Feature/cog 920 implement mock summaryobject for codegraph #385
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Contributor
WalkthroughThe pull request introduces modifications to three files in the Cognee project. The primary changes include adding a mock code summary feature in Changes
Sequence DiagramsequenceDiagram
participant User
participant ExtractSummary
participant MockSummary
participant Environment
User->>Environment: Set MOCK_CODE_SUMMARY
User->>ExtractSummary: Request code summary
ExtractSummary->>Environment: Check MOCK_CODE_SUMMARY value
alt MOCK_CODE_SUMMARY is true
ExtractSummary->>MockSummary: Call get_mock_summarized_code()
MockSummary-->>ExtractSummary: Return mock summary
else MOCK_CODE_SUMMARY is false
ExtractSummary->>ExtractSummary: Generate actual summary
end
ExtractSummary-->>User: Return code summary
Possibly related PRs
Suggested labels
Suggested reviewers
Poem
Tip CodeRabbit's docstrings feature is now available as part of our Early Access Program! Simply use the command 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 (
|
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
🧹 Nitpick comments (3)
cognee/tasks/summarization/mock_summary.py (1)
3-37: Consider enhancing mock data realism and type safety.While the implementation is structurally correct, consider these improvements:
- The mock data could be more realistic (e.g., actual Python syntax in constants and imports)
- Type hints for nested structures would improve maintainability
Consider this enhanced implementation:
def get_mock_summarized_code() -> SummarizedCode: return SummarizedCode( file_name="mock_file.py", - high_level_summary="This is a mock high-level summary.", + high_level_summary="This module implements a data processing pipeline with error handling.", key_features=[ - "Mock feature 1", - "Mock feature 2" + "Implements async data processing", + "Includes comprehensive error handling", + "Provides data validation utilities" ], - imports=["mock_import1", "mock_import2"], + imports=[ + "from typing import List, Optional", + "import asyncio", + "from datetime import datetime" + ], - constants=["MOCK_CONSTANT = 'mock_value'"], + constants=[ + "MAX_RETRIES: int = 3", + "DEFAULT_TIMEOUT: float = 30.0" + ], classes=[ SummarizedClass( - name="MockClass", - description="This is a mock description of the MockClass.", + name="DataProcessor", + description="Handles asynchronous processing of data streams with retry logic.", methods=[ SummarizedFunction( - name="mock_method", - description="This is a description of the mock method.", - docstring="This is a mock method.", - inputs=["mock_input: str"], - outputs=["mock_output: str"], + name="process_batch", + description="Processes a batch of data with automatic retries on failure.", + docstring="Asynchronously processes a batch of data with configurable retry logic.", + inputs=["data: List[dict]", "timeout: Optional[float] = None"], + outputs=["List[ProcessedResult]"], decorators=None, ) ], ) ], functions=[ SummarizedFunction( - name="mock_function", - description="This is a description of the mock function.", - docstring="This is a mock function.", - inputs=["mock_input: str"], - outputs=["mock_output: str"], - decorators=None, + name="validate_input", + description="Validates input data against schema.", + docstring="Ensures input data meets required format and constraints.", + inputs=["data: dict", "schema: ValidationSchema"], + outputs=["ValidationResult"], + decorators=["@validate_schema"], ) ], - workflow_description="This is a mock workflow description.", + workflow_description="The module implements a data processing pipeline that validates inputs, processes data in batches, and handles errors with automatic retries.", )cognee/modules/data/extraction/extract_summary.py (2)
21-24: Simplify boolean parsing logic.The boolean parsing can be simplified as the initial
isinstancecheck is redundant.- enable_mocking = os.getenv("MOCK_CODE_SUMMARY", "false") - if isinstance(enable_mocking, bool): - enable_mocking = str(enable_mocking).lower() - enable_mocking = enable_mocking in ("true", "1", "yes") + MOCK_CODE_SUMMARY = "MOCK_CODE_SUMMARY" + enable_mocking = os.getenv(MOCK_CODE_SUMMARY, "false").lower() in ("true", "1", "yes")
26-31: Update function docstring to reflect mock functionality.The function's behavior has changed with the addition of mock support, but this isn't reflected in the documentation.
Add a docstring explaining the mock functionality:
async def extract_code_summary(content: str): """Extract a summary of the provided code content. Args: content (str): The source code content to summarize Returns: SummarizedCode: A summary of the code structure and content Environment Variables: MOCK_CODE_SUMMARY: When set to "true", "1", or "yes", returns mock data instead of performing actual code analysis """
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (3)
cognee/modules/data/extraction/extract_summary.py(2 hunks)cognee/tasks/repo_processor/get_repo_file_dependencies.py(1 hunks)cognee/tasks/summarization/mock_summary.py(1 hunks)
Vasilije1990
approved these changes
Dec 18, 2024
Vasilije1990
deleted the
feature/cog-920-implement-mock-summaryobject-for-codegraph
branch
This was referenced Dec 18, 2024
Merged
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Summary by CodeRabbit
New Features
Bug Fixes
Documentation