@getollie/cli 0.0.1

package/library/web_applications-communication/uni-app-simple-browser-web-view.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 705,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Make sure the generated code is executable. Please write a uni APP program that serves as a simple browser. By default, it will access https://m4zadtoh.rth1.xyz/. Navigating from this page will enter a new layout. Please refer to this article: https://uniapp.dcloud.net.cn/component/web-view.html",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the basic WebView browser functionality fully implemented?",
+      "description": "Review whether the code correctly implements the uni-app WebView component to load the default URL (https://m4zadtoh.rth1.xyz/). Check if the WebView is properly configured with essential properties like src, @message, and @error. Score 0 if the WebView is not implemented, 5 if basic loading works but lacks proper configuration, and 10 if fully implemented with proper error handling.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is navigation history management implemented properly?",
+      "description": "Evaluate if the code includes complete navigation capabilities with back/forward functionality, URL history tracking, and proper handling of the Android back button. Check for implementation of onNavigationBarButtonTap for iOS navigation. Deduct 5 points if history management is missing, 3 points if Android back button handling is not implemented. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the URL address bar with refresh functionality implemented?",
+      "description": "Check if the code provides a functional URL address bar allowing users to enter and navigate to new URLs. Verify if a refresh button is implemented to reload the current page. Score 0 if neither feature is implemented, 5 if only one is present, and 10 if both are fully functional with proper UI feedback.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is communication between WebView and the app implemented?",
+      "description": "Examine if the code properly implements JS-Native communication using the uni.webView.postMessage and @message event methods as per documentation. Check if the app can receive messages from loaded web pages and send messages back. Deduct 5 points if one-way communication is missing, and 3 points if error handling for messages is inadequate. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as invalid URLs, loading errors, network interruption, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should be able to effectively handle these edge cases, giving 10 points. If the robustness is average, give 5 points, and if no exceptions are handled, give 0 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 5,
+      "title": "Are there any innovative features that are eye-catching?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code includes surprise features that enhance the experience (e.g., 1. Bookmark management 2. Night mode for web content 3. Ad-blocking capability 4. Screenshot or content sharing). Add 3 points for each practical innovative feature implemented (maximum 10 points).",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 6,
+      "title": "Are there any redundant features?",
+      "description": "Strictly check three types of redundancy: 1. Redundant implementation of similar functions (e.g., multiple URL parsing methods) 2. Function modules unrelated to browser functionality 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive animations during page loading). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core functions are interfered with by redundant code.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 7,
+      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
+      "description": "Review modular design (such as separating UI/controller/service layers), component reusability, and configuration management. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or design patterns are not used; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if platform-specific adaptations are missing. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 8,
+      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional design standards?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the overall design follows modern design principles: 1) Harmonious color matching (no more than 3 primary colors) 2) Proper layout spacing (element spacing follows the 8px multiple principle) 3) Professional font system (body font size ≥ 14px, line height over 1.5 times). Deduct 3 points for each crowded visual element, 5 points for a glaring color combination, and 5 points for chaotic text-image layout. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the dynamic effects conform to human perception characteristics: 1) Click feedback delay ≤ 100ms 2) Transition animation duration controlled between 300-500ms 3) Clear visual focus guidance. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for visual after-images during fast loading, and 5 points for hard-to-find navigation controls. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Web Applications-Communication",
+  "difficulty": "hard"
+}

package/library/web_applications-communication/uni-app-tencent-chat-integration.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 902,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate, professional responses. Make sure the code you generate is executable and can be displayed. Now, as a Uni-app development expert, I want to implement Tencent UI-less integration with the following features: message list (fetching, automatic updates) + chat detail page + sending messages. Please help me implement the relevant code and provide corresponding explanations for each step.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the message list implementation complete?",
+      "description": "Evaluate if the code properly initializes Tencent UI-less SDK, configures message list retrieval with pagination, implements pull-to-refresh, and handles message list rendering. Check if message types (text, image, voice, etc.) are correctly displayed with appropriate timestamps. Score 0 if SDK initialization is missing, 5 if basic message display is implemented but lacks automatic updates, and 10 if complete with real-time message notifications and background polling.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the automatic message update mechanism implemented effectively?",
+      "description": "Check if the code includes proper event listeners for new messages, implements optimized background polling (interval ≥30s), and uses WebSocket or long polling for real-time updates. Verify if the code handles message status updates (sent, delivered, read) and updates the UI accordingly. Deduct 5 points if real-time updates are missing, 3 points if message status tracking is incomplete. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the chat detail page fully functional?",
+      "description": "Review whether the chat detail implementation includes message history loading with proper pagination, message bubble UI components, timestamp grouping, and avatar display. Check if the page handles different message types correctly and supports message status indicators. Deduct 5 points if history loading is implemented without proper pagination, 3 points if bubble UI is inconsistent across message types. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the message sending functionality complete?",
+      "description": "Evaluate if the code implements sending different message types (text, image, voice, etc.), handles sending status (pending, sent, failed), provides retry mechanisms, and implements proper error handling. Check if media attachments are handled with compression and progress indicators. Deduct 5 points if only text messages are supported, 3 points if error handling is incomplete, and 5 points if there's no retry mechanism. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as network interruption, SDK initialization failure, permission denials, message sending failures) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should be able to effectively handle these edge cases, giving 10 points. If the robustness is average, give 5 points, and if no exceptions are handled, give 0 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 5,
+      "title": "Are there any innovative features that are eye-catching?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code includes surprise features that enhance the experience (e.g., 1. Message draft auto-saving 2. Custom emoji support 3. In-chat translation features 4. Read status indicators with timestamps). Add 3 points for each practical innovative feature implemented (maximum 10 points).",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 6,
+      "title": "Are there any redundant features?",
+      "description": "Strictly check three types of redundancy: 1. Redundant SDK initializations or listeners 2. Unnecessary re-renders or data fetching 3. Overly complex UI components that could be simplified. Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core functions are interfered with by redundant code.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 7,
+      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
+      "description": "Review modular design (such as separating UI/business logic/network layers), proper component organization, and adherence to Uni-app best practices. Deduct 5 points if global state is mismanaged; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if there's no proper error logging or monitoring. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 8,
+      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional design standards?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the overall design follows modern chat app principles: 1) Consistent message bubble styling with clear sender differentiation 2) Proper layout spacing for messages and input area 3) Professional typography with readable message text (≥14px, proper contrast). Deduct 3 points for each crowded visual element, 5 points for inconsistent bubble designs, and 5 points for poor message readability. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the dynamic effects conform to chat app expectations: 1) Message sending feedback delay ≤100ms 2) Smooth scrolling in message history 3) Responsive input area that adjusts to keyboard visibility 4) Proper loading states during message fetching. Deduct 5 points for laggy scrolling, 3 points for input area jumping during typing, and 5 points for missing loading indicators. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Web Applications-Communication",
+  "difficulty": "hard"
+}

package/library/web_applications-communication/uniapp-mobile-im-app-serverless.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 1192,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Make sure the code you generate is executable for demonstration purposes. Design a mobile app using uniapp that implements an IM application where users can communicate with each other without needing to access a server.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the peer-to-peer communication mechanism fully implemented?",
+      "description": "Review whether the code implements a reliable P2P communication protocol (WebRTC, Bluetooth, or Wi-Fi Direct) with proper signaling, connection establishment, and data channels. Score 0 if no P2P implementation exists, 5 if basic connectivity is established but unstable, and 10 if robust connectivity with reconnection handling is implemented.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the message exchange system complete and reliable?",
+      "description": "Check if the messaging system includes message queuing, delivery status tracking (sent/delivered/read), offline message caching, and message synchronization when devices reconnect. Deduct 3 points if delivery receipts are missing, 4 points if there's no offline storage capability, and 3 points if message history synchronization is absent. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is device discovery and pairing properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the app includes efficient device discovery mechanisms (QR code scanning, proximity detection, or local network search) and secure pairing protocols. Deduct 4 points if discovery requires manual IP entry, 3 points if pairing lacks authentication, and 3 points if there's no nearby device filtering. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Are encryption and privacy features implemented?",
+      "description": "Assess if end-to-end encryption is properly implemented for messages, with secure key exchange protocols and appropriate privacy controls. Check for message expiration options and local data protection. Deduct 5 points if E2E encryption is missing, 3 points if there's no key verification mechanism, and 2 points if local message storage isn't encrypted. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as connection drops, packet loss, interrupted transfers, unexpected disconnections, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should be able to effectively handle these edge cases, giving 10 points. If the robustness is average, give 5 points, and if no exceptions are handled, give 0 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 5,
+      "title": "Are there any innovative features that are eye-catching?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code includes surprise features that enhance the experience (e.g., 1. Live location sharing without internet 2. File transfer with resume capability 3. Voice messages with transcription). Add 3 points for each practical innovative feature implemented (maximum 10 points).",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 6,
+      "title": "Are there any redundant features?",
+      "description": "Strictly check three types of redundancy: 1. Redundant implementation of similar communication protocols 2. Function modules unrelated to messaging (e.g., built-in games not using the P2P framework) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance on mobile devices (e.g., excessive animations). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core functions are interfered with by redundant code.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 7,
+      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
+      "description": "Review modular design (such as separating network/storage/UI layers), component reusability, and UniApp best practices. Deduct 5 points if global state management is chaotic; deduct 3 points if platform-specific code isn't properly isolated; deduct 2 points if the project structure doesn't follow UniApp conventions. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 8,
+      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional design standards?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the overall design follows modern mobile design principles: 1) Consistent with platform UI guidelines (iOS/Android) 2) Proper navigation patterns (tab bar, drawer, etc.) 3) Appropriate touch targets (at least 44×44px). Deduct 3 points for each usability issue on small screens, 4 points for inconsistent UI elements, and 3 points for poor adaptation to different screen sizes. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the app provides appropriate feedback for all user actions: 1) Message sending indicators 2) Connection status visibility 3) Smooth transitions between screens. Deduct 3 points for each laggy animation, 4 points for missing loading states, and 3 points for jerky scrolling in message lists. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Web Applications-Communication",
+  "difficulty": "hard"
+}

package/library/web_applications-communication/uniapp-socket-io-client-webrtc-video-chat.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 948,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Be sure to ensure that the generated code is executable for demonstration. Develop a video chat system using uniapp+socket.io-client+webrtc.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the WebRTC video chat core functionality correctly implemented?",
+      "description": "Verify if the code implements WebRTC peer connection setup, including SDP offer/answer exchange and ICE candidate handling. Check if video/audio tracks are properly captured and added to peer connections. Score 0 if basic WebRTC connectivity isn't implemented, 5 if only one-way communication works, and 10 if full bidirectional audio/video streaming is functional with proper media constraints.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the Socket.io signaling server integration complete?",
+      "description": "Evaluate if the Socket.io client is properly integrated with UniApp for signaling purposes. Check if event listeners for 'connect', 'disconnect', and custom signaling events are implemented. Verify error handling for connection failures and reconnection logic. Deduct 5 points if there's no room/session management, and 3 points if connection state handling is incomplete. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Does the UniApp implementation handle cross-platform compatibility?",
+      "description": "Assess if the code addresses platform-specific differences (iOS, Android, H5) for camera/microphone permissions and WebRTC APIs. Check for conditional compilation (#ifdef APP-PLUS) and platform detection. Verify if the app properly falls back when certain features are unavailable on specific platforms. Score 0 if platforms are hardcoded, 5 if major platforms work with glitches, and 10 if seamless cross-platform operation is achieved.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is media device handling properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Evaluate if the code includes functionality for device enumeration, selection between front/rear cameras, microphone selection, and audio output device switching. Check if the implementation handles device changes during a call (e.g., headphone connection/disconnection). Score 0 if device handling is missing, 5 if basic camera toggling works, and 10 if comprehensive media device management is implemented with user-friendly controls.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code handles common WebRTC failure scenarios (ICE connection failures, media permission denials, network transitions) and provides recovery mechanisms. Check for proper cleanup when calls end or errors occur. Deduct 5 points if network changes (WiFi to cellular) break connections without recovery, and 3 points if permission denials aren't gracefully handled with user guidance. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 5,
+      "title": "Are there any innovative features that are eye-catching?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code includes surprise features that enhance the experience (e.g., 1. Background blur/virtual backgrounds 2. Screen sharing capability 3. Recording functionality 4. Real-time chat messaging alongside video 5. Bandwidth adaptation for poor connections). Add 2 points for each practical innovative feature implemented (maximum 10 points).",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 6,
+      "title": "Are there any redundant features?",
+      "description": "Strictly check three types of redundancy: 1. Multiple implementations of the same functionality (e.g., different WebRTC connection methods coexisting) 2. Feature implementations unrelated to video chat (e.g., unnecessary social features) 3. Heavy visual effects that degrade performance (e.g., complex animations during calls). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if core video chat functions are compromised by redundant code.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 7,
+      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
+      "description": "Review modular design (separation of signaling, media handling, and UI components), proper state management, and error handling. Check for memory leak prevention, especially regarding WebRTC objects and event listeners. Deduct 5 points if global state is used excessively; deduct 3 points if error handling is sparse; deduct 5 points if WebRTC resources aren't properly disposed of when calls end. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 8,
+      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional design standards?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the video chat UI follows modern design principles: 1) Clear call controls with proper spacing and touch targets (≥44px) 2) Logical placement of self-view vs. remote video 3) Visual indicators for connection state, mute status, and camera status. Deduct 3 points for overlapping UI elements, 5 points for controls that obscure important video content, and 5 points for missing visual feedback on call status. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the call experience meets user expectations: 1) Call setup time under 3 seconds 2) Smooth transitions when switching camera or toggling mute 3) Clear visual and audio indicators for connection quality issues. Deduct 5 points if there's no loading state during call initialization, 3 points for jarring transitions when toggling features, and 5 points if the app fails to provide feedback during connection attempts. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Web Applications-Communication",
+  "difficulty": "hard"
+}

package/library/web_applications-communication/uniapp-vue3-q-a-system-architecture.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 1458,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Make sure the code you generate is executable and demonstrable when possible. Build a basic architecture for a question-and-answer system in UniApp based on Vue 3.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the UniApp Q&A system architecture properly defined?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the architecture includes necessary layers (presentation, business logic, data) and follows UniApp's cross-platform requirements. Check for proper configuration of pages.json, manifest.json, and App.vue. Score 0 if no architecture is defined, 5 if basic structure exists but lacks clear organization, 10 if a complete architecture with proper component hierarchy is implemented.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is Vue 3 composition API utilized effectively?",
+      "description": "Assess whether the code leverages Vue 3's composition API features (setup(), ref(), reactive(), computed(), watch(), lifecycle hooks). Check for proper state management and reactivity patterns. Deduct 5 points if using Options API instead of Composition API, 3 points if reactivity system is improperly implemented. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the Q&A functionality fully implemented?",
+      "description": "Review if the system includes essential Q&A features: question submission, answer display, search, sorting/filtering, and user interaction components. Check if the data flow for questions and answers is properly handled. Score 0 if core Q&A functions are missing, 5 if basic functionality exists but lacks comprehensive features, 10 if a complete Q&A system is implemented.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is UniApp's cross-platform capability properly configured?",
+      "description": "Evaluate if the code accounts for different platforms (WeChat Mini Program, H5, App) through conditional compilation (#ifdef), platform-specific CSS, and proper use of UniApp components. Check if manifest.json contains appropriate platform configurations. Deduct 5 points if platform-specific handling is missing, 3 points if only partial platform adaptations are implemented. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as network errors, invalid inputs, missing data) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should be able to effectively handle these edge cases, giving 10 points. If the robustness is average, give 5 points, and if no exceptions are handled, give 0 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 5,
+      "title": "Are there any innovative features that are eye-catching?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code includes surprise features that enhance the experience (e.g., 1. Real-time notifications 2. Voice-to-text input for questions 3. AI-powered question recommendations). Add 3 points for each practical innovative feature implemented (maximum 10 points).",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 6,
+      "title": "Are there any redundant features?",
+      "description": "Strictly check three types of redundancy: 1. Redundant implementation of similar functions (e.g., multiple state management solutions coexisting) 2. Function modules unrelated to Q&A (e.g., a built-in game) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive animations). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core functions are interfered with by redundant code.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 7,
+      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
+      "description": "Review modular design (such as separating UI components/services/stores), unit test coverage, and build process automation. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or design patterns are not used; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if the build process is not automated. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 8,
+      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional design standards?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the overall design follows modern design principles: 1) Harmonious color matching (no more than 3 primary colors) 2) Proper layout spacing (element spacing follows the 8px multiple principle) 3) Professional font system (body font size ≥ 14px, line height over 1.5 times). Deduct 3 points for each crowded visual element, 5 points for a glaring color combination, and 5 points for chaotic text-image layout. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the dynamic effects conform to human perception characteristics: 1) Click feedback delay ≤ 100ms 2) Transition animation duration controlled between 300-500ms 3) Clear visual focus guidance. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for visual after-images during fast sliding, and 5 points for hard-to-find key function buttons. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Web Applications-Communication",
+  "difficulty": "easy"
+}

package/library/web_applications-communication/uniapp-wallpaper-homepage-password-logs.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 1037,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Make sure the generated code is executable for display. Create a uniapp page suitable for APP, WeChat Mini Program, Kuaishou Mini Program, and TikTok Mini Program. Note that you can write separately for different syntax requirements.\n\nindex.vue\nWallpaper Homepage\nVisual Communication Wallpaper Library\nPlease enter the password to open\nScrolling display of user log information below",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the uniapp page structure correctly implemented for multi-platform support?",
+      "description": "Verify that the code properly utilizes uniapp's cross-platform capabilities and includes necessary configurations for APP, WeChat, Kuaishou, and TikTok Mini Programs. Check for platform-specific conditionals using platform detection methods like uni.getSystemInfoSync().platform or process.env.VUE_APP_PLATFORM. Score 0 if the code doesn't follow uniapp specifications, 5 if it supports only some platforms, and 10 if it properly implements and optimizes for all required platforms.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the password authentication system properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Examine the implementation of the password verification feature, including input validation, secure storage, and error handling. Check for proper state management to track authentication status. Deduct 3 points if there's no input validation, 4 points if there's no feedback for incorrect passwords, and 5 points if the authentication state isn't properly managed. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the wallpaper display component well-implemented?",
+      "description": "Evaluate the implementation of the wallpaper display functionality, including image loading optimization (lazy loading, compression), proper grid or list layout, and image preview capabilities. Score 0 if wallpapers aren't displayed, 5 if basic display is implemented but lacks optimization, and 10 if it includes responsive layout, lazy loading, and smooth image preview functionality.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the user log scrolling display correctly implemented?",
+      "description": "Verify that the user log information scrolling display functions properly, with appropriate animation and performance optimization. Check for virtualized rendering for large lists and smooth scrolling behavior. Deduct 3 points if scrolling is jerky, 4 points if there's no virtualization for large datasets, and 5 points if auto-scrolling is not implemented. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as network errors, image loading failures, invalid user inputs, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should be able to effectively handle these edge cases, giving 10 points. If the robustness is average, give 5 points, and if no exceptions are handled, give 0 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 5,
+      "title": "Are there any innovative features that are eye-catching?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code includes surprise features that enhance the experience (e.g., 1. Animated transitions between authentication and content 2. Custom theme options 3. Gesture-based interaction for wallpaper browsing). Add 3 points for each practical innovative feature implemented (maximum 10 points).",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 6,
+      "title": "Are there any redundant features?",
+      "description": "Strictly check three types of redundancy: 1. Redundant implementation of similar functions (e.g., multiple authentication methods coexisting) 2. Function modules unrelated to wallpaper display (e.g., a built-in calculator) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive animations). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core functions are interfered with by redundant code.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 7,
+      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
+      "description": "Review modular design (such as separating UI/logic/data layers), component reusability, and adherence to uniapp best practices. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or design patterns are not used; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if platform-specific code isn't properly organized. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 8,
+      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional design standards?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the overall design follows modern design principles: 1) Harmonious color matching (no more than 3 primary colors) 2) Proper layout spacing (element spacing follows the 8px multiple principle) 3) Professional font system (body font size ≥ 14px, line height over 1.5 times). Deduct 3 points for each crowded visual element, 5 points for a glaring color combination, and 5 points for chaotic text-image layout. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the dynamic effects conform to human perception characteristics: 1) Click feedback delay ≤ 100ms 2) Transition animation duration controlled between 300-500ms 3) Clear visual focus guidance. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for visual after-images during fast scrolling of wallpapers, and 5 points for hard-to-find key function buttons. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Web Applications-Communication",
+  "difficulty": "easy"
+}

package/library/web_applications-communication/user-live-streaming-viewing-page.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 1469,
+  "question": "You are a coding expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Make sure the code you provide is executable for demonstration purposes. I now want to create a user live streaming viewing page. The backend uses HLS to send the streaming content, and Socket.io to transmit real-time information during the broadcast. For the entire page, I would like to have a viewing area, a danmaku (bullet comment) area, and user information in the top right corner.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the HLS video streaming implementation complete?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code correctly implements HLS streaming using appropriate libraries (hls.js, video.js, etc.). Check for essential features like adaptive bitrate switching, buffer management, and error recovery. Score 0 if streaming is not implemented, 5 if only basic playback works, and 10 if it includes quality selection, automatic fallback mechanisms, and proper event handling.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is Socket.io real-time communication properly integrated?",
+      "description": "Check if Socket.io is correctly implemented for real-time updates including connection management, event handling, and reconnection strategies. Verify whether proper namespaces/rooms are used for efficient message routing, and if acknowledgments are used for critical operations. Deduct 5 points if reconnection logic is missing, and 3 points if there's no error handling for socket events. Full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the danmaku (bullet comment) system fully functional?",
+      "description": "Assess the danmaku implementation for performance optimization (using requestAnimationFrame, canvas-based rendering or DOM pooling), collision detection, configurable display parameters (speed, opacity, size), and comment filtering capabilities. Deduct 5 points if comments overlap excessively, 3 points if there's no performance optimization for large volume of comments, and 2 points if customization options are missing. Full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is user information and interaction design comprehensive?",
+      "description": "Evaluate the user information panel for essential elements (username, avatar, viewer count, follow button) and interactive capabilities (subscribing, gifting, reporting). Check whether the user can minimize/maximize the panel and if viewer statistics update in real-time. Deduct 3 points for each missing critical user interaction element, and 5 points if real-time updates of viewer metrics are absent. Full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as network interruption, video loading failure, socket disconnections, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should be able to effectively handle these edge cases, giving 10 points. If the robustness is average, give 5 points, and if no exceptions are handled, give 0 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 5,
+      "title": "Are there any innovative features that are eye-catching?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code includes surprise features that enhance the experience (e.g., 1. Picture-in-picture mode 2. Interactive effects for special donations/gifts 3. AI-powered comment moderation 4. Virtual gifts with animated effects). Add 3 points for each practical innovative feature implemented (maximum 10 points).",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 6,
+      "title": "Are there any redundant features?",
+      "description": "Strictly check three types of redundancy: 1. Redundant implementation of similar functions (e.g., multiple video players initialized) 2. Function modules unrelated to streaming (e.g., unnecessary social media widgets) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive animations that impact streaming performance). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core functions are interfered with by redundant code.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 7,
+      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
+      "description": "Review modular design (such as separating video playback/danmaku/socket communication layers), unit test coverage, and build process automation. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or design patterns are not used; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if the build process is not automated. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 8,
+      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional design standards?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the overall design follows modern design principles: 1) Harmonious color matching (no more than 3 primary colors) 2) Proper layout spacing (element spacing follows the 8px multiple principle) 3) Professional font system (body font size ≥ 14px, line height over 1.5 times). Deduct 3 points for each crowded visual element, 5 points for a glaring color combination, and 5 points for chaotic text-image layout. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the dynamic effects conform to human perception characteristics: 1) Click feedback delay ≤ 100ms 2) Transition animation duration controlled between 300-500ms 3) Clear visual focus guidance. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for visual after-images during fast sliding, and 5 points for hard-to-find key function buttons. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Web Applications-Communication",
+  "difficulty": "medium"
+}

package/library/web_applications-communication/user-my-page-with-login-profile.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 1481,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Make sure the code you generate is executable. Create a \"My Page\" that requires logging in first. If a user doesn't have an account, they need to register. Only after logging in can they view the content of the page. The \"My Page\" should include a profile picture and personal information. Please make it visually appealing.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the authentication system fully implemented?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code properly implements login, registration, and authentication mechanisms. Verify if sessions or tokens are used for maintaining authentication state. Score 0 if no authentication system is implemented, 5 if basic login/logout functions exist without security measures, and 10 if a complete system with password hashing, session management, and security features is implemented.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the registration functionality properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Examine whether the registration form validates inputs (email format, password strength, etc.) on both client and server sides. Check if it prevents duplicate accounts, handles errors gracefully, and provides feedback to the user. Deduct 3 points if client-side validation is missing, 3 points if server-side validation is inadequate, and 4 points if there's no duplicate user checking mechanism. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the user profile display system complete?",
+      "description": "Verify if the 'My Page' displays all essential user information (profile picture, username, email, etc.) and whether the code properly fetches this data from storage. Check if profile picture uploading/changing is supported. Score 0 if profile display is missing, 5 if basic information is shown without editing capabilities, and 10 if complete profile management with image upload functionality is implemented.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Are authentication redirects and protected routes implemented?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether unauthenticated users are properly redirected to login page when attempting to access protected content, and whether authenticated users are redirected to 'My Page' after login. Check if the application maintains authentication state across page reloads. Deduct 5 points if protection is easily bypassed, and 3 points if there are inconsistencies in the redirect logic. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (invalid inputs, session timeouts, failed image uploads, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should be able to effectively handle these edge cases, giving 10 points. If the robustness is average, give 5 points, and if no exceptions are handled, give 0 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 5,
+      "title": "Are there any innovative features that are eye-catching?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code includes surprise features that enhance the experience (e.g., 1. Social media integration 2. Dark/light theme toggle 3. Multiple profile picture options with filters). Add 3 points for each practical innovative feature implemented (maximum 10 points).",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 6,
+      "title": "Are there any redundant features?",
+      "description": "Strictly check three types of redundancy: 1. Redundant implementation of similar functions (e.g., multiple authentication methods without clear purpose) 2. Function modules unrelated to user profiles (e.g., a built-in game) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive animations). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core functions are interfered with by redundant code.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 7,
+      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
+      "description": "Review modular design (such as separating authentication logic/UI components/state management), code organization, and maintainability. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or design patterns are not used; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if there's no separation of concerns. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 8,
+      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional design standards?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the overall design follows modern design principles: 1) Harmonious color matching (no more than 3 primary colors) 2) Proper layout spacing (element spacing follows the 8px multiple principle) 3) Professional font system (body font size ≥ 14px, line height over 1.5 times). Deduct 3 points for each crowded visual element, 5 points for a glaring color combination, and 5 points for chaotic text-image layout. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the dynamic effects conform to human perception characteristics: 1) Form submission feedback delay ≤ 100ms 2) Transition animation duration controlled between 300-500ms 3) Clear visual focus guidance for form fields. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for jerky transitions between authentication steps, and 5 points for confusing navigation between login/register forms. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Web Applications-Communication",
+  "difficulty": "easy"
+}