Enhance MarkdownGroupCheckboxValidator functionality

[guibranco]

User description

Closes #

📑 Description

✅ Checks

• [X] My pull request adheres to the code style of this project
• [X] My code requires changes to the documentation
• [X] I have updated the documentation as required
• [X] All the tests have passed

☢️ Does this introduce a breaking change?

• [ ] Yes
• [X] No

ℹ Additional Information

---

Description

• Enhanced the regex pattern used for validating checkbox groups in MarkdownGroupCheckboxValidator.
• Improved the formatting of the validation report for better readability.

---

Changes walkthrough 📝

	Relevant files
Enhancement	MarkdownGroupCheckboxValidator.php Enhance MarkdownGroupCheckboxValidator functionality          src/Library/MarkdownGroupCheckboxValidator.php Updated regex pattern for group validation. Improved report formatting for consistency. +2/-2

---

💡 Penify usage: Comment /help on the PR to get a list of all available Penify tools and their descriptions

Summary by CodeRabbit

• New Features

  • Enhanced flexibility in validating Markdown group checkboxes with improved regex patterns.

• Bug Fixes

  • Standardized the header format of the checkbox validation report for consistency.

[coderabbitai[bot]]

[!CAUTION]

Review failed

The pull request is closed.

Walkthrough

The changes made in the MarkdownGroupCheckboxValidator class focus on updating the validateCheckboxes and generateReport methods. The regex pattern in validateCheckboxes has been revised to better capture group titles in Markdown, allowing for optional HTML comments. Additionally, the report header text in generateReport has been modified for consistency in capitalization. These adjustments aim to enhance the functionality and formatting of the class.

Changes

File	Change Summary
Src/Library/MarkdownGroupCheckboxValidator.php	Updated regex pattern in validateCheckboxes to better match Markdown group titles; modified report header text in generateReport.

Possibly related PRs

• #597: Introduces the MarkdownGroupCheckboxValidator class, including the validateCheckboxes and generateReport methods, directly related to the changes made in the main PR.
• #604: Enhances the MarkdownGroupCheckboxValidator class by adding a feature to track found checkbox groups, directly extending the functionality being modified in the main PR.
• #606: Modifies the logic in the checkPullRequestDescription function, which relates to the validation logic that may interact with the MarkdownGroupCheckboxValidator functionality in the context of pull request descriptions.

Suggested labels

size/S, ♻️ code quality

Suggested reviewers

• gstraccini

🐇 In the land of Markdown, where checkboxes play,
A validator hops, making sure they stay.
With patterns refined, and reports in line,
Consistency reigns, oh how they shine!
So let’s celebrate this change, oh so bright,
For a clearer report, and checkboxes just right! 🌟

---

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](https://coderabbit.ai): - Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example: - `I pushed a fix in commit , please review it.` - `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 gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.` - `@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 using 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. ### Other keywords and placeholders - Add `@coderabbitai ignore` anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed. - Add `@coderabbitai summary` to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description. - Add `@coderabbitai` anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically. ### 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](https://docs.coderabbit.ai/guides/configure-coderabbit) 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](https://coderabbit.ai/docs) for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit. - Join our [Discord Community](http://discord.gg/coderabbit) to get help, request features, and share feedback. - Follow us on [X/Twitter](https://twitter.com/coderabbitai) for updates and announcements.

[penify-dev[bot]]

PR Review 🔍

⏱️ Estimated effort to review [1-5]	2, because the changes are focused on regex patterns and report formatting, which are relatively straightforward to understand and review.
🧪 Relevant tests	No
⚡ Possible issues	Regex Complexity: The new regex pattern may be more complex and could potentially lead to unexpected matches. It would be beneficial to add unit tests to cover various scenarios.
🔒 Security concerns	No

[deepsource-io[bot]]

Here's the code health analysis summary for commits d4ec045..84c7c57. View details on DeepSource ↗.

Analysis Summary

Analyzer	Status	Summary	Link
Docker	✅ Success		View Check ↗
PHP	✅ Success		View Check ↗
Secrets	✅ Success		View Check ↗
SQL	✅ Success		View Check ↗

---

💡 If you’re a repository administrator, you can configure the quality gates from the settings.

[sonarcloud[bot]]

Quality Gate passed

Issues
0 New issues
0 Accepted issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
0.0% Coverage on New Code
0.0% Duplication on New Code

See analysis details on SonarCloud

[penify-dev[bot]]

PR Code Suggestions ✨

Category	Suggestion	Score
Maintainability	Use trim() to clean up group names in the report output ___ **Consider using trim() on the group name to avoid issues with leading or trailing whitespace in the report.** [Src/Library/MarkdownGroupCheckboxValidator.php [65]](https://github.com/guibranco/gstraccini-bot/pull/607/files#diff-22d3d445d743a7c6edd967c388fd0108aa18486e81f8f1ae05821def60251f9cR65-R65) ```diff -$report .= "\n{$group['group']}\n"; +$report .= "\n" . trim($group['group']) . "\n"; ``` Suggestion importance[1-10]: 9 Why: Using `trim()` on the group name is a strong suggestion that enhances the output's cleanliness and prevents potential formatting issues.	9
Best practice	Standardize the casing of the report message for consistency ___ **The report message should maintain consistent casing for better readability and professionalism.** [Src/Library/MarkdownGroupCheckboxValidator.php [63]](https://github.com/guibranco/gstraccini-bot/pull/607/files#diff-22d3d445d743a7c6edd967c388fd0108aa18486e81f8f1ae05821def60251f9cR63-R63) ```diff -$report = "Checkbox validation report:\n"; +$report = "Checkbox Validation Report:\n"; ``` Suggestion importance[1-10]: 8 Why: Standardizing the casing of the report message improves readability and professionalism, making it a valuable suggestion.	8
Possible issue	Improve the regex pattern to ensure it accurately captures valid Markdown group headers and checkboxes ___ **The regex pattern for $groupPattern could be improved to ensure it captures only valid Markdown group headers and checkboxes, preventing potential false positives.** [Src/Library/MarkdownGroupCheckboxValidator.php [9]](https://github.com/guibranco/gstraccini-bot/pull/607/files#diff-22d3d445d743a7c6edd967c388fd0108aa18486e81f8f1ae05821def60251f9cR9-R9) ```diff -$groupPattern = '/##\s(.+)\n(?:\n)?((?:- \[(.)\] .+\n)+)/mi'; +$groupPattern = '/^##\s(.+?)\s*$(?:\n(?:\n)?((?:- \[(x| )\] .+\n)+))/mi'; ``` Suggestion importance[1-10]: 7 Why: The suggestion proposes a regex improvement that could enhance validation accuracy, but the proposed pattern may still allow some invalid cases.	7
Enhancement	Implement thorough testing for regex patterns to validate their correctness and robustness ___ **Ensure that the regex patterns are tested with a variety of inputs to confirm they behave as expected and handle edge cases.** [Src/Library/MarkdownGroupCheckboxValidator.php [9-10]](https://github.com/guibranco/gstraccini-bot/pull/607/files#diff-22d3d445d743a7c6edd967c388fd0108aa18486e81f8f1ae05821def60251f9cR9-R10) ```diff -$groupPattern = '/##\s(.+)\n(?:\n)?((?:- \[(.)\] .+\n)+)/mi'; +// Ensure comprehensive testing of the regex patterns with various Markdown inputs. ``` Suggestion importance[1-10]: 6 Why: While testing regex patterns is important, this suggestion is more of a general best practice rather than a specific improvement to the code itself.	6

[github-actions[bot]]

Infisical secrets check: ✅ No secrets leaked!

💻 Scan logs

```txt 9:50PM INF scanning for exposed secrets... 9:50PM INF 529 commits scanned. 9:50PM INF scan completed in 137ms 9:50PM INF no leaks found ```

[guibranco]

@gstraccini codacy bypass

[gstraccini[bot]]

Bypassing the Codacy analysis for this pull request! :warning: