Abstract project interface for reusable editor components #2827
Conversation
Summary of ChangesHello @nighca, I'm Gemini Code Assist1! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed! This pull request significantly refactors the project's architecture by abstracting the core Highlights
🧠 New Feature in Public Preview: You can now enable Memory to help Gemini Code Assist learn from your team's feedback. This makes future code reviews more consistent and personalized to your project's style. Click here to enable Memory in your admin console. Changelog
Activity
Using Gemini Code AssistThe full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips. Invoking Gemini You can request assistance from Gemini at any point by creating a comment using either
Customization To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a Limitations & Feedback Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for Github and other Google products, sign up here. You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension. Footnotes
|
![gemini-code-assist[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/956858?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Code Review
This pull request introduces a significant refactoring of project persistence and history management. It extracts cloud and local cache operations into dedicated CloudHelper and LocalHelper classes, and centralizes project history management by moving history from the Project model to the EditorState and making it accessible via editorCtx.state.history. This change impacts numerous components, where direct calls to project.saveToCloud() or project.history.doAction() are replaced with calls to the new helper classes or editorCtx.state.history.doAction(). The Editing class and its related tests are updated to reflect these new helper dependencies. Additionally, the Project constructor now accepts owner and name parameters, and IProject and ILocalCacheHelper interfaces are introduced. A review comment highlights a potential vulnerability in the createProject function, which saves to the cloud without user confirmation, making it susceptible to Indirect Prompt Injection. Another comment notes the removal of a test case that checked for errors when saving a disposed project, suggesting that the new implementation might not handle disposed projects correctly during export/save operations.
|
|
||
| try { | ||
| await project.saveToCloud() | ||
| await new CloudHelper().save(project) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The createProject function, which is registered as an MCP tool, performs a side effect (saving a new project to the cloud) without requiring user confirmation. This makes the application vulnerable to Indirect Prompt Injection, where a malicious project or asset could trick the LLM into creating unwanted projects on the user's account. It is recommended to implement a confirmation dialog before executing MCP tools with side effects.
|
|
||
| it('should throw an error when saving a disposed project', async () => { | ||
| const project = makeProject() | ||
| const saveToLocalCacheMethod = vi.spyOn(project, 'saveToLocalCache' as any) | ||
|
|
||
| project.dispose() | ||
|
|
||
| await expect(project.saveToCloud()).rejects.toThrow('disposed') | ||
|
|
||
| await expect((project as any).saveToLocalCache('key')).rejects.toThrow('disposed') | ||
| expect(saveToLocalCacheMethod).toHaveBeenCalledWith('key') | ||
| }) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This test case, which verifies that saving a disposed project throws an error, has been removed. The new implementation using helper classes doesn't seem to check if a project is disposed before exporting/saving. This could lead to unexpected behavior or errors if a disposed project is saved. Please consider re-adding this test and implementing a check for isDisposed in the Project.export method to prevent this.
1 participant
close #2815.