-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 19
fix: updated generated sqlc #2609
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
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Summary of Changes
Hello @strantalis, 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 primarily focuses on synchronizing the application's Go database models with the latest database schema. It incorporates new data structures related to 'Obligations' into the policy
service's database models, which are typically auto-generated by tools like sqlc
to ensure type safety and consistency between the application and the database.
Highlights
- Database Models Update: I've updated the
service/policy/db/models.go
file, which contains the generated database models. This update introduces four new Go struct types:ObligationDefinition
,ObligationFulfiller
,ObligationTrigger
, andObligationValuesStandard
. These additions reflect recent changes in the underlying database schema, as indicated by the PR title 'fix: updated generated sqlc'.
Using Gemini Code Assist
The 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 in your pull request via creating an issue comment (i.e. comment on the pull request page) using either /gemini <command>
or @gemini-code-assist <command>
. Below is a summary of the supported commands.
Feature | Command | Description |
---|---|---|
Code Review | /gemini review |
Performs a code review for the current pull request in its current state. |
Pull Request Summary | /gemini summary |
Provides a summary of the current pull request in its current state. |
Comment | @gemini-code-assist | Responds in comments when explicitly tagged, both in issue comments and review comments. |
Help | /gemini help |
Displays a list of available commands. |
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 .gemini/
folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.
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 or fill out our survey to provide feedback.
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.
Schema shifts, new types, Code generation makes it clean, Database now matched.
Footnotes
-
Review the Privacy Notices, Generative AI Prohibited Use Policy, Terms of Service, and learn how to configure Gemini Code Assist in GitHub here. Gemini can make mistakes, so double check it and use code with caution. ↩
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Code Review
This pull request introduces new database models for an 'obligations' feature, generated by sqlc
. The changes are based on a new database migration that defines tables for obligation definitions, values, triggers, and fulfillers. My review focuses on improving the maintainability and readability of the generated code by suggesting adjustments to the source SQL migration and sqlc
configuration. I've pointed out opportunities to add documentation to the models and to improve naming consistency.
WDYT about #2610 for a follow-up to prevent this from happening again? |
Proposed Changes
These changes originally showed up in #2601.
Checklist
Testing Instructions