Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

feat(boards2): pagination #3586

Open
wants to merge 6 commits into
base: devx/feature/boardsv2
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

x1unix
Copy link
Contributor

@x1unix x1unix commented Jan 23, 2025

Implement pagination for boards, threads and replies.

Closes #3200, #3539

CC @jeronimoalbi @salmad3

@github-actions github-actions bot added the 🧾 package/realm Tag used for new Realms or Packages. label Jan 23, 2025
@Gno2D2
Copy link
Collaborator

Gno2D2 commented Jan 23, 2025

🛠 PR Checks Summary

🔴 Maintainers must be able to edit this pull request (more info)
🔴 Pending initial approval by a review team member, or review from tech-staff

Manual Checks (for Reviewers):
  • IGNORE the bot requirements for this PR (force green CI check) (checked by @jeronimoalbi)
  • The pull request description provides enough details (checked by @jeronimoalbi)
Read More

🤖 This bot helps streamline PR reviews by verifying automated checks and providing guidance for contributors and reviewers.

✅ Automated Checks (for Contributors):

🔴 Maintainers must be able to edit this pull request (more info)
🔴 Pending initial approval by a review team member, or review from tech-staff

☑️ Contributor Actions:
  1. Fix any issues flagged by automated checks.
  2. Follow the Contributor Checklist to ensure your PR is ready for review.
    • Add new tests, or document why they are unnecessary.
    • Provide clear examples/screenshots, if necessary.
    • Update documentation, if required.
    • Ensure no breaking changes, or include BREAKING CHANGE notes.
    • Link related issues/PRs, where applicable.
☑️ Reviewer Actions:
  1. Complete manual checks for the PR, including the guidelines and additional checks if applicable.
📚 Resources:
Debug
Automated Checks
Maintainers must be able to edit this pull request (more info)

If

🟢 Condition met
└── 🟢 The pull request was created from a fork (head branch repo: gnostudio/gno)

Then

🔴 Requirement not satisfied
└── 🔴 Maintainer can modify this pull request

Pending initial approval by a review team member, or review from tech-staff

If

🟢 Condition met
└── 🟢 Not (🔴 Pull request author is a member of the team: tech-staff)

Then

🔴 Requirement not satisfied
└── 🔴 If
    ├── 🔴 Condition
    │   └── 🔴 Or
    │       ├── 🔴 At least 1 user(s) of the organization reviewed the pull request (with state "APPROVED")
    │       ├── 🔴 At least 1 user(s) of the team tech-staff reviewed pull request
    │       └── 🔴 This pull request is a draft
    └── 🔴 Else
        └── 🔴 And
            ├── 🟢 This label is applied to pull request: review/triage-pending
            └── 🔴 On no pull request

Manual Checks
**IGNORE** the bot requirements for this PR (force green CI check)

If

🟢 Condition met
└── 🟢 On every pull request

Can be checked by

  • Any user with comment edit permission
The pull request description provides enough details

If

🟢 Condition met
└── 🟢 And
    ├── 🟢 Not (🔴 Pull request author is a member of the team: core-contributors)
    └── 🟢 Not (🔴 Pull request author is user: dependabot[bot])

Can be checked by

  • team core-contributors

@Gno2D2 Gno2D2 added the review/triage-pending PRs opened by external contributors that are waiting for the 1st review label Jan 23, 2025
@jeronimoalbi jeronimoalbi removed the review/triage-pending PRs opened by external contributors that are waiting for the 1st review label Jan 23, 2025
@Gno2D2 Gno2D2 added the review/triage-pending PRs opened by external contributors that are waiting for the 1st review label Jan 23, 2025
@Gno2D2 Gno2D2 requested a review from a team January 23, 2025 16:44
@x1unix x1unix requested a review from jeronimoalbi January 23, 2025 16:59
Comment on lines +395 to +406
page := p.Iterate(&post.replies, func(_ string, value interface{}) bool {
reply := value.(*Post)

sb.WriteString(indent)
sb.WriteString("\n")
sb.WriteString(reply.Render(nil, commentsIndent, levels-1))
return false
})

if page != nil {
sb.WriteString("\n---\n")
sb.WriteString(page.Picker())
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This should be optional because p could be nil. Shouldn't we make sure not to render pager when p == nil?

Copy link
Contributor Author

@x1unix x1unix Jan 24, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@jeronimoalbi check content of p.Iterate which is nil-safe actually.

https://goplay.tools/snippet/dBX1Td7u68w

func (opts *PaginationOpts) Iterate(tree *avl.Tree, cb func(k string, val interface{}) bool) *pager.Page {
	if opts == nil {
		tree.Iterate("", "", cb)
		return nil
	}
	
	....
}

@x1unix x1unix requested a review from jeronimoalbi January 24, 2025 17:52
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
🧾 package/realm Tag used for new Realms or Packages. review/triage-pending PRs opened by external contributors that are waiting for the 1st review
Projects
Status: Triage
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants