code-review-ai 0.1.1 → 0.1.2

This diff represents the content of publicly available package versions that have been released to one of the supported registries. The information contained in this diff is provided for informational purposes only and reflects changes between package versions as they appear in their respective public registries.
checksums.yaml CHANGED
@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
1
1
  ---
2
2
  SHA256:
3
- metadata.gz: 44b987a9b718977db5cb57cc5070619c83527a885415ef390c1d816bfeadae2b
4
- data.tar.gz: 175707830a53cba891cd74bd612cc6fb7e3efa3da3afeff59a5ddd2bc6607112
3
+ metadata.gz: dc88c3ac3b82a7e496c885911b8c1d2ec14542386c511da77d6e4ce4aadfe3fc
4
+ data.tar.gz: 89b731c50440a73a42c21155aca1a2964c6b6660bba9f8f71055da53db21b0c9
5
5
  SHA512:
6
- metadata.gz: 95a4b53f801fed345232ee28aaca77ebbe7266ed154bc9c5ca4fd463b80e9a4bc2ed364d169a948c439f05c65f3735fff6adfc5112c84dcacb87c48704023027
7
- data.tar.gz: a419729cc7f97749e220e453d8d80ad98bc96282950e3b9fd06cc366a3d1c66610c689a5108df0f8e1c9911e70c8d6a061e69c7e72a6a1f3f418add41d2f0097
6
+ metadata.gz: f8b7da2ee4f84a010278cfe84b8a7cc60a80f33d852ab7c1ff0b93bb549f652e3d0a3d90d92082f5560a5baca2363a82281ea4d8e7b2c70d12a391bdbddc7e85
7
+ data.tar.gz: 50c0f4918049bc9f3348943d83720805a51adfe4ad99b83b76680b02a74d207a39f3ac5091b7ec46e48ab10c48265919bc3d69041ddca1f9f2b09eb03c9aef8a
@@ -1,4 +1,5 @@
1
1
  # frozen_string_literal: true
2
+
2
3
  require_relative '../prompts'
3
4
 
4
5
  module CodeReviewAi
@@ -1,4 +1,5 @@
1
1
  # frozen_string_literal: true
2
+
2
3
  require_relative '../prompts'
3
4
 
4
5
  module CodeReviewAi
@@ -28,25 +28,38 @@ module CodeReviewAi
28
28
  %<changes>s
29
29
  PROMPT
30
30
 
31
- BRANCH_SUMMARY_TEMPLATE = <<~PROMPT
32
- You are a Ruby developer with expert-level proficiency in OOP principles and best practices.
33
- Your task is to provide a concise, well-structured summary of the changes made in the following branch.
31
+ BRANCH_SUMMARY_TEMPLATE = <<~PROMPT
32
+ Act as a seasoned Ruby developer with expert-level knowledge of OOP principles, best practices, and clean code standards.
33
+ Your task is to provide a concise, well-structured summary of the changes made in the following branch.
34
34
 
35
- Please ensure that all output is written in %<language>s.
35
+ **Guidelines**:
36
+ - Ensure the output is written entirely in **%<language>s**.
37
+ - Provide clear, actionable insights in the summary.
38
+ - Your recommendations should reflect OOP principles, performance, readability, and maintainability.
39
+ - If possible, provide detailed suggestions for improvement.
40
+ - Use the exact format specified below for consistency.
41
+ - If you spot any codes that can be abstracted or refactored, please mention them.
36
42
 
37
- Follow this format for your summary:
43
+ **Use the following format for the summary:**
38
44
 
39
- 1. **Overview**: A high-level summary of the changes made in the branch, written in %<language>s.
45
+ 1. **Overview**
46
+ A high-level summary of the changes made in the branch, describing their purpose and context in **%<language>s**.
40
47
 
41
- 2. **File-wise Breakdown**: For each file, list the key changes in bullet points. Be specific and concise:
42
- - **Summary**: A brief description of the change.
43
- - **Impact**: How the change affects the functionality or performance.
44
- - **Potential Issues**: Any concerns or potential pitfalls with the change.
45
- - **Suggestions for Improvement**: Recommendations for enhancing the change or code.
46
- - **Other Notes**: Any additional relevant details or context.
48
+ 2. **File-wise Breakdown**
49
+ For each file, list key changes with the following details:
50
+ - **Summary**: A brief description of what was changed.
51
+ - **Impact**: How the change affects functionality, performance, or the codebase.
52
+ - **Potential Issues**: Any concerns or risks introduced by the change.
53
+ - **Suggestions for Improvement**: Recommendations for refining the code or changes.
54
+ - **Other Notes**: Any additional context or points to consider.
55
+
56
+ 3. **Overall Impression**
57
+ Your general recommendations on the inter file changes and the overall quality of the codebase.
58
+ If refactoring or restructuring is possible, please mention it here in details.
59
+
60
+ **Changes to Analyze:**
61
+ %<changes>s
62
+ PROMPT
47
63
 
48
- Changes:
49
- %<changes>s
50
- PROMPT
51
64
  end
52
65
  end
@@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
1
1
  # frozen_string_literal: true
2
2
 
3
3
  module CodeReviewAi
4
- VERSION = '0.1.1'
4
+ VERSION = '0.1.2'
5
5
  end
metadata CHANGED
@@ -1,13 +1,13 @@
1
1
  --- !ruby/object:Gem::Specification
2
2
  name: code-review-ai
3
3
  version: !ruby/object:Gem::Version
4
- version: 0.1.1
4
+ version: 0.1.2
5
5
  platform: ruby
6
6
  authors:
7
7
  - Michiharu Ono
8
8
  bindir: bin
9
9
  cert_chain: []
10
- date: 2025-01-26 00:00:00.000000000 Z
10
+ date: 2025-01-27 00:00:00.000000000 Z
11
11
  dependencies:
12
12
  - !ruby/object:Gem::Dependency
13
13
  name: faraday