[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
|
Thank you for the test. It seems like using |
Checklist
General
Server
Changes affecting Programming Exercises
Motivation and Context
Go currently is on rank 12 of the PYPL Index and should be included as a relevant language for programming exercises.
Description
This PR adds Go as a programming exercise template. It uses the Strategy Pattern example as used in the other languages.
The tests use the standard
testingpackage to be run withgo test. The output is converted to JUnit XML using go-junit-report.This PR also includes refactoring of client code for easy extensibility of package name verification.
Steps for Testing
Prerequisites:
Gofor the languageTestserver States
Note
These badges show the state of the test servers.
Green = Currently available, Red = Currently locked
Click on the badges to get to the test servers.
Review Progress
Code Review
Manual Tests
Summary by CodeRabbit
Release Notes
New Features
Enhancements
Bug Fixes
Chores