[Docs] Ensure that each permission key's ID is displayed in the reference table #15558
Conversation
…ence table Signed-off-by: Siddhi sahu <himanisahu739@gmail.com>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Summary of Changes
Hello @Siddhi-sahu, 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!
I've made updates to the permissions reference table generation script to improve data processing efficiency and enhance the visibility of permission key IDs. The key IDs are now a primary column in the table, making them easier to reference, while the hidden details row has been streamlined to focus solely on the permission moniker.
Highlights
- Data Processing Refinement: I've refactored the JavaScript code in
docs/_includes/permissions.htmlto more efficiently select and process the necessary data columns for the permissions table. Instead of using multiplespliceoperations to remove unwanted columns, I now directly select the required columns (Category, Key Name, Description, and Key ID) into a newprocessedDataarray. - Permission Key ID Visibility: The 'Key ID' for each permission is now directly displayed as a column in the main reference table. Previously, this information was hidden within an expandable row. This change makes the Key ID immediately visible and accessible.
- Table Header Update: The header for the column displaying the permission ID has been updated from 'Keychain Name' to 'Key ID' to accurately reflect the content of the column.
- Hidden Row Simplification: The hidden row, which expands upon clicking a table entry, now exclusively displays the 'Moniker' for the permission. The 'Key ID' has been moved to the main table, simplifying the hidden row's content.
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.
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.
Code Review
This pull request addresses an issue where permission key IDs were not displayed in the reference table. The changes correctly add the Key ID as a column in the main table and remove it from the expandable details row. The refactoring of the data processing logic from using multiple splice calls to creating a new array with selected columns is a significant improvement in both readability and correctness. I have one suggestion to make the code even more concise by using the map function.
| const processedData = []; | ||
| jsonData.forEach(row => { | ||
| row.splice(10, 1); | ||
| row.splice(9, 1); | ||
| row.splice(8, 1); | ||
| row.splice(7, 1); | ||
| row.splice(6, 1); | ||
| row.splice(5, 1); | ||
| row.splice(4, 1); | ||
| row.splice(3, 1); | ||
| const trimmedRow = [row[0], row[1], row[2], row[10]]; | ||
| processedData.push(trimmedRow); | ||
| }); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
For better code conciseness and readability, you can use the map function to create the processedData array. This is a more functional and idiomatic way to transform arrays in JavaScript.
| const processedData = []; | |
| jsonData.forEach(row => { | |
| row.splice(10, 1); | |
| row.splice(9, 1); | |
| row.splice(8, 1); | |
| row.splice(7, 1); | |
| row.splice(6, 1); | |
| row.splice(5, 1); | |
| row.splice(4, 1); | |
| row.splice(3, 1); | |
| const trimmedRow = [row[0], row[1], row[2], row[10]]; | |
| processedData.push(trimmedRow); | |
| }); | |
| const processedData = jsonData.map(row => [row[0], row[1], row[2], row[10]]); |
|
|
|
🚀 Preview for commit f2ab615 at: https://6895a9ddfd3951b5937a98ba--meshery-docs-preview.netlify.app |
|
@ritzorama what do you think👀. would you like the Moniker row to be not hidden as well? @leecalcote |
Notes for Reviewers
before:
after:
Signed commits