Add linter workflow for code quality checks

[guibranco]

Description

• Introduced a new linter workflow to ensure code quality.
• The workflow includes steps for .NET setup and formatting checks.
• It provides instructions for fixing formatting issues automatically.

---

Changes walkthrough 📝

	Relevant files
Enhancement	linter.yml Add GitHub Actions Linter Workflow                                              .github/workflows/linter.yml Added a new GitHub Actions workflow for linter checks. Configured the workflow to trigger on pull requests and manual dispatch. Included steps for checking out the repository and setting up .NET. Added a step for running CSharpier to check code formatting. +24/-0

Description by Korbit AI

Note

This feature is in early access. You can enable or disable it in the Korbit Console.

What change is being made?

Add a GitHub Actions workflow configuration file linter.yml to automate linter checks on pull requests.

Why are these changes being made?

This change introduces an automated linter check to ensure code quality and consistency by running CSharpier on every pull request. Automating this process helps maintain code standards and reduces manual review effort.

[semanticdiff-com]

Review changes with SemanticDiff.

[senior-dev-bot]

Hi there! 👋 Thanks for opening a PR. It looks like you've already reached the 5 review limit on our Basic Plan for the week. If you still want a review, feel free to upgrade your subscription in the Web App and then reopen the PR

[korbit-ai]

My review is in progress 📖 - I will have feedback for you in a few minutes!

[pr-code-reviewer]

👋 Hi there!

Everything looks good!

_{^{Automatically generated with the help of gpt-3.5-turbo.
Feedback? Please don't hesitate to drop me an email at [email protected].}}

[instapr]

Feedback:

• Good job on creating the linter.yml workflow!
• Consider adding a comment block at the beginning of the file to provide a brief description of the workflow.
• Ensure the indentation is consistent throughout the file for better readability.

[codara-ai-code-review]

Potential issues, bugs, and flaws that can introduce unwanted behavior:

1. .github/workflows/linter.yml: The pull_request event does not specify any activity (e.g., opened, synchronize, etc.), which means the workflow will trigger on any pull request activity. This might not be desirable as the workflow should ideally run when code changes are made.

Code suggestions and improvements for better exception handling, logic, standardization, and consistency:

1. .github/workflows/linter.yml: Consider specifying the pull_request event with the needed activity like opened, synchronize, or closed to trigger the workflow only when relevant changes are made to the pull request.
2. .github/workflows/linter.yml: Add proper error handling and exit conditions in the steps, especially in the Dotnet restore and CSharpier format check steps to handle potential failures gracefully.
3. .github/workflows/linter.yml: Use more descriptive names for steps to improve code readability and maintenance. For example, instead of linter-check, consider using a more specific and meaningful name like run-linter-checks.

[coderabbitai]

Important

Review skipped

Auto reviews are limited to specific labels.

Please check the settings in the CodeRabbit UI or the .coderabbit.yaml file in this repository. To trigger a single review, invoke the @coderabbitai review command.

You can disable this status message by setting the reviews.review_status to false in the CodeRabbit configuration file.

---

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?

Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

• Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
  • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>.
  • Generate unit testing code for this file.
  • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
• Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
  • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
  • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
• PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
  • @coderabbitai generate interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table.
  • @coderabbitai show all the console.log statements in this repository.
  • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
  • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
  • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

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 as PR comments)

• @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
• @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
• @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
• @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
• @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
• @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
• @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
• @coderabbitai help to get help.

Additionally, you can add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.

CodeRabbit Configuration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

• You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
• Please see the configuration documentation for more information.
• If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json

Documentation and Community

• Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
• Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
• Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

[gooroo-dev]

Please double check the following review of the pull request:

Issues counts

🐞Mistake	🤪Typo	🚨Security	🚀Performance	💪Best Practices	📖Readability	❓Others
0	0	0	0	1	1	0

Changes in the diff

• ➕ Added a new GitHub Actions workflow file linter.yml for linter checks.
• 💪 Best Practices: Included steps to checkout the repository, set up .NET, restore .NET tools, and run CSharpier format check.
• 📖 Improved readability: Added comments and structured the workflow steps clearly.

Identified Issues

ID	Type	Details	Severity	Confidence
1	💪Best Practices	Use specific versions for actions to ensure consistency and stability.	🟠Medium	🟠Medium
2	📖Readability	The echo message could be misleading; it suggests running 'dotnet build' instead of 'dotnet csharpier'.	🟡Low	🟡Low

Issue 1

ID: 1

Explanation: Using specific versions for actions ensures consistency and stability in the workflow. The current setup uses actions/checkout@v4 and actions/setup-dotnet@v4, which may change over time.

Code that addresses the issue:

- name: Checkout repo
  uses: actions/[email protected]

- name: Setup .NET
  uses: actions/[email protected]

Explanation of the fix: Specifying the exact version (v4.0.0) for the actions ensures that the workflow will not break due to future updates in the actions.

Issue 2

ID: 2

Explanation: The echo message suggests running 'dotnet build' to fix formatting, which is misleading. The correct command to fix formatting is 'dotnet csharpier'.

Code that addresses the issue:

- name: CSharpier format check
  run: |
    dotnet csharpier . --check
    echo "run 'dotnet csharpier' to fix the formatting of the code automatically"

Explanation of the fix: Updated the echo message to correctly suggest running 'dotnet csharpier' to fix formatting issues.

Missing Tests

Since this is a GitHub Actions workflow configuration, traditional unit tests do not apply. However, you can validate the workflow by creating a test pull request to ensure that the linter checks are executed correctly.

Summon me to re-review when updated! Yours, Gooroo.dev
Please react or reply to this review!

[penify-dev]

PR Review 🔍

⏱️ Estimated effort to review [1-5]	2, because the changes are straightforward and primarily involve adding a new workflow file without complex logic.
🧪 Relevant tests	No
⚡ Possible issues	No
🔒 Security concerns	No

[korbit-ai]

I have reviewed your code and did not find any issues!

---

Please note that I can make mistakes, and you should still encourage your team to review your code as well.

[penify-dev]

PR Code Suggestions ✨

Category	Suggestion	Score
Best practice	Ensure the linter workflow fails if the formatting check does not pass Consider adding a step to fail the workflow if the formatting check fails, ensuring that code quality is enforced. .github/workflows/linter.yml [23-24] run: | - dotnet csharpier . --check + dotnet csharpier . --check || exit 1 echo "run 'dotnet build' to fix the formatting of the code automatically" Suggestion importance[1-10]: 9 Why: This suggestion addresses a critical aspect of CI/CD by ensuring that the workflow fails if the formatting check does not pass, which is essential for maintaining code quality.	9
	Add a cleanup step to remove temporary files after the linter check You might want to add a step to clean up any temporary files or artifacts created during the linter check. .github/workflows/linter.yml [24] -... +- name: Cleanup + run: dotnet clean Suggestion importance[1-10]: 5 Why: Although cleanup is a good practice, it may not be necessary in this context since the linter check does not inherently create temporary files, making this suggestion less impactful.	5
Maintainability	Specify a version for csharpier to maintain consistency in formatting Consider specifying a specific version of csharpier to ensure consistent formatting across different environments. .github/workflows/linter.yml [23] -dotnet csharpier . --check +dotnet tool install csharpier --version <specific-version> && dotnet csharpier . --check Suggestion importance[1-10]: 8 Why: Specifying a version for csharpier is important for maintainability and consistency, making this a valuable suggestion.	8
Enhancement	Add a step to install dependencies before performing the format check It may be beneficial to add a step to install any necessary dependencies before running the formatting check. .github/workflows/linter.yml [15-16] -- name: Dotnet restore +- name: Install dependencies + run: dotnet restore - name: CSharpier format check Suggestion importance[1-10]: 7 Why: While installing dependencies is important, the current setup already includes a step for restoring tools, making this suggestion less critical but still a good enhancement.	7