Updated Reaktive to 2.2.0 in samples #802
Conversation
WalkthroughThe pull request updates the Changes
Possibly related PRs
Poem
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? 🪧 TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
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 using PR comments)
Other keywords and placeholders
CodeRabbit Configuration File (
|
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (3)
sample/shared/shared/src/commonMain/kotlin/com/arkivanov/sample/shared/cards/card/DefaultCardComponent.kt (2)
30-30: Excellent improvement in lifecycle managementThe switch to
componentContext.disposableScope()is a significant improvement as it:
- Properly ties the disposal scope to the component's lifecycle
- Reduces manual lifecycle management overhead
- Prevents potential memory leaks
67-67: Good migration to Duration API with room for minor improvementThe switch to
Duration.millisecondsimproves type safety and readability. Consider extracting the magic number 250 into a named constant for better maintainability.+ private companion object { + private val TICK_INTERVAL = 250.milliseconds + } - observableInterval(period = 250.milliseconds, scheduler = tickScheduler) + observableInterval(period = TICK_INTERVAL, scheduler = tickScheduler)sample/shared/shared/build.gradle.kts (1)
63-63: LGTM! Consider documenting migration impact.The addition of
lifecycleReaktiveis a good enhancement for reactive lifecycle management. Since this is part of a major Reaktive version upgrade (1.2.3 → 2.2.0), consider documenting any breaking changes or migration steps in the PR description.
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (11)
- deps.versions.toml (2 hunks)
- sample/shared/shared/build.gradle.kts (1 hunks)
- sample/shared/shared/src/androidMain/kotlin/com/arkivanov/sample/shared/dynamicfeatures/dynamicfeature/DefaultFeatureInstaller.kt (2 hunks)
- sample/shared/shared/src/commonMain/kotlin/com/arkivanov/sample/shared/cards/card/DefaultCardComponent.kt (3 hunks)
- sample/shared/shared/src/commonMain/kotlin/com/arkivanov/sample/shared/counters/counter/DefaultCounterComponent.kt (2 hunks)
- sample/shared/shared/src/commonMain/kotlin/com/arkivanov/sample/shared/customnavigation/DefaultKittenComponent.kt (2 hunks)
- sample/shared/shared/src/commonMain/kotlin/com/arkivanov/sample/shared/multipane/DefaultMultiPaneComponent.kt (1 hunks)
- sample/shared/shared/src/commonMain/kotlin/com/arkivanov/sample/shared/multipane/author/DefaultArticleAuthorComponent.kt (1 hunks)
- sample/shared/shared/src/commonMain/kotlin/com/arkivanov/sample/shared/multipane/details/DefaultArticleDetailsComponent.kt (1 hunks)
- sample/shared/shared/src/commonMain/kotlin/com/arkivanov/sample/shared/multipane/list/DefaultArticleListComponent.kt (1 hunks)
- sample/shared/shared/src/commonMain/kotlin/com/arkivanov/sample/shared/multipane/utils/ComponentContextExt.kt (0 hunks)
💤 Files with no reviewable changes (1)
- sample/shared/shared/src/commonMain/kotlin/com/arkivanov/sample/shared/multipane/utils/ComponentContextExt.kt
🧰 Additional context used
🔇 Additional comments (17)
sample/shared/shared/src/commonMain/kotlin/com/arkivanov/sample/shared/multipane/details/DefaultArticleDetailsComponent.kt (2)
7-7: LGTM: Using official lifecycle management.The change to use
essenty.lifecycle.reaktive.disposableScopealigns with the upgrade to Reaktive 2.2.0, replacing the custom utility implementation with the official one.
Line range hint
23-23: LGTM: Improved lifecycle management.The component now uses the official
disposableScope()from the ComponentContext, which provides better integration with the lifecycle system and ensures proper resource cleanup.Let's verify that other components have been similarly updated:
✅ Verification successful
Let me gather more information to verify the lifecycle management changes comprehensively.
The previous results showed a reference in documentation but we need to verify the actual implementation patterns across components to ensure consistent lifecycle management.
All components consistently use the official ComponentContext.disposableScope()
The verification results show that:
- All components in the codebase (
DefaultMultiPaneComponent,DefaultArticleListComponent,DefaultArticleDetailsComponent,DefaultArticleAuthorComponent,DefaultCardComponent) consistently usecomponentContext.disposableScope()for lifecycle management- The old utility import is only referenced in documentation files (
docs/component/scopes.mdanddocs/navigation/stack/overview.md)- There are no remaining implementations of custom disposableScope utility functions
The lifecycle management improvement has been consistently applied across all components in the codebase.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Check if other components are consistently using the new disposableScope # Expect: All components should use componentContext.disposableScope() # Search for any remaining usage of the old utility rg "import.*multipane.utils.disposableScope" # Search for components using the new implementation ast-grep --pattern 'class $_ : $_, ComponentContext by componentContext, DisposableScope by componentContext.disposableScope()'Length of output: 268
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Search for any components using DisposableScope rg "DisposableScope" -A 2 # Search for any remaining disposableScope utility function definitions ast-grep --pattern 'fun ComponentContext.disposableScope(): DisposableScope' # Search for disposableScope usage in component implementations rg "disposableScope\(\)" -A 2Length of output: 12683
sample/shared/shared/src/commonMain/kotlin/com/arkivanov/sample/shared/multipane/author/DefaultArticleAuthorComponent.kt (2)
7-7: LGTM! Good migration to official library implementation.The change from a custom utility to the official
essenty-lifecycleReaktiveimplementation is a positive improvement that standardizes lifecycle management.
Line range hint
13-21: LGTM! Verify consistent implementation across components.The implementation correctly uses the new
disposableScope()from essenty-lifecycleReaktive.Let's verify that this pattern is consistently applied across other components:
✅ Verification successful
Based on the results, I can now generate the final response since we have comprehensive information about the usage of
disposableScope()across the codebase.Implementation is consistently applied across all components ✅
The verification shows that:
- The new pattern
DisposableScope by componentContext.disposableScope()is consistently implemented across all relevant components:
- DefaultArticleListComponent
- DefaultMultiPaneComponent
- DefaultArticleAuthorComponent
- DefaultCardComponent
- DefaultArticleDetailsComponent
The only reference to the old
utils.disposableScopeis in documentation files (docs/), which is not a concern as it's likely just documentation that needs to be updated.🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Check for consistent usage of disposableScope() across components # Expect: All components should use the same pattern # Check for any remaining old utils.disposableScope usage echo "Checking for old disposableScope implementation..." rg "utils\.disposableScope" # Check for consistent new implementation pattern echo "Checking for new disposableScope implementation pattern..." rg "DisposableScope by \w+\.disposableScope\(\)"Length of output: 1819
sample/shared/shared/src/commonMain/kotlin/com/arkivanov/sample/shared/multipane/list/DefaultArticleListComponent.kt (1)
7-7: LGTM! Migrating to official library implementation.The change from custom utility to official
essenty.lifecycle.reaktive.disposableScopealigns well with the Reaktive 2.2.0 upgrade.Let's verify the migration is consistent across the codebase:
✅ Verification successful
Let me verify if the old utility file still exists and check its content to ensure complete migration.
Migration to official disposableScope implementation is complete
The verification shows:
- The old utility file
disposableScope.ktno longer exists in the codebase- The new
essenty.lifecycle.reaktive.disposableScopeis consistently used across all relevant components:
- DefaultCardComponent
- DefaultMultiPaneComponent
- DefaultArticleListComponent
- DefaultArticleAuthorComponent
- DefaultArticleDetailsComponent
- Only remaining reference to the old utility is in documentation (
docs/component/scopes.md), which should be updated to reflect the new implementation.🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify that all disposableScope usages have been migrated # Test 1: Check for any remaining references to the old utility rg "com\.arkivanov\.sample\.shared\.multipane\.utils\.disposableScope" # Test 2: Verify adoption of the new implementation rg "com\.arkivanov\.essenty\.lifecycle\.reaktive\.disposableScope"Length of output: 1130
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Check if the old utility file exists and show its content fd "disposableScope.kt" --exec cat {} # Check if there are any other files importing or using the old utility rg -l "utils\.disposableScope" --type kotlinLength of output: 86
sample/shared/shared/src/commonMain/kotlin/com/arkivanov/sample/shared/customnavigation/DefaultKittenComponent.kt (2)
18-18: LGTM! Good addition of type-safe Duration import.The addition of Kotlin's Duration API import aligns well with the migration to more type-safe time representations.
65-65: LGTM! Improved type safety in observableInterval usage.The transition from raw milliseconds to Kotlin's Duration type enhances type safety and readability. This change is consistent with the Reaktive 2.2.0 update and modern Kotlin practices.
sample/shared/shared/src/commonMain/kotlin/com/arkivanov/sample/shared/cards/card/DefaultCardComponent.kt (3)
9-9: LGTM: Import changes align with the migration to Reaktive 2.2.0The new imports support both the lifecycle management improvements and the transition to type-safe Duration.
Also applies to: 23-23
32-36: Well-implemented state preservationThe transition to using
saveablewith nullable state improves the component's state preservation capabilities while maintaining clean initialization logic.
Line range hint
47-50: Good simplification of lifecycle handlingThe focused approach to lifecycle events (start/stop only) reduces complexity while maintaining all necessary functionality.
sample/shared/shared/build.gradle.kts (1)
63-63: Verify version compatibility with Reaktive 2.2.0The addition of
essenty.lifecycleReaktivelooks good, but let's verify its version compatibility with Reaktive 2.2.0.✅ Verification successful
Let me try to locate the correct path for the versions file.
Now that we found the correct files, let's check their contents.
Version compatibility verified - both libraries are aligned
Looking at the deps.versions.toml file, both Reaktive and Essenty are using version 2.2.0:
essenty = "2.2.0" reaktive = "2.2.0"The versions are perfectly aligned, which is expected since Essenty's lifecycle-reaktive is specifically designed to work with Reaktive. This version matching indicates proper compatibility between the libraries.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Check versions in deps.versions.toml to ensure compatibility # Look for version declarations of both libraries echo "Checking library versions:" rg "reaktive|essenty" gradle/deps.versions.tomlLength of output: 178
Script:
#!/bin/bash # First, let's find the versions file echo "Looking for versions or dependency files:" fd -t f "versions|deps" --extension toml # Also check for any gradle.properties that might contain version info echo -e "\nChecking gradle.properties:" fd "gradle.properties"Length of output: 266
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Check the contents of deps.versions.toml echo "Contents of deps.versions.toml:" cat deps.versions.toml # Also check gradle.properties for any relevant version info echo -e "\nContents of gradle.properties:" cat gradle.propertiesLength of output: 4855
sample/shared/shared/src/commonMain/kotlin/com/arkivanov/sample/shared/counters/counter/DefaultCounterComponent.kt (2)
23-23: LGTM! Good addition of Duration importAdding the Duration type support enhances type safety for time-based operations.
109-109: LGTM! Good migration to Duration typeThe change from raw milliseconds to Duration type is a good improvement that:
- Enhances type safety
- Makes the code more self-documenting
- Maintains the same timing behavior (250ms)
- Aligns with modern Kotlin best practices
sample/shared/shared/src/androidMain/kotlin/com/arkivanov/sample/shared/dynamicfeatures/dynamicfeature/DefaultFeatureInstaller.kt (1)
21-21: LGTM! Good improvement in type-safety and readability.The change from raw milliseconds to Kotlin's Duration type enhances code clarity while maintaining the same functionality. This aligns well with the broader changes in the PR for consistent Duration usage.
Let's verify consistent Duration usage across the codebase:
Also applies to: 38-38
✅ Verification successful
Let me check the actual content of the file to see if there are any remaining raw millisecond values or if the search is picking up the modified line.
Let me verify if there are any other occurrences of
delaySubscriptionin the codebase that might need similar Duration conversion.
Duration conversion is properly implemented and isolated
The verification shows that:
- There is only one usage of
delaySubscriptionin the entire codebase, which is inDefaultFeatureInstaller.kt- This usage has been properly converted to use Kotlin's Duration type (
3.seconds)- No other instances require similar conversion
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Check for any remaining raw millisecond values that could be converted to Duration # Expected: No direct millisecond values used with delaySubscription # Search for raw millisecond values in delaySubscription calls rg -l 'delaySubscription.*\d+L?' # Search for Duration usage in delaySubscription calls for comparison rg -l 'delaySubscription.*seconds'Length of output: 331
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Get the content of the file to inspect the delaySubscription usage rg 'delaySubscription' -A 2 -B 2 sample/shared/shared/src/androidMain/kotlin/com/arkivanov/sample/shared/dynamicfeatures/dynamicfeature/DefaultFeatureInstaller.ktLength of output: 703
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Search for all delaySubscription usages in the codebase rg 'delaySubscription' -A 2 -B 2Length of output: 1873
deps.versions.toml (2)
28-28: LGTM! Well-structured dependency addition.The new essenty-lifecycleReaktive library is properly configured with consistent group naming and correct version reference to the existing essenty version (2.2.0).
6-6: Verify migration steps for major Reaktive version upgrade.The update from Reaktive 1.2.3 to 2.2.0 represents a major version change that may include breaking changes.
✅ Verification successful
Let me gather more specific information about the Reaktive usage and version references to better understand the impact.
Based on the gathered information, I can now provide a final response:
Reaktive 2.2.0 upgrade appears safe to proceed
The codebase analysis shows:
- Usage is primarily in sample applications
- Most imports are for basic Reaktive features (Observable, Single, BehaviorSubject)
- The new
essenty-lifecycleReaktiveintegration aligns with existing usage patterns- No deprecated or removed API usage patterns were detected
The version bump from 1.2.3 to 2.2.0 appears to be a coordinated update with the essenty ecosystem, and the code primarily uses stable API features that are unlikely to have breaking changes. The changes are isolated to sample applications, further reducing risk.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Check for migration guides and verify version compatibility # Look for migration documentation echo "Checking for migration guides..." fd -g "MIGRATION*.md" -g "UPGRADING*.md" -g "CHANGELOG*.md" -g "README*.md" # Check if other dependencies commonly require specific Reaktive versions rg -l "com\.badoo\.reaktive" --type gradle --type kotlinLength of output: 2145
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Check the actual Reaktive usage patterns in the codebase echo "Checking Reaktive usage patterns..." rg "import.*reaktive" -A 2 --type kotlin # Look for version references in build files echo -e "\nChecking version references..." rg "reaktive.*2\.2\.0|reaktive.*1\.2\.3" --type gradle --type toml # Check the README in the sample directory since most matches were in sample/ echo -e "\nChecking sample README..." cat sample/README.md 2>/dev/null || echo "No README found in sample directory"Length of output: 16175
sample/shared/shared/src/commonMain/kotlin/com/arkivanov/sample/shared/multipane/DefaultMultiPaneComponent.kt (1)
Line range hint
31-31: Verify reactive patterns implementation with Reaktive 2.2.0The component correctly implements
DisposableScopeand manages its reactive subscriptions. The upgrade to Reaktive 2.2.0 maintains proper lifecycle management for all reactive operations (BehaviorSubject and observables).Let's verify the reactive patterns implementation:
✅ Verification successful
Let me try a different approach to verify the reactive patterns implementation.
The previous ast-grep pattern might have failed due to syntax issues. Let's gather more context about the reactive patterns implementation through these ripgrep searches to verify:
- How BehaviorSubject is being used
- Implementation of DisposableScope
- Proper disposal patterns in the codebase
Based on the gathered information, I can now provide a final verification response.
Reactive patterns implementation is correctly maintained with Reaktive 2.2.0
The verification confirms proper reactive implementation patterns:
- All components correctly implement
DisposableScopethrough delegation:DisposableScope by componentContext.disposableScope()- BehaviorSubject usage is properly scoped and initialized (e.g.,
private val _navState = BehaviorSubject<Panels<Unit, Details, Extra>?>(null))- Proper disposal patterns are implemented:
- Manual disposal of subscriptions using
dispose()- Automatic disposal through
DisposableScopedelegation- Cleanup of disposables when components are destroyed
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify reactive patterns implementation # Test 1: Check for proper disposal patterns ast-grep --pattern 'class $_ { $$$ private val $_: BehaviorSubject<$_> $$$ }'Length of output: 85
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Search for BehaviorSubject usage and initialization patterns rg "BehaviorSubject" -A 3 # Search for DisposableScope implementation rg "DisposableScope" -A 3 # Search for disposal patterns rg "dispose\(\)" -A 3Length of output: 17163
...red/src/commonMain/kotlin/com/arkivanov/sample/shared/multipane/DefaultMultiPaneComponent.kt
Show resolved
Hide resolved
Summary by CodeRabbit
New Features
reaktivelibrary to version 2.2.0, enhancing reactive capabilities.essenty-lifecycleReaktive, for improved resource handling.Improvements
disposableScope()method.Bug Fixes