Fix: Issue #16 (description: Restrict creating mines more than total cells)

[b0r1ngx]

Solution of a problem raised at Issue https://github.com/arkivanov/Minesweeper/issues/16

Closes #16.

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Bug Fixes
  • Ensured the maximum number of mines in Minesweeper does not exceed the total number of cells.
  • Improved validation for width, height, and maximum mines to fall within specific ranges.
  • Introduced coerceIn to ensure proper range for width, height, and max mines.

[b0r1ngx]

How do you like this solution of Issue #16 ?

Also I'm not so much work with flow like that and I don't know or I just can't to assign myself to issue, to show that issue have this pull request as problem solution, I think I just need to read about it somewhere ;)

[arkivanov]

@coderabbitai review

[coderabbitai[bot]]

Walkthrough

The recent enhancement in the codebase focuses on refining the logic within the DefaultEditSettingsComponent to ensure the width, height, and maxMines parameters are constrained within specific ranges using coerceIn. This validation step is vital for maintaining game settings within acceptable boundaries, ensuring a balanced and playable gaming experience.

Changes

Files	Change Summary
.../commonMain/kotlin/.../DefaultEditSettingsComponent.kt	Introduces coerceIn to validate width, height, and maxMines ranges for GameSettings.

A whimsical ode to a code so bright,
Where mines and spaces meet in a fight.
"Let not your numbers, too high, leap,
For in this grid, the balance we keep."
🐰🎉
So hop and code, with logic so fine,
Ensuring fun in every line.

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](https://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=I%20just%20used%20%40coderabbitai%20for%20my%20code%20review%2C%20and%20it%27s%20fantastic%21%20It%27s%20free%20for%20OSS%20and%20offers%20a%20free%20trial%20for%20the%20proprietary%20code.%20Check%20it%20out%3A&url=https%3A//coderabbit.ai) - [Mastodon](https://mastodon.social/share?text=I%20just%20used%20%40coderabbitai%20for%20my%20code%20review%2C%20and%20it%27s%20fantastic%21%20It%27s%20free%20for%20OSS%20and%20offers%20a%20free%20trial%20for%20the%20proprietary%20code.%20Check%20it%20out%3A%20https%3A%2F%2Fcoderabbit.ai) - [Reddit](https://www.reddit.com/submit?title=Great%20tool%20for%20code%20review%20-%20CodeRabbit&text=I%20just%20used%20CodeRabbit%20for%20my%20code%20review%2C%20and%20it%27s%20fantastic%21%20It%27s%20free%20for%20OSS%20and%20offers%20a%20free%20trial%20for%20proprietary%20code.%20Check%20it%20out%3A%20https%3A//coderabbit.ai) - [LinkedIn](https://www.linkedin.com/sharing/share-offsite/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcoderabbit.ai&mini=true&title=Great%20tool%20for%20code%20review%20-%20CodeRabbit&summary=I%20just%20used%20CodeRabbit%20for%20my%20code%20review%2C%20and%20it%27s%20fantastic%21%20It%27s%20free%20for%20OSS%20and%20offers%20a%20free%20trial%20for%20proprietary%20code)

---

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 .` - `Generate unit-tests 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 tests 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 tests.` - `@coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.` 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 a review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository. - `@coderabbitai resolve` resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments. - `@coderabbitai help` to get help. Additionally, you can add `@coderabbitai ignore` anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed. ### CodeRabbit Configration File (`.coderabbit.yaml`) - You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a `.coderabbit.yaml` file to the root of your repository. - The JSON schema for the configuration file is available [here](https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/coderabbit-overrides.v2.json). - 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/coderabbit-overrides.v2.json` ### CodeRabbit Discord Community Join our [Discord Community](https://discord.com/invite/GsXnASn26c) to get help, request features, and share feedback.

[b0r1ngx]

Waow, new instruments, awesome I'm checked out today, not get any notifies by email:\

[b0r1ngx]

You have a nice conversation here with some of LLM 😅

However, does it make sense to have maxMines equal to width * height? Such a game is 100% fail from the first click. I suggest to validate as follows.

About this idea: yea, I'm also tried use width * height - 1, later user's can compete for who is fastest make first click on the field, it's really sounds funny, for someone

P.S. game not fails but became to win state, maybe if we save: width * height, user's can compete by who have faster chip, system that is run this project.

[b0r1ngx]

It would be nice to also validate width and height to be minimum 2. And a maximum like 100? We can also use coerceAtLeast , coerceAtMost and coerceIn - a Kotlin idiomatic way.

Yes, we can do that, lets me make a commit for this change.

I have a question about this change, should we somehow show information about limitations to user that they are allowed to play only at 10 < width/height <= 100 setting?

For example if they entered 5, we highlight textfiled with red and show hint with allowed settings?

[arkivanov]

I have a question about this change, should we somehow show information about limitations to user that they are allowed to play only at 10 < width/height <= 100 setting?

For example if they entered 5, we highlight textfiled with red and show hint with allowed settings?

Let's keep it simple for now. From my point of view it makes sense to just coerce width between 2 and 100 and height between 2 and 50. What do you think?

[b0r1ngx]

Also entering negative number leads to:

I'm fix it in this PR.

[b0r1ngx]

What do you think?

Yes, lets do this!

[arkivanov]

Also entering negative number leads to:

I'm fix it in this PR.

Yep, that's why I suggest to

maxMines.coerceIn(1, width * height - 1)

[b0r1ngx]

maxMines.coerceIn(1, width * height - 1)

We must use something like I did in my last commit, because if we just coerce width / height values and not saving it for later usage for maxMines (like in replied message), we can get error, because width/height isn't fixed (coerced).

[b0r1ngx]

@coderabbitai I pushed a fix in commit d762256

[coderabbitai[bot]]

[!TIP] For best results, initiate chat on the files or code changes.

@b0r1ngx, I've reviewed the changes made in commit d762256 to the DefaultEditSettingsComponent.kt file. The implementation effectively addresses the issues discussed:

1. Limiting Mines: The maxMines value is coerced to be within the range of 1 to one less than the product of width and height, ensuring that the game cannot be set up with more mines than there are cells available, minus one. This aligns with the suggestion to prevent a game setup where the first click would result in a loss.

2. Handling Negative Numbers for Width and Height: Both width and height are coerced to be within reasonable limits (2 to 100 for width and 2 to 50 for height), which implicitly handles negative inputs by setting them to the minimum allowed value.

This solution appears to be a robust way to ensure game settings are within logical and playable limits, enhancing the overall user experience. Great job on implementing these changes!

Analysis chain

---

Scripts executed

The following scripts were executed for the analysis: --- Script: ```shell #!/bin/bash # Fetch the list of files modified in commit d762256 git show --name-only d762256 ``` Length of output: 293 --- --- Script: ```shell #!/bin/bash # Fetch the contents of the modified file in commit d762256 git show d762256:composeApp/src/commonMain/kotlin/com/arkivanov/minesweeper/settings/DefaultEditSettingsComponent.kt ``` Length of output: 1824

[b0r1ngx]

Tip

For best results, initiate chat on the files or code changes.

@b0r1ngx, I've reviewed the changes made in commit d762256 to the DefaultEditSettingsComponent.kt file. The implementation effectively addresses the issues discussed:

1. Limiting Mines: The maxMines value is coerced to be within the range of 1 to one less than the product of width and height, ensuring that the game cannot be set up with more mines than there are cells available, minus one. This aligns with the suggestion to prevent a game setup where the first click would result in a loss.
2. Handling Negative Numbers for Width and Height: Both width and height are coerced to be within reasonable limits (2 to 100 for width and 2 to 50 for height), which implicitly handles negative inputs by setting them to the minimum allowed value.

This solution appears to be a robust way to ensure game settings are within logical and playable limits, enhancing the overall user experience. Great job on implementing these changes!

Analysis chain Scripts executed

@coderabbitai can you give any advice how to increase code maintainability in this commit?

[coderabbitai[bot]]

[!TIP] For best results, initiate chat on the files or code changes.

@b0r1ngx, to enhance code maintainability for the changes made in commit d762256 to the DefaultEditSettingsComponent.kt file, consider the following advice:

1. Use Named Arguments for Clarity: When calling functions with multiple parameters, especially with literal values, using named arguments can greatly improve readability. For example, coerceIn(min = 1, max = width * height - 1) makes it immediately clear what the 1 and width * height - 1 values represent.

2. Extract Complex Logic into Separate Functions: If there's any complex logic within your changes, consider extracting it into separate, well-named functions. This not only makes the main function easier to read and understand but also allows for easier unit testing of the extracted logic.

3. Add Comments or Documentation: For any non-trivial logic or decisions made in your code, adding comments or documentation can help future maintainers understand the rationale behind your choices. This is especially useful for any "magic numbers" or specific constraints you've applied, explaining why they are necessary.

4. Consider Using Extension Functions: If you find yourself repeating certain operations on objects of the same type, consider creating extension functions. This can make your code more concise and expressive, and Kotlin's extension functions are a powerful feature for writing clean, maintainable code.

5. Review Kotlin Coding Conventions: Ensure your code adheres to the Kotlin coding conventions. Consistency in coding style contributes significantly to code maintainability, making it easier for you and others to read and understand the code.

Implementing these practices can help make your code more maintainable, readable, and easier to work with in the long run.

[b0r1ngx]

@coderabbitai I pushed a fix in commit 069a93b

What is the purpose of this commit? What code metrics is increasing?

Give answer for each question.

[coderabbitai[bot]]

[!TIP] For best results, initiate chat on the files or code changes.

@b0r1ngx, the purpose of commit 069a93b titled "Refactoring (Magic Numbers)" is to improve code readability and maintainability by replacing magic numbers with named constants (MIN_SIZE, MAX_WIDTH, MAX_HEIGHT). This change makes the code easier to understand and modify, as it clearly defines what these numbers represent and centralizes their values for easy adjustments.

The code metrics that are increasing due to this commit include:

1. Readability: The use of named constants instead of magic numbers makes the code more readable by providing context for these values.
2. Maintainability: The introduction of constants allows for easier updates to these values in the future, as changes only need to be made in one place.
3. Scalability: By abstracting these values into constants, the code becomes more adaptable to changes in requirements or game settings.

This refactoring step is a good practice in software development, enhancing the overall quality of the codebase.

Analysis chain

Scripts executed

The following scripts were executed for the analysis: --- Script: ```shell #!/bin/bash # Fetch the contents of the changes made in commit 069a93b git show 069a93b ``` Length of output: 1675

[b0r1ngx]

For example, coerceIn(min = 1, max = width height - 1) makes it immediately clear what the 1 and width height - 1 values represent.

@arkivanov What do you think about this LLM advice? Should it be done or it's not improve code maintainability? Maybe it entails some disadvantages?

We can impove it with something like: private const val MIN_MINES = 1

[arkivanov]

What do you think about this LLM advice? Should it be done or it's not improve code maintainability? Maybe it entails some disadvantages?

I think the current code is good enough, no need to use named arguments in that particular case. Personally, I wouldn't extract constants either - 2..100 looks more readable to me. But it's just my personal opinion.

[b0r1ngx]

Thanks for feedback! I agree with you!

[arkivanov]

Thank you!