fix(components): contract address controller input validation #1191
Conversation
|
The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎
6 Skipped Deployments
|
|
Warning Rate limit exceeded@Poafs1 has exceeded the limit for the number of commits or files that can be reviewed per hour. Please wait 18 minutes and 31 seconds before requesting another review. ⌛ How to resolve this issue?After the wait time has elapsed, a review can be triggered using the We recommend that you space out your commits to avoid hitting the rate limit. 🚦 How do rate limits work?CodeRabbit enforces hourly rate limits for each developer per organization. Our paid plans have higher rate limits than the trial, open-source and free plans. In all cases, we re-allow further reviews after a brief timeout. Please see our FAQ for further information. 📒 Files selected for processing (2)
WalkthroughThis pull request focuses on improving the contract address form validation in the EVM contract verification process. The changes involve enhancing form validation logic, error handling, and styling for the contract address input. The modifications span multiple files, including the changelog, validation types, form component, and footer styling, with the primary goal of providing more robust and user-friendly validation for contract addresses. Changes
Suggested reviewers
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: 0
🧹 Nitpick comments (1)
src/lib/pages/evm-contract-verify/types.ts (1)
71-83: Consider improving the empty string error message.The validation logic is well-implemented with proper checks for both empty strings and invalid hex addresses. However, the empty string error message is currently just a space (" "), which could be more descriptive.
Consider updating the empty string error message to be more descriptive:
- message: " ", + message: "Contract address is required",
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (4)
CHANGELOG.md(1 hunks)src/lib/pages/evm-contract-verify/components/EvmContractVerifyFooter.tsx(1 hunks)src/lib/pages/evm-contract-verify/index.tsx(2 hunks)src/lib/pages/evm-contract-verify/types.ts(2 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (4)
src/lib/pages/evm-contract-verify/components/EvmContractVerifyFooter.tsx (1)
41-43: LGTM! Minor styling adjustments.The padding and gap changes improve the footer layout consistency.
src/lib/pages/evm-contract-verify/index.tsx (2)
40-55: LGTM! Well-implemented form validation.The form configuration with immediate validation feedback (
mode: "all") and proper error handling improves the user experience.
160-160: LGTM! Error display integration.Properly integrates error display with the ControllerInput component.
CHANGELOG.md (1)
54-54: LGTM! Clear and well-placed changelog entry.The entry follows the changelog format and provides appropriate information about the fix.
Summary by CodeRabbit
Release Notes
Bug Fixes
UI/UX Improvements