chore: fix minor runtime warnings #6518
Conversation
bijin-bruno
requested review from
helloanoop,
lohit-bruno and
naman-bruno
as code owners
WalkthroughProxy configuration migration logic in two files now uses defensive programming patterns. Proxy objects are safely initialized with fallback empty objects, and property existence checks switch from the Changes
Estimated code review effort🎯 2 (Simple) | ⏱️ ~10 minutes Possibly related PRs
Suggested labels
Suggested reviewers
Poem
Pre-merge checks and finishing touches❌ Failed checks (1 warning, 1 inconclusive)
✅ Passed checks (1 passed)
✨ Finishing touches
🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out. Comment |
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
🧹 Nitpick comments (3)
packages/bruno-electron/src/store/preferences.js (1)
128-128: Redundant defensive initialization after existence check.Line 127 already verifies
preferences?.proxyexists before entering this block, making the|| {}fallback at line 128 redundant. Since the guard condition ensurespreferences.proxyis truthy, this defensive initialization will never fall back to an empty object.🔎 Simplify to remove redundancy
- const proxy = preferences.proxy || {}; + const proxy = preferences.proxy;packages/bruno-electron/src/utils/transformBrunoConfig.js (2)
79-79: Redundant defensive initialization after existence check.Line 78 already verifies
brunoConfig.proxyexists, making the|| {}fallback at line 79 redundant. The guard condition ensures the property is truthy, so the fallback to an empty object will never be used.🔎 Simplify to remove redundancy
- const proxy = brunoConfig.proxy || {}; + const proxy = brunoConfig.proxy;
77-128: Consider consolidating duplicated proxy migration logic.The proxy migration logic here closely mirrors the implementation in
packages/bruno-electron/src/store/preferences.js(lines 125-192). Both handle similar legacy format transformations with minor differences (this file only handlesenabledproperty, while preferences.js handles bothenabledandmode).Extracting a shared migration utility function could reduce maintenance burden and ensure consistent behavior across both migration paths.
📜 Review details
Configuration used: Path: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (2)
packages/bruno-electron/src/store/preferences.jspackages/bruno-electron/src/utils/transformBrunoConfig.js
🧰 Additional context used
📓 Path-based instructions (1)
**/*.{js,jsx,ts,tsx}
📄 CodeRabbit inference engine (CODING_STANDARDS.md)
**/*.{js,jsx,ts,tsx}: Use 2 spaces for indentation. No tabs, just spaces
Stick to single quotes for strings. For JSX/TSX attributes, use double quotes (e.g., )
Always add semicolons at the end of statements
No trailing commas
Always use parentheses around parameters in arrow functions, even for single params
For multiline constructs, put opening braces on the same line, and ensure consistency. Minimum 2 elements for multiline
No newlines inside function parentheses
Space before and after the arrow in arrow functions.() => {}is good
No space between function name and parentheses.func()notfunc ()
Semicolons go at the end of the line, not on a new line
Names for functions need to be concise and descriptive
Add in JSDoc comments to add more details to the abstractions if needed
Add in meaningful comments instead of obvious ones where complex code flow is explained properly
Files:
packages/bruno-electron/src/store/preferences.jspackages/bruno-electron/src/utils/transformBrunoConfig.js
🧠 Learnings (1)
📚 Learning: 2025-12-17T21:41:24.730Z
Learnt from: naman-bruno
Repo: usebruno/bruno PR: 6407
File: packages/bruno-app/src/components/Environments/ConfirmCloseEnvironment/index.js:5-41
Timestamp: 2025-12-17T21:41:24.730Z
Learning: Do not suggest PropTypes validation for React components in the Bruno codebase. The project does not use PropTypes, so reviews should avoid proposing PropTypes and rely on the existing typing/validation approach (e.g., TypeScript or alternative runtime checks) if applicable. This guideline applies broadly to all JavaScript/JSX components in the repo.
Applied to files:
packages/bruno-electron/src/store/preferences.jspackages/bruno-electron/src/utils/transformBrunoConfig.js
🧬 Code graph analysis (2)
packages/bruno-electron/src/store/preferences.js (1)
packages/bruno-electron/src/utils/transformBrunoConfig.js (2)
proxy(79-79)newProxy(85-97)
packages/bruno-electron/src/utils/transformBrunoConfig.js (3)
packages/bruno-electron/src/app/collections.js (1)
brunoConfig(103-103)packages/bruno-electron/src/ipc/network/cert-utils.js (1)
brunoConfig(49-49)packages/bruno-electron/src/app/collection-watcher.js (2)
brunoConfig(212-212)brunoConfig(453-453)
⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms. You can increase the timeout in your CodeRabbit configuration to a maximum of 15 minutes (900000ms). (6)
- GitHub Check: SSL Tests - Linux
- GitHub Check: Unit Tests
- GitHub Check: SSL Tests - macOS
- GitHub Check: SSL Tests - Windows
- GitHub Check: CLI Tests
- GitHub Check: Playwright E2E Tests
🔇 Additional comments (2)
packages/bruno-electron/src/store/preferences.js (1)
131-131: LGTM! Explicit property checks improve robustness.Switching from the
inoperator tohasOwnProperty()provides explicit own-property checks, avoiding potential issues with inherited properties from the prototype chain. This makes the legacy format detection more precise.Also applies to: 149-152
packages/bruno-electron/src/utils/transformBrunoConfig.js (1)
82-82: LGTM! Explicit property check improves precision.Using
hasOwnProperty('enabled')instead of theinoperator ensures only own properties are checked, avoiding prototype chain lookups. This makes the legacy format detection more explicit and robust.
Description
fix minor runtime warnings
Contribution Checklist:
Note: Keeping the PR small and focused helps make it easier to review and merge. If you have multiple changes you want to make, please consider submitting them as separate pull requests.
Publishing to New Package Managers
Please see here for more information.
Summary by CodeRabbit
✏️ Tip: You can customize this high-level summary in your review settings.