fix(zmodel): check optionality consistency between relation and fk fields

[ymc9]

Fixes #177

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Bug Fixes
  • Improved type comparison in schema validations.
  • Fixed typos in error messages for schema validations.
  • Enhanced validation for optional fields in non-optional relations.
• Tests
  • Adjusted test configurations for better accuracy.
  • Added a regression test for a specific model relationship scenario.

[coderabbitai]

Walkthrough

Walkthrough

The changes involve improvements to the datamodel validator in a schema language server, focusing on better handling of scalar types, spelling corrections in error messages, and adding validation for optional fields in non-optional relations. Additionally, there are updates to integration tests, including the removal of a logging option and the introduction of a new test case to address a specific regression scenario related to model relationships and field optionality.

Changes

Files	Change Summary
.../validator/datamodel-validator.ts	- Improved scalar type handling - Spelling corrections - Validation for optional fields in non-optional relations
.../tests/regression/issue-1014.test.ts	- Removed { logPrismaQuery: true } option
.../tests/regression/issue-177.test.ts	- New test case for model relationships and field optionality

Assessment against linked issues

Objective	Addressed	Explanation
Relation id field and reference field must have consistent "optional" typing (#177)	✅

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:

Note: Auto-reply has been disabled for this repository by the repository owner. The CodeRabbit bot will not respond to your comments unless it is explicitly tagged.

• 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 tests 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 generate interesting stats about this repository from git and render them as a table.
  • @coderabbitai show all the console.log statements in this repository.
  • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit tests.
  • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.

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 as PR comments)

• @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
• @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
• @coderabbitai review to trigger a review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
• @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
• @coderabbitai help to get help.

Additionally, you can add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.

CodeRabbit Configration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

• You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
• The JSON schema for the configuration file is available here.
• 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/coderabbit-overrides.v2.json

CodeRabbit Discord Community

Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.

[coderabbitai]

Review Status

Actionable comments generated: 0

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI

Commits

Files that changed from the base of the PR and between 912c831 and 18eb4f2.

Files selected for processing (3)

• packages/schema/src/language-server/validator/datamodel-validator.ts (4 hunks)
• tests/integration/tests/regression/issue-1014.test.ts (1 hunks)
• tests/integration/tests/regression/issue-177.test.ts (1 hunks)

Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (1)

• tests/integration/tests/regression/issue-1014.test.ts

Additional comments: 5

tests/integration/tests/regression/issue-177.test.ts (1)

• 1-27: The test case is well-structured and targets the specific regression scenario outlined in issue #177 effectively. It checks that the schema validation logic correctly identifies and reports inconsistencies in field optionality within model relationships. The use of loadModelWithError to simulate the loading of a model with an expected error message is a good approach to validate the updated validation logic. The test is clear, concise, and directly related to the issue it aims to prevent regressions for.

packages/schema/src/language-server/validator/datamodel-validator.ts (4)

• 67-67: The update to the comparison for SCALAR_TYPES.includes to handle the type correctly is a crucial improvement. It ensures that the validation logic accurately identifies scalar types, which is essential for the integrity of the schema validation process. This change enhances the robustness of the type checking mechanism within the validator.
• 124-124: Correcting spelling errors in error messages, such as "fields" value cannot be empty, improves the clarity and professionalism of the feedback provided to users during schema validation. This change contributes to better user experience by making error messages more understandable.
• 134-134: Similar to the previous comment, correcting spelling errors in error messages, such as "references" value cannot be empty, enhances the clarity and professionalism of the feedback provided to users. Clear and accurate error messages are crucial for effective debugging and schema correction by users.
• 160-167: The addition of validation for optional fields in non-optional relations is a significant improvement. This validation ensures that the schema validator can accurately identify and report inconsistencies in optionality between related fields. It directly addresses the issue outlined in #177, enhancing the robustness and correctness of Prisma schema definitions. This change is a proactive approach to maintaining the integrity of schema relationships and preventing potential runtime issues.