GFE Promise.all Problem #77
Conversation
|
@codex review |
1 similar comment
|
@codex review |
|
Note Other AI code review bot(s) detectedCodeRabbit has detected other AI code review bot(s) in this pull request and will avoid duplicating their findings in the review comments. This may lead to a less comprehensive review. WalkthroughAdds a new TypeScript implementation and documentation for a promiseAll utility (Promise.all-like) under GreatFrontEnd GFE‑75, updates progress counters in multiple READMEs (3/75 → 4/75), removes a progress-by-category table and a “Last updated” line, and replaces a GitHub Actions Gemini review step with a multi-model retry-and-fallback workflow. Changes
Estimated code review effort🎯 3 (Moderate) | ⏱️ ~20–30 minutes
Possibly related PRs
Poem
Pre-merge checks and finishing touches❌ Failed checks (1 warning)
✅ Passed checks (2 passed)
✨ Finishing touches
🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out. Comment |
|
Claude finished @pertrai1's task in 1m 43s —— View job Code Review: Promise.all ImplementationGreat work tackling this async programming challenge! This is a fundamental pattern that's important to understand deeply. I've identified some critical bugs and provided educational feedback below. 🚨 Critical Issues1. Race Condition with
|
|
To use Codex here, create a Codex account and connect to github. |
1 similar comment
|
To use Codex here, create a Codex account and connect to github. |
🧮 Solution AnalysisPR: GFE Promise.all Problem 📊 Code Quality ResultsESLint Analysis
🔍 Complexity Analysispromise-all📋 Analysis Results: 🔍 Automated Complexity Analysis
File: greatfrontend/gfe-75/async-programming/promise-all/promise-all.ts Time ComplexityEstimated: O(1)
Space ComplexityEstimated: O(1) Data Structures Used
Code Metrics
Recommendations
💡 Analysis Tips
📁 Analysis Files CreatedDetailed analysis files have been automatically generated and committed to 🎯 Next Steps
Analysis generated for PR files only |
Debug Response{
"error": {
"code": 503,
"message": "The model is overloaded. Please try again later.",
"status": "UNAVAILABLE"
}
}
|
✅ Test ResultsTests have been executed for this pull request. 📊 Coverage Summary
Check the workflow logs for detailed test output. |
Debug Response{
"error": {
"code": 503,
"message": "The model is overloaded. Please try again later.",
"status": "UNAVAILABLE"
}
}
|
![github-actions[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/15368?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
| return; | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| iterable.forEach(async (value, index) => { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Critical Bug: Race Condition with forEach and async callback
Using forEach with an async callback creates a race condition. The async callbacks execute independently and don't block forEach, which means:
- All callbacks start executing immediately
- The
pending--on line 27 can be executed by multiple callbacks at the same time before any awaits complete - This can cause
pendingto reach 0 before all promises actually resolve
Example of the bug:
const p1 = Promise.resolve(1);
const p2 = Promise.resolve(2);
await promiseAll([p1, p2]);
// May resolve with [undefined, undefined] or partially filled arrayThe fix: Use a regular for loop or for...of loop, OR use Promise.resolve(value).then() instead of await:
iterable.forEach((value, index) => {
Promise.resolve(value)
.then((val) => {
result[index] = val;
pending--;
if (pending === 0) {
resolve(result as ReturnValue<T>);
}
})
.catch(reject);
});This ensures proper promise chaining without race conditions.
| reject(err); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| pending--; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Race Condition: pending-- is not atomic
This decrement happens outside the try-catch block and runs synchronously after the await completes. However, with the current forEach + async pattern:
- If promise rejection happens, the
catchblock runs and callsreject(err) - But
pending--still executes afterward - This can cause the promise to resolve after it was already rejected
Additionally: Once a promise rejects, all subsequent promise resolutions should be ignored, but this code will continue to decrement pending and potentially call resolve() even after rejection occurred.
Fix: Move pending-- inside the try block, and add a flag to track if rejection occurred.
| resolve(result as ReturnValue<T>); | ||
| } | ||
| }); | ||
| return result; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Issue: Incorrect return statement
This return result; is inside the Promise constructor executor function, which means:
- It returns from the executor, not from
promiseAll - The return value is ignored by the Promise constructor
- This doesn't affect functionality but is confusing and unnecessary
Fix: Remove this line. The Promise constructor doesn't use the executor's return value.
| iterable: T | ||
| ): Promise<ReturnValue<T>> { | ||
| return new Promise((resolve, reject) => { | ||
| if (!Array.isArray(iterable)) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Minor: Array.isArray check may be too restrictive
The native Promise.all() accepts any iterable (arrays, sets, generators, etc.), not just arrays. This implementation only accepts arrays due to the Array.isArray() check.
While this is fine for a simplified implementation, consider:
- The error message says "not an iterator" but should say "not an array" (since that's what's being checked)
- Or accept any iterable by checking for
Symbol.iteratorinstead
For learning purposes, the current approach is acceptable, but worth noting the difference from the native implementation.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Pull request overview
This PR adds a TypeScript implementation of Promise.all to the GreatFrontEnd GFE 75 collection and updates progress trackers accordingly.
- Implements a custom
promiseAllfunction with TypeScript type safety - Updates progress counts from 3/75 to 4/75 across all tracking files
- Adds documentation and examples for the Promise.all problem
Reviewed changes
Copilot reviewed 5 out of 5 changed files in this pull request and generated 7 comments.
Show a summary per file
| File | Description |
|---|---|
greatfrontend/gfe-75/async-programming/promise-all/promise-all.ts |
New TypeScript implementation of Promise.all with type definitions |
greatfrontend/gfe-75/async-programming/promise-all/README.md |
Documentation with problem description and usage examples |
greatfrontend/gfe-75/README.md |
Updates async programming progress from 0/12 to 1/12 |
greatfrontend/README.md |
Updates GFE 75 total progress from 3/75 to 4/75 |
README.md |
Updates GreatFrontEnd problem count from 6 to 7 |
Critical Issues Found: The implementation has several critical bugs related to async/await patterns with forEach, race conditions in promise rejection handling, and incorrect pending counter management. These issues will cause the function to behave incorrectly and should be addressed before merging.
| ): Promise<ReturnValue<T>> { | ||
| return new Promise((resolve, reject) => { | ||
| if (!Array.isArray(iterable)) { | ||
| return reject(new TypeError('The iterable is not an iterator')); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The error message 'The iterable is not an iterator' is misleading. It should say 'iterable is not an array' or 'argument must be an array' since the check is specifically for Array.isArray. Also note that iterators and iterables are different concepts in JavaScript.
| return reject(new TypeError('The iterable is not an iterator')); | |
| return reject(new TypeError('Argument must be an array')); |
greatfrontend/gfe-75/README.md
Outdated
| No problems completed yet | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The heading shows 'Async Programming (1/12)' indicating one completed problem, but the text below still says 'No problems completed yet', which contradicts the listed Promise.all problem. Remove or update this 'No problems completed yet' line.
| No problems completed yet |
|
|
||
| if (pending === 0) { | ||
| resolve(result as ReturnValue<T>); | ||
| return; | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| iterable.forEach(async (value, index) => { | ||
| try { | ||
| const val = await value; | ||
| result[index] = val; | ||
| } catch (err) { | ||
| reject(err); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| pending--; | ||
|
|
||
| if (pending === 0) { | ||
| resolve(result as ReturnValue<T>); | ||
| } | ||
| }); | ||
| return result; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Using forEach with an async callback creates a critical race condition. The async callbacks are not awaited by forEach, so pending-- may execute before the promise resolves, and multiple rejections can occur after the first one (which would throw unhandled errors). Use Promise.resolve().then() or standard promise chaining instead to properly handle each item sequentially or in parallel.
| if (pending === 0) { | |
| resolve(result as ReturnValue<T>); | |
| return; | |
| } | |
| iterable.forEach(async (value, index) => { | |
| try { | |
| const val = await value; | |
| result[index] = val; | |
| } catch (err) { | |
| reject(err); | |
| } | |
| pending--; | |
| if (pending === 0) { | |
| resolve(result as ReturnValue<T>); | |
| } | |
| }); | |
| return result; | |
| let settled = false; | |
| if (pending === 0) { | |
| resolve(result as ReturnValue<T>); | |
| return; | |
| } | |
| iterable.forEach((value, index) => { | |
| Promise.resolve(value) | |
| .then((val) => { | |
| if (settled) { | |
| return; | |
| } | |
| result[index] = val; | |
| pending--; | |
| if (pending === 0) { | |
| settled = true; | |
| resolve(result as ReturnValue<T>); | |
| } | |
| }) | |
| .catch((err) => { | |
| if (settled) { | |
| return; | |
| } | |
| settled = true; | |
| reject(err); | |
| }); | |
| }); |
| resolve(result as ReturnValue<T>); | ||
| } | ||
| }); | ||
| return result; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This return statement is unreachable code that returns a value inside a Promise executor. The Promise executor should not return anything meaningful (only resolve/reject should be used). Remove this line.
| return result; |
| } catch (err) { | ||
| reject(err); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| pending--; | ||
|
|
||
| if (pending === 0) { | ||
| resolve(result as ReturnValue<T>); | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The pending-- decrement is placed inside the async callback after the try-catch block, which means it will execute even if an error occurs (since the catch doesn't return). This should be moved inside the try block after successful resolution to ensure correct counting, or you need to add a guard to prevent further operations after rejection.
| } catch (err) { | |
| reject(err); | |
| } | |
| pending--; | |
| if (pending === 0) { | |
| resolve(result as ReturnValue<T>); | |
| } | |
| pending--; | |
| if (pending === 0) { | |
| resolve(result as ReturnValue<T>); | |
| } | |
| } catch (err) { | |
| reject(err); | |
| } |
| } catch (err) { | ||
| reject(err); | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Multiple promises can reject, and each rejection will call reject(err). After the first rejection, subsequent rejections will throw unhandled errors. Add a flag to track if the promise has already been rejected and guard against calling reject multiple times.
|
|
||
| > `Promise.all()` is a method that takes an iterable of elements (usually `Promises`) as an input, and returns a single `Promise` that resolves to an array of the results of the input promises. - [MDN](https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Global_Objects/Promise/all) | ||
| ## Exampes |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Typo in heading: 'Exampes' should be 'Examples'
| ## Exampes | |
| ## Examples |
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 4
🧹 Nitpick comments (1)
greatfrontend/gfe-75/async-programming/promise-all/promise-all.ts (1)
33-33: Remove unnecessary return statement in Promise executor.Returning a value from a Promise executor has no effect. The Promise is controlled solely by calling
resolve()orreject().🔎 Proposed fix
} }); - return result; }); }
📜 Review details
Configuration used: defaults
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (5)
README.md(2 hunks)greatfrontend/README.md(1 hunks)greatfrontend/gfe-75/README.md(2 hunks)greatfrontend/gfe-75/async-programming/promise-all/README.md(1 hunks)greatfrontend/gfe-75/async-programming/promise-all/promise-all.ts(1 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
📓 Path-based instructions (5)
**/*.ts
📄 CodeRabbit inference engine (AGENTS.md)
**/*.ts: Use explicit type annotations for function parameters and return types in TypeScript solutions
Follow strict TypeScript configuration with ES2020 target and CommonJS modules in TypeScript solutions
Enforce full type safety in TypeScript solutions
Files:
greatfrontend/gfe-75/async-programming/promise-all/promise-all.ts
**/*.{js,ts}
📄 CodeRabbit inference engine (AGENTS.md)
**/*.{js,ts}: Use clear, descriptive variable names across all solutions
Add comments for non-obvious logic or algorithm steps in code
Keep functions focused and single-purpose across all solutions
Prefer readability over cleverness in code implementation
**/*.{js,ts}: Use descriptive variable names; single letters likei,j,kare acceptable for loop iterators and standard mathematical contexts
Add comments for complex logic, but prefer self-documenting code with clear logic
Minimize external dependencies and keep solutions self-contained
**/*.{js,ts}: Use clear, descriptive variable names (not just i, j, k unless in simple loops) and add comments for non-obvious logic or algorithm steps
Keep functions focused and single-purpose, preferring readability over cleverness
Use const by default, let only when reassignment needed; avoid var except for LeetCode solution function definitions
Use modern ES6+ syntax (arrow functions, destructuring, spread operators) where appropriate
Prefer built-in methods (.map(), .filter(), .reduce()) when appropriate and use strict equality (===) over loose equality (==)
Files:
greatfrontend/gfe-75/async-programming/promise-all/promise-all.ts
**/*.{ts,tsx}
📄 CodeRabbit inference engine (.github/copilot-instructions.md)
**/*.{ts,tsx}: Use explicit type annotations for function parameters and return types in TypeScript
Follow strict TypeScript configuration as defined in tsconfig.json with ES2020 target and CommonJS modules
Files:
greatfrontend/gfe-75/async-programming/promise-all/promise-all.ts
**/*.md
📄 CodeRabbit inference engine (AGENTS.md)
**/*.md: Create comprehensive documentation guides for arrays, trees, graphs, heaps, and other data structures
Document reusable code templates for common algorithmic patterns
Maintain Big O complexity cheatsheets and references
Files:
greatfrontend/gfe-75/async-programming/promise-all/README.mdREADME.mdgreatfrontend/gfe-75/README.mdgreatfrontend/README.md
**/README.md
📄 CodeRabbit inference engine (CLAUDE.md)
Each problem directory should include a README.md containing: problem title and difficulty badge, link to the problem on the respective platform, problem description, examples and constraints
Files:
greatfrontend/gfe-75/async-programming/promise-all/README.mdREADME.mdgreatfrontend/gfe-75/README.mdgreatfrontend/README.md
🧠 Learnings (2)
📓 Common learnings
Learnt from: CR
Repo: pertrai1/coding-challenges PR: 0
File: CLAUDE.md:0-0
Timestamp: 2025-12-02T17:56:01.747Z
Learning: Applies to GreatFrontEnd/**/*.{js,ts} : Validate event handling patterns (delegation, cleanup), ensure proper async/await and Promise usage in GreatFrontEnd solutions
📚 Learning: 2025-12-02T17:56:01.747Z
Learnt from: CR
Repo: pertrai1/coding-challenges PR: 0
File: CLAUDE.md:0-0
Timestamp: 2025-12-02T17:56:01.747Z
Learning: Applies to GreatFrontEnd/**/*.{js,ts} : Evaluate the public API for clarity and usability, check for consistent naming conventions, verify parameter validation and error handling in GreatFrontEnd solutions
Applied to files:
README.mdgreatfrontend/gfe-75/README.md
🪛 LanguageTool
greatfrontend/gfe-75/async-programming/promise-all/README.md
[grammar] ~5-~5: Ensure spelling is correct
Context: ...ference/Global_Objects/Promise/all) ## Exampes JavaScript // Resolved example. const p0 = Promise.resolve(3); const p1 = 42; const p2 = new Promise((resolve, reject) => { setTimeout(() => { resolve('foo'); }, 100); }); await promiseAll([p0, p1, p2]); // [3, 42, 'foo'] JavaScript // Rejection example. const p0 = Promise.resolve(30); const p1 = new Promise((resolve, reject) => { setTimeout(() => { reject('An error occurred!'); }, 100); }); try { await promiseAll([p0, p1]); } catch (err) { console.log(err); // 'An error occurred!' }
(QB_NEW_EN_ORTHOGRAPHY_ERROR_IDS_1)
⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms. You can increase the timeout in your CodeRabbit configuration to a maximum of 15 minutes (900000ms). (2)
- GitHub Check: Upload results
- GitHub Check: review
🔇 Additional comments (3)
greatfrontend/README.md (1)
14-14: LGTM! Progress tracking updated correctly.The progress update from 3/75 to 4/75 accurately reflects the addition of the Promise.all solution.
README.md (1)
10-10: LGTM! Progress metrics updated consistently.Both progress counters (total problems and GFE 75 specific) have been incremented correctly to reflect the new Promise.all solution.
Also applies to: 46-46
greatfrontend/gfe-75/README.md (1)
7-7: LGTM! Progress tracking and new entry added correctly.The progress update and addition of Promise.all to the Async Programming section accurately reflects the completed work.
Also applies to: 21-23
| iterable.forEach(async (value, index) => { | ||
| try { | ||
| const val = await value; | ||
| result[index] = val; | ||
| } catch (err) { | ||
| reject(err); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| pending--; | ||
|
|
||
| if (pending === 0) { | ||
| resolve(result as ReturnValue<T>); | ||
| } | ||
| }); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Critical: Race condition with forEach and async callbacks.
Using forEach with async callbacks creates multiple critical issues:
-
forEach doesn't await: The async callbacks are fire-and-forget. The forEach loop completes immediately, not waiting for any promises to settle.
-
No rejection isolation: After calling
reject(err), the code continues executing. Thependingcounter is still decremented, and if all promises eventually settle,resolve()will be called afterreject()was already called. -
Multiple rejections: If multiple promises reject,
reject()will be called multiple times. While subsequent calls are ignored by the Promise, this indicates a logic error. -
Race condition on pending counter: Since all async callbacks run concurrently without synchronization, the
pending--and check on line 29 create a race condition.
Based on retrieved learnings for GreatFrontEnd solutions, proper async/await and Promise usage must be validated.
🔎 Proposed fix using for...of loop
- iterable.forEach(async (value, index) => {
+ let rejected = false;
+
+ for (let index = 0; index < n; index++) {
+ const value = iterable[index];
try {
const val = await value;
+ if (rejected) return; // Don't continue if already rejected
result[index] = val;
} catch (err) {
+ if (!rejected) {
+ rejected = true;
- reject(err);
+ reject(err);
+ }
+ return; // Exit early on rejection
}
pending--;
if (pending === 0) {
resolve(result as ReturnValue<T>);
}
- });
+ }Alternatively, use Promise.all with manual mapping:
- iterable.forEach(async (value, index) => {
- try {
- const val = await value;
- result[index] = val;
- } catch (err) {
- reject(err);
- }
-
- pending--;
-
- if (pending === 0) {
- resolve(result as ReturnValue<T>);
- }
- });
+ const promises = Array.from(iterable).map((value, index) =>
+ Promise.resolve(value).then(
+ (val) => {
+ result[index] = val;
+ pending--;
+ if (pending === 0) {
+ resolve(result as ReturnValue<T>);
+ }
+ },
+ (err) => {
+ reject(err);
+ }
+ )
+ );Committable suggestion skipped: line range outside the PR's diff.
🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
In greatfrontend/gfe-75/async-programming/promise-all/promise-all.ts around
lines 19-32, replace the fire-and-forget forEach with a deterministic approach:
map the iterable to an array of promises (wrap each input with Promise.resolve
to normalize values), then call Promise.all on that array and use its single
success or failure to call resolve(result) or reject(error). This eliminates the
pending counter, race conditions, multiple reject calls, and ensures the caller
awaits all inputs; if you prefer sequential handling instead, iterate with
for...of and await each promise, catching and immediately rejecting on the first
error.
|
@codex review |
|
Claude finished @pertrai1's task in 1m 22s —— View job Code Review: Promise.all ImplementationGreat work tackling this async programming challenge! The implementation shows good understanding of promises and TypeScript generics. I've analyzed the code and identified the key patterns, insights, and areas for improvement. ✅ What Works Well
🎓 Learning SummaryPattern: Promise Coordination & Concurrency ControlThis problem teaches the fundamental pattern of coordinating multiple concurrent async operations. Key Insight: Promise.all requires managing multiple concurrent promises while preserving order and implementing "fail-fast" behavior. The solution uses a counter-based coordination pattern where:
Why This Approach WorksThe
Pattern ApplicationWhen to use this pattern:
📊 Complexity AnalysisTime Complexity: O(n)
Space Complexity: O(n)
🔗 Related Problems for Practice
🐛 Common Mistakes to Avoid
💡 Alternative ApproachesApproach 1: Using Array.map() + Promise.all() (Meta-solution)export function promiseAll<T extends readonly unknown[] | []>(
iterable: T
): Promise<ReturnValue<T>> {
if (!Array.isArray(iterable)) {
return Promise.reject(new TypeError('Argument must be an array'));
}
// Normalize all values to promises, then use native Promise.all
return Promise.all(
Array.from(iterable).map(item => Promise.resolve(item))
) as Promise<ReturnValue<T>>;
}Trade-offs:
Approach 2: Using async/await with for...of loopexport function promiseAll<T extends readonly unknown[] | []>(
iterable: T
): Promise<ReturnValue<T>> {
return new Promise(async (resolve, reject) => {
if (!Array.isArray(iterable)) {
return reject(new TypeError('Argument must be an array'));
}
if (iterable.length === 0) {
return resolve([] as ReturnValue<T>);
}
const result = Array(iterable.length);
try {
// Sequential processing (NOT concurrent like Promise.all!)
for (let i = 0; i < iterable.length; i++) {
result[i] = await iterable[i];
}
resolve(result as ReturnValue<T>);
} catch (err) {
reject(err);
}
});
}Trade-offs:
🎯 Code Quality ObservationsStrengths:
Minor Suggestions:
📝 Educational NotesWhy Promise Coordination MattersThis pattern is fundamental for:
Real-world Applications// Fetching multiple users in parallel
const userIds = [1, 2, 3, 4, 5];
const users = await promiseAll(
userIds.map(id => fetch(`/api/users/${id}`).then(r => r.json()))
);
// Loading multiple images
const imagePaths = ['img1.jpg', 'img2.jpg', 'img3.jpg'];
const images = await promiseAll(
imagePaths.map(path => loadImage(path))
);🎓 Interview TipsWhen discussing Promise.all in interviews:
✨ SummaryYour implementation demonstrates solid understanding of async coordination patterns! The code correctly:
The |
|
To use Codex here, create a Codex account and connect to github. |
|
🤖 Gemini Code Review (Model: This is an excellent problem to understand asynchronous control flow and the Promise API! Let's break down your solution. 1. Pattern IdentificationThis solution implements a Promise Combinator pattern. Specifically, it's a polyfill for 2. Complexity Verification
3. Key InsightThe key insight for implementing
4. Edge Case AnalysisYour solution handles several important edge cases well:
One minor deviation from native
5. Learning Points
6. Code QualityYour code quality is very good:
Minor suggestions:
7. Alternative ApproachesWhile the core mechanism of
Your chosen approach using |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
Caution
Some comments are outside the diff and can’t be posted inline due to platform limitations.
⚠️ Outside diff range comments (1)
.github/workflows/gemini-pr-review.yml (1)
43-47: Validate API_KEY is set before making API calls.If the
GEMINI_API_KEYsecret is not configured, the curl requests will fail with potentially unclear error messages. Adding an early validation check would provide clearer feedback.🔎 Proposed validation
- name: Generate Review with Gemini id: gemini env: API_KEY: ${{ secrets.GEMINI_API_KEY }} run: | + # Validate API key is set + if [ -z "$API_KEY" ]; then + echo "❌ Error: GEMINI_API_KEY secret is not configured" + echo "⚠️ **Configuration Error**" > review_comment.md + echo "" >> review_comment.md + echo "The GEMINI_API_KEY secret is not configured for this repository." >> review_comment.md + echo "Please add it in Settings → Secrets → Actions." >> review_comment.md + exit 0 # Don't fail the workflow, just skip the review + fi + # 1. Construct the JSON payload safely using jq
🧹 Nitpick comments (3)
greatfrontend/gfe-75/async-programming/promise-all/promise-all.ts (2)
1-1: Consider exporting theReturnValuetype for user convenience.The type definition is well-crafted and correctly unwraps promise types while removing readonly modifiers. However, it's not exported, which means users cannot directly reference it when typing variables that hold
promiseAllresults.🔎 Optional: Export the type
-type ReturnValue<T> = { -readonly [P in keyof T]: Awaited<T[P]> }; +export type ReturnValue<T> = { -readonly [P in keyof T]: Awaited<T[P]> };
20-38: LGTM! Critical race condition fixed from previous reviews.The implementation now correctly uses
Promise.resolve().then().catch()pattern instead ofasync/awaitwithforEach, eliminating the race condition. Therejectedflag properly prevents multiple reject calls, and results are stored at the correct indices preserving order.This implementation correctly mirrors
Promise.allbehavior:
- Executes all promises concurrently
- Resolves with results in order
- Rejects on first rejection
- Ignores subsequent operations after rejection
As per retrieved learnings, proper Promise usage in GreatFrontEnd solutions is validated.
💡 Optional: Add documentation comments for clarity
Consider adding comments to explain the algorithm for future maintainers:
const result = Array(n); let pending = n; + // Flag to ensure we only reject once (Promise.all fails fast on first rejection) let rejected = false; + // Process all promises concurrently iterable.forEach((value, index) => { + // Normalize both plain values and promises Promise.resolve(value) .then((val) => { + // Ignore if already rejected if (rejected) return; result[index] = val; pending--; + // Resolve when all promises have settled successfully if (pending === 0) { resolve(result as ReturnValue<T>); } }) .catch((err) => { + // Ensure we only reject once (subsequent rejections are ignored) if (!rejected) { rejected = true; reject(err); } }); });.github/workflows/gemini-pr-review.yml (1)
118-118: Consider usingjqdirectly instead of piping fromcat.The pattern
cat file | jqcan be simplified tojq '.' file, which is more idiomatic and avoids an unnecessary process.🔎 Suggested simplification
- REVIEW_TEXT=$(cat response.json | jq -r '.candidates[0].content.parts[0].text // empty') + REVIEW_TEXT=$(jq -r '.candidates[0].content.parts[0].text // empty' response.json) - ERROR_CODE=$(cat response.json | jq -r '.error.code // empty') - ERROR_STATUS=$(cat response.json | jq -r '.error.status // empty') - ERROR_MESSAGE=$(cat response.json | jq -r '.error.message // "Unknown error"') + ERROR_CODE=$(jq -r '.error.code // empty' response.json) + ERROR_STATUS=$(jq -r '.error.status // empty' response.json) + ERROR_MESSAGE=$(jq -r '.error.message // "Unknown error"' response.json) - cat response.json | jq '.' >> review_comment.md + jq '.' response.json >> review_comment.mdAlso applies to: 128-130, 174-174
📜 Review details
Configuration used: defaults
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (4)
.github/workflows/gemini-pr-review.yml(1 hunks)greatfrontend/gfe-75/README.md(2 hunks)greatfrontend/gfe-75/async-programming/promise-all/README.md(1 hunks)greatfrontend/gfe-75/async-programming/promise-all/promise-all.ts(1 hunks)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (2)
- greatfrontend/gfe-75/README.md
- greatfrontend/gfe-75/async-programming/promise-all/README.md
🧰 Additional context used
📓 Path-based instructions (3)
**/*.ts
📄 CodeRabbit inference engine (AGENTS.md)
**/*.ts: Use explicit type annotations for function parameters and return types in TypeScript solutions
Follow strict TypeScript configuration with ES2020 target and CommonJS modules in TypeScript solutions
Enforce full type safety in TypeScript solutions
Files:
greatfrontend/gfe-75/async-programming/promise-all/promise-all.ts
**/*.{js,ts}
📄 CodeRabbit inference engine (AGENTS.md)
**/*.{js,ts}: Use clear, descriptive variable names across all solutions
Add comments for non-obvious logic or algorithm steps in code
Keep functions focused and single-purpose across all solutions
Prefer readability over cleverness in code implementation
**/*.{js,ts}: Use descriptive variable names; single letters likei,j,kare acceptable for loop iterators and standard mathematical contexts
Add comments for complex logic, but prefer self-documenting code with clear logic
Minimize external dependencies and keep solutions self-contained
**/*.{js,ts}: Use clear, descriptive variable names (not just i, j, k unless in simple loops) and add comments for non-obvious logic or algorithm steps
Keep functions focused and single-purpose, preferring readability over cleverness
Use const by default, let only when reassignment needed; avoid var except for LeetCode solution function definitions
Use modern ES6+ syntax (arrow functions, destructuring, spread operators) where appropriate
Prefer built-in methods (.map(), .filter(), .reduce()) when appropriate and use strict equality (===) over loose equality (==)
Files:
greatfrontend/gfe-75/async-programming/promise-all/promise-all.ts
**/*.{ts,tsx}
📄 CodeRabbit inference engine (.github/copilot-instructions.md)
**/*.{ts,tsx}: Use explicit type annotations for function parameters and return types in TypeScript
Follow strict TypeScript configuration as defined in tsconfig.json with ES2020 target and CommonJS modules
Files:
greatfrontend/gfe-75/async-programming/promise-all/promise-all.ts
🧠 Learnings (4)
📓 Common learnings
Learnt from: CR
Repo: pertrai1/coding-challenges PR: 0
File: CLAUDE.md:0-0
Timestamp: 2025-12-02T17:56:01.747Z
Learning: Applies to GreatFrontEnd/**/*.{js,ts} : Validate event handling patterns (delegation, cleanup), ensure proper async/await and Promise usage in GreatFrontEnd solutions
Learnt from: CR
Repo: pertrai1/coding-challenges PR: 0
File: CLAUDE.md:0-0
Timestamp: 2025-12-02T17:56:01.747Z
Learning: Applies to GreatFrontEnd/**/*.{js,ts} : Evaluate the public API for clarity and usability, check for consistent naming conventions, verify parameter validation and error handling in GreatFrontEnd solutions
Learnt from: CR
Repo: pertrai1/coding-challenges PR: 0
File: CLAUDE.md:0-0
Timestamp: 2025-12-02T17:56:01.747Z
Learning: Applies to GreatFrontEnd/**/*.{js,ts} : Consider edge cases specific to browser environments (empty inputs, invalid types) and verify cleanup logic (removing event listeners, clearing timeouts) in GreatFrontEnd solutions
📚 Learning: 2025-12-02T17:56:01.747Z
Learnt from: CR
Repo: pertrai1/coding-challenges PR: 0
File: CLAUDE.md:0-0
Timestamp: 2025-12-02T17:56:01.747Z
Learning: Applies to **/*.{js,ts} : Prefer built-in methods (.map(), .filter(), .reduce()) when appropriate and use strict equality (===) over loose equality (==)
Applied to files:
greatfrontend/gfe-75/async-programming/promise-all/promise-all.ts
📚 Learning: 2025-12-02T17:56:01.747Z
Learnt from: CR
Repo: pertrai1/coding-challenges PR: 0
File: CLAUDE.md:0-0
Timestamp: 2025-12-02T17:56:01.747Z
Learning: Applies to GreatFrontEnd/**/*.{js,ts} : Validate event handling patterns (delegation, cleanup), ensure proper async/await and Promise usage in GreatFrontEnd solutions
Applied to files:
greatfrontend/gfe-75/async-programming/promise-all/promise-all.ts
📚 Learning: 2025-12-02T17:56:01.747Z
Learnt from: CR
Repo: pertrai1/coding-challenges PR: 0
File: CLAUDE.md:0-0
Timestamp: 2025-12-02T17:56:01.747Z
Learning: Applies to GreatFrontEnd/**/*.{js,ts} : Look for debouncing/throttling where appropriate and consider memory leaks (event listeners, timers, closures) in GreatFrontEnd solutions
Applied to files:
greatfrontend/gfe-75/async-programming/promise-all/promise-all.ts
⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms. You can increase the timeout in your CodeRabbit configuration to a maximum of 15 minutes (900000ms). (1)
- GitHub Check: review
🔇 Additional comments (6)
greatfrontend/gfe-75/async-programming/promise-all/promise-all.ts (4)
2-4: LGTM! Well-typed function signature.The function signature properly uses generic constraints and explicit type annotations as per the coding guidelines. The constraint
T extends readonly unknown[] | []correctly handles both regular and readonly array inputs.
6-8: LGTM! Error handling fixed from previous reviews.The error message now accurately reflects the validation being performed. The runtime check provides good defensive programming even though TypeScript enforces types at compile time.
Note: While native
Promise.allaccepts any iterable, limiting this implementation to arrays is acceptable for a coding challenge and the error message clearly communicates this constraint.
10-14: LGTM! Proper edge case handling.The empty array case is handled correctly with an early return, avoiding unnecessary computation. The type assertion is appropriate here to satisfy TypeScript's type checker.
16-18: LGTM! Good addition of therejectedflag.The initialization is clean and follows coding guidelines with appropriate use of
constandlet. Therejectedflag is a crucial addition that addresses the multiple rejection issues flagged in previous reviews..github/workflows/gemini-pr-review.yml (2)
91-96: LGTM! Well-structured retry and fallback setup.The initialization of the retry mechanism with multiple models and proper state tracking is clean and follows good practices.
134-149: LGTM! Robust retry logic and comprehensive error reporting.The implementation includes:
- Exponential backoff (2, 4, 8 seconds) for retriable errors, which is appropriate for API rate limiting
- Proper distinction between retriable (503, 429, UNAVAILABLE, RESOURCE_EXHAUSTED) and non-retriable errors
- Comprehensive failure documentation with the last error message and full debug payload
- Clear success metadata showing which model was used
This significantly improves the reliability of the review workflow.
Also applies to: 152-178
| if [ "$HTTP_CODE" = "200" ]; then | ||
| # Verify we got valid content | ||
| REVIEW_TEXT=$(cat response.json | jq -r '.candidates[0].content.parts[0].text // empty') | ||
| if [ -n "$REVIEW_TEXT" ]; then | ||
| echo "✓ Successfully received review from $MODEL" | ||
| SUCCESS=true | ||
| USED_MODEL="$MODEL" | ||
| break | ||
| fi | ||
| fi |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Handle empty content response more explicitly.
When the API returns HTTP 200 but with empty REVIEW_TEXT, the current logic neither increments RETRY_COUNT nor breaks from the retry loop. This means the loop will retry the same model unnecessarily until MAX_RETRIES is exhausted. Since empty content on a 200 response likely indicates a payload or API contract issue rather than a transient error, consider breaking and trying the next model immediately.
🔎 Proposed fix
# Check if request was successful
if [ "$HTTP_CODE" = "200" ]; then
# Verify we got valid content
REVIEW_TEXT=$(cat response.json | jq -r '.candidates[0].content.parts[0].text // empty')
if [ -n "$REVIEW_TEXT" ]; then
echo "✓ Successfully received review from $MODEL"
SUCCESS=true
USED_MODEL="$MODEL"
break
+ else
+ echo " ⚠️ Received empty response from $MODEL, trying next model..."
+ break
fi
fi📝 Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| if [ "$HTTP_CODE" = "200" ]; then | |
| # Verify we got valid content | |
| REVIEW_TEXT=$(cat response.json | jq -r '.candidates[0].content.parts[0].text // empty') | |
| if [ -n "$REVIEW_TEXT" ]; then | |
| echo "✓ Successfully received review from $MODEL" | |
| SUCCESS=true | |
| USED_MODEL="$MODEL" | |
| break | |
| fi | |
| fi | |
| if [ "$HTTP_CODE" = "200" ]; then | |
| # Verify we got valid content | |
| REVIEW_TEXT=$(cat response.json | jq -r '.candidates[0].content.parts[0].text // empty') | |
| if [ -n "$REVIEW_TEXT" ]; then | |
| echo "✓ Successfully received review from $MODEL" | |
| SUCCESS=true | |
| USED_MODEL="$MODEL" | |
| break | |
| else | |
| echo " ⚠️ Received empty response from $MODEL, trying next model..." | |
| break | |
| fi | |
| fi |
🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
In .github/workflows/gemini-pr-review.yml around lines 116 to 125, when
HTTP_CODE is 200 but REVIEW_TEXT is empty the script currently neither
increments RETRY_COUNT nor breaks the retry loop causing repeated retries on the
same model; update the logic so that when REVIEW_TEXT is empty you log a clear
warning and immediately break out of the current retry loop to move on to the
next model (do not increment RETRY_COUNT for this case), ensuring the workflow
treats empty-200 as a non-transient payload/API contract issue and tries the
next model.
📅 Spaced Repetition Reviews Scheduled!Great job solving #GFE-af3c - Promise All! 🎉 To help you retain this knowledge long-term, I've scheduled 5 review sessions using spaced repetition:
What to expect:
🧠 Why Spaced Repetition?Research shows that reviewing material at increasing intervals dramatically improves retention. This is your learning superpower! Check |
Problem: #GFE-af3c - Promise All PR: #77 Reviews scheduled: 5 (days 1, 3, 7, 14, 30) [skip ci]
Summary by CodeRabbit
New Features
Documentation
Documentation (cleanup)
✏️ Tip: You can customize this high-level summary in your review settings.