fix(server): number field was returned as integer

[yk-eukarya]

Summary by CodeRabbit

• New Features

  • Enhanced numeric value handling to support decimal precision, allowing for more accurate representations of numbers.
  • Introduced new mappings for numeric types in schema field conversions.

• Bug Fixes

  • Corrected type handling in value-to-schema and schema-to-value conversions to ensure consistency with numeric types.

[coderabbitai]

Walkthrough

The changes in this pull request focus on updating the handling of numeric types within the gqlmodel package. Specifically, the ToSchemaFieldTypeProperty function has been modified to return a SchemaFieldNumber instead of SchemaFieldInteger, and the conversion of minimum and maximum values has shifted from integers to floats. Additionally, the ToValueType and FromValueType functions have been updated to reflect these changes, incorporating SchemaFieldTypeNumber into their logic. These adjustments enhance the representation and handling of numeric values within the schema.

Changes

File Path	Change Summary
server/internal/adapter/gql/gqlmodel/convert_schema.go	- Updated ToSchemaFieldTypeProperty to return SchemaFieldNumber instead of SchemaFieldInteger. - Converted minimum and maximum values from integers to floats.
server/internal/adapter/gql/gqlmodel/convert_value.go	- Changed return value for ToValueType from SchemaFieldTypeInteger to SchemaFieldTypeNumber for value.TypeNumber. - Added case for SchemaFieldTypeNumber in FromValueType to return value.TypeNumber.

Poem

In the meadow where numbers play,
A rabbit hops, brightening the day.
With floats now dancing, integers take flight,
Schema fields gleam, oh what a sight!
From type to type, a joyful leap,
In the world of values, our changes run deep! 🐇✨

---

📜 Recent review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL

📥 Commits

Files that changed from the base of the PR and between b85ef41 and b008239.

📒 Files selected for processing (2)

• server/internal/adapter/gql/gqlmodel/convert_schema.go (1 hunks)
• server/internal/adapter/gql/gqlmodel/convert_value.go (2 hunks)

🔇 Additional comments (4)

server/internal/adapter/gql/gqlmodel/convert_value.go (2)

72-73: LGTM! Symmetric type conversion implemented.

The addition of the SchemaFieldTypeNumber case completes the bidirectional mapping between value types and schema field types, ensuring consistent number field handling.

---

28-28: LGTM! Verify the impact on existing number fields.

The change correctly maps value.TypeNumber to SchemaFieldTypeNumber, fixing the type conversion issue.

Let's verify the usage of number fields in the codebase:

✅ Verification successful

Based on the shell script results, I can now verify the changes comprehensively. Let me generate the final response:

✅ The number type conversion is correctly implemented and consistent

The codebase analysis confirms that:

• The conversion between value.TypeNumber and SchemaFieldTypeNumber is symmetric in both ToValueType and FromValueType functions
• The number type is properly handled across the codebase:
  • Schema validation (server/pkg/schema/field_number.go)
  • Value type system (server/pkg/value/number.go)
  • GraphQL model conversions (server/internal/adapter/gql/gqlmodel/convert_value.go)
• The change doesn't affect the existing integer type handling, which maintains its separate path through TypeInteger and SchemaFieldTypeInteger

🏁 Scripts executed

The following scripts were executed for the analysis:

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check for any direct usage of TypeNumber in the codebase
# to ensure all conversions are handled correctly

# Search for TypeNumber usage
echo "Checking TypeNumber usage:"
rg "TypeNumber" -A 3

# Search for SchemaFieldTypeNumber usage
echo "Checking SchemaFieldTypeNumber usage:"
rg "SchemaFieldTypeNumber" -A 3

Length of output: 19241

server/internal/adapter/gql/gqlmodel/convert_schema.go (2)

271-274: Consider potential precision loss during number conversion

The changes correctly fix the number field being returned as integer by using SchemaFieldNumber and float64. However, be cautious about potential precision loss when converting from the original number type to float64.

Let's verify the number type handling in the schema package:

---

271-274: Verify consistent number type handling

The changes look good, but ensure that ToValueType and FromValueType functions (mentioned in the AI summary) are also updated to handle number fields consistently.

Let's verify the number type handling in related functions:

✅ Verification successful

Let me gather more specific information about number type handling in these functions.

This will help us verify if number types are properly handled in the conversion functions.

---

Based on the results, I can now generate the final response as we have sufficient information about the number type handling in both conversion functions.

Number type handling is properly implemented in conversion functions

The verification shows that both ToValueType and FromValueType functions in convert_value.go already handle number types correctly:

• ToValueType converts value.TypeNumber to SchemaFieldTypeNumber
• FromValueType converts SchemaFieldTypeNumber back to value.TypeNumber

This implementation is consistent with the number field type conversion changes in the reviewed code.

🏁 Scripts executed

The following scripts were executed for the analysis:

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check number type handling in ToValueType and FromValueType

# Check ToValueType implementation
rg -A 5 "func ToValueType"

# Check FromValueType implementation
rg -A 5 "func FromValueType"

Length of output: 1740

---

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Search for number-related type handling in both files
rg -A 2 "TypeNumber|SchemaFieldTypeNumber" server/internal/adapter/gql/gqlmodel/convert_value.go server/pkg/integrationapi/value.go

# Get full context of ToValueType and FromValueType functions
rg -B 2 -A 10 "func (From|To)ValueType" server/internal/adapter/gql/gqlmodel/convert_value.go

Length of output: 1592

---

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
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

🪧 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 <commit_id>, 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 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 for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
• Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
• Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

[netlify]

✅ Deploy Preview for reearth-cms canceled.

Name	Link
🔨 Latest commit	b008239
🔍 Latest deploy log	https://app.netlify.com/sites/reearth-cms/deploys/671a00e2d97195000863829f