fix: API handler warning #248
Conversation
DanielRivers
requested review from
DaveOrDead and
peterphanouvong
as code owners
WalkthroughThe pull request introduces changes to several handler functions within the Changes
Possibly related PRs
Suggested reviewers
Warning There were issues while running some tools. Please review the errors and either fix the tool’s configuration or disable the tool if it’s a critical failure. 🔧 eslint
src/handlers/auth.jsOops! Something went wrong! :( ESLint: 8.57.1 ESLint couldn't find the plugin "eslint-plugin-jest". (The package "eslint-plugin-jest" was not found when loaded as a Node module from the directory "".) It's likely that the plugin isn't installed correctly. Try reinstalling by running the following: The plugin "eslint-plugin-jest" was referenced from the config file in ".eslintrc.json". If you still can't figure out the problem, please stop by https://eslint.org/chat/help to chat with the team. 📜 Recent review detailsConfiguration used: CodeRabbit UI 📒 Files selected for processing (6)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (4)
🔇 Additional comments (2)src/handlers/createOrg.js (1)
While using Consider these alternative approaches that might be more idiomatic:
Would you like me to provide examples of these alternative implementations? ✅ Verification successfulBased on the search results, I can now generate a final response as we have sufficient context about the redirect patterns in the codebase. The The codebase implements a
The current implementation is the correct approach as it:
🏁 Scripts executedThe following scripts were executed for the analysis: Script: #!/bin/bash
# Description: Search for similar redirect patterns in the codebase and Next.js documentation
# Look for other redirect patterns in the codebase
rg -A 2 "redirect\("
# Look for potential Next.js specific redirect imports
rg "import.*redirect.*next|from ['|\"]next"
Length of output: 4208 src/handlers/register.js (1)
The use of Let's verify if this is the recommended pattern for Next.js API handlers: ✅ Verification successfulPattern is consistently used across all auth handlers The verification shows that the
This consistent implementation across related handlers indicates an established pattern for handling redirects while avoiding the "API handler should not return a value" warning. 🏁 Scripts executedThe following scripts were executed for the analysis: Script: #!/bin/bash
# Description: Search for similar patterns in the codebase and Next.js documentation
# Check if other handlers in the codebase use the same pattern
echo "Checking other handlers for consistency:"
rg "return void.*redirect" --type js
# Look for Next.js API handler patterns in documentation files
echo "Checking documentation for API handler patterns:"
rg -i "api.*handler.*return" --type md
Length of output: 601 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 (2)
src/handlers/auth.js (2)
97-97: Consider optimizing the void operator placementWhile using
voidto explicitly ignore the return value is correct, consider usingawait void route(routerClient)instead ofvoid await route(routerClient)for better clarity. Both achieve the same result, butawait voidis more commonly used as it makes it clearer that we're awaiting the operation while discarding its result.- return void await route(routerClient); + return await void route(routerClient);
Line range hint
97-122: Consider adding documentation about void operator usageThe consistent use of
voidoperator to address the "API handler should not return a value" warning is a valid approach. However, consider adding a comment explaining why this pattern is necessary, as it might not be immediately obvious to other developers.Add a comment like this at the top of the file:
/** * Note: We explicitly use the `void` operator to prevent API handlers from returning values, * which can trigger Next.js warnings. This ensures that responses are handled through the * appropriate Next.js mechanisms (Response object for App Router, res.status().end() for Pages Router). */
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (4)
src/handlers/auth.js(2 hunks)src/handlers/callback.ts(1 hunks)src/handlers/login.js(1 hunks)src/handlers/logout.js(1 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (8)
src/handlers/login.js (1)
26-26: LGTM! The change addresses the API handler warning.
The use of void operator ensures the handler doesn't return a value, which resolves the "API handler should not return a value" warning while maintaining the redirect functionality.
Let's verify if this approach aligns with Next.js best practices:
✅ Verification successful
The void operator usage is consistent with protected API route handlers pattern
The verification shows that:
- The
voidoperator pattern is consistently used across multiple API handlers (login.js,logout.js,auth.js) - The codebase includes a
protectApihigher-order function specifically designed for Next.js API route handlers - The handlers are properly documented with JSDoc comments indicating their role as API route handlers
- The pattern ensures handlers don't return values while maintaining their functionality
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Search for Next.js API handler patterns in the codebase and documentation
# Check if there are similar patterns in other API handlers
rg -A 2 "return void" --type js
# Look for Next.js API handler documentation or comments
rg -i "api.*handler.*return" --type md
Length of output: 534
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's search for more context about API handlers and their patterns
# Look for API handler related imports and configurations
rg -A 2 "import.*handler|export.*handler" --type js
# Search for comments or documentation about API handlers
rg -B 2 -A 2 "@api|API.*handler" --type js --type ts
# Check if there are any Next.js configuration files
fd -e js -e ts -e json "next.config"
# Look for any documentation about API routes
fd README md -x cat {} \; | rg -i "api|route|handler"
Length of output: 1406
src/handlers/callback.ts (5)
40-40: LGTM: Proper use of void operator in error handling
The addition of void operator here correctly prevents the API handler from returning a value while maintaining the error response functionality.
44-44: LGTM: Correct handling of absolute URL redirects
The void operator is appropriately used here to prevent value return while maintaining redirect functionality for absolute URLs.
46-48: LGTM: Proper handling of relative URL redirects
The void operator is correctly applied to the relative URL redirect, maintaining consistent behavior with the rest of the changes.
51-51: LGTM: Proper default redirect handling
The void operator is appropriately used for the default redirect case.
40-51: Verify the impact on error handling and redirects
While the changes look correct, let's verify that error handling and redirects still work as expected.
✅ Verification successful
Error handling and redirects implementation is consistent across handlers
The verification shows that the error handling and redirects in the callback handler are consistent with patterns used across the codebase:
- Error responses consistently use
routerClient.json({error: ...})with appropriate status codes - Redirect handling is uniform across auth-related handlers (login, logout, register, createOrg) using
routerClient.redirect() - The conditional redirect logic in callback.ts follows the same pattern as other handlers, properly handling both absolute URLs and relative paths by prepending the site URL when needed
The changes maintain the established error handling and redirect patterns used throughout the codebase.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check for similar patterns in other Next.js API handlers
# and verify consistent error handling approaches
# Look for other API handlers with similar patterns
echo "Checking for similar API handler patterns..."
rg -t typescript "return.*routerClient\.(json|redirect)" --no-filename
# Look for error handling patterns in API routes
echo "Checking error handling patterns in API routes..."
rg -t typescript "catch.*error.*return.*routerClient\." --no-filename
Length of output: 422
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's try without typescript file type specification
echo "Checking for similar API handler patterns..."
rg "return.*routerClient\.(json|redirect)" -A 2
echo "Checking error handling patterns..."
rg "catch.*error.*return.*routerClient\." -A 2
# Also check for general error handling patterns
echo "Checking general error handling patterns..."
rg "routerClient\.json\(\{error:" -A 2
Length of output: 2198
src/handlers/auth.js (2)
121-122: LGTM! Changes align with Next.js Pages Router patterns
The use of void here is appropriate as we want to explicitly ignore the return values while maintaining proper response handling through the res object.
99-99: Verify if Response object should be returned directly
In Next.js App Router, Response objects are typically returned directly to allow proper handling by the framework. Using void here might prevent the 404 response from being properly handled.
Let's verify the Next.js documentation and similar patterns in the codebase:
DanielRivers
force-pushed
the
fix/api-handler-warning
branch
from
b9aea2e to
2031ea3
Compare
Explain your changes
When using server routes which redirect warning
API handler should not return a valuewas presented to the console. This resolves this warningChecklist
🛟 If you need help, consider asking for advice over in the Kinde community.