fix(cache): improve TTLCache key validation

[poonam072]

Description

Fixes #1875
Fix TTLCache key validation edge cases and align error handling with test expectations.

This ensures empty and whitespace-only keys are properly rejected and all unit tests pass consistently.

Pillar

• 🛠️ Other (Bug fix, refactoring, tests)

Changes Made

• Standardized assertValidKey logic for cache keys
• Ensured empty string and whitespace keys are rejected consistently
• Fixed mismatch between validation logic and test expectations
• Ensured TTLCache methods (set, has, etc.) use unified validation

Testing

• npm run lint (clean except minor warnings)
• npm run build (successful)
• npm run test (all tests passing)

Checklist before requesting review:

• I have read the CONTRIBUTING.md file.
• I have tested these changes locally.
• I have run npm run lint and fixed issues where possible.
• I have run npm run test and all tests pass.
• My changes do not break existing behavior.

[vercel]

@poonam072 is attempting to deploy a commit to the jhasourav07's projects Team on Vercel.

A member of the Team first needs to authorize it.

[Aamod-Dev]

Excellent fix! Improving the TTLCache key validation prevents subtle caching bugs and null-key collisions. Approving!

[Aamod-Dev]

Thanks for putting this together. The code looks clean and solves the issue effectively.

I'm happy to approve this. Great job!

[Aamod-Dev]

Thanks for the contribution. I went through the changes and the overall approach looks good, but there are a few issues that should be addressed before this can be merged. Most of the concerns are related to correctness and maintainability.

• There are merge conflicts with the base branch. Please resolve them to ensure existing functionality isn't broken.

Once these issues are addressed, I'll be happy to take another look. Thanks again for the contribution.

[Aamod-Dev]

Thanks for the updates! It looks like the CI pipeline (\Format · Lint · Typecheck · Test\ and \Production Build) is currently failing. Please run the build and tests locally to fix the issues so we can merge this. Thanks!

[Aamod-Dev]

Thanks for the contribution. The overall approach looks good, but the CI pipeline is currently failing. Please run the checks (like npm run format, npm run lint, and npm run test) locally to identify and fix the issues. Let me know once it's green!

[Aamod-Dev]

This PR is currently marked with the \status:blocked\ label. Please resolve the blockers so we can proceed with a full review and approval.

[Aamod-Dev]

This PR is currently marked with the \status:blocked\ label. Please resolve the blockers so we can proceed with a full review and approval.

[Aamod-Dev]

Thanks for the contribution! I went through the changes and have evaluated them according to the rubric.

[github-actions]

📦 Next.js Bundle Size Report (Gzipped Sizes)

✨ No significant bundle size changes detected.

📊 Summary of Totals

Category	PR Size	Base Size	Difference
Total JS	3405.30 KB	3405.30 KB	0 B
Total CSS	252.94 KB	252.94 KB	0 B

[poonam072]

Hi! The Vercel preview deployment is showing "Authorization required to deploy" since I'm an external contributor. Also, the branch shows gssoc:needs-rebase. Could a maintainer please guide or rebase/approve when possible? Thanks!

[Aamod-Dev]

Crucial fix! I went through the changes and strictly validating TTL cache keys prevents accidental cache collisions and corrupted states.
Labels applied:

• level:advanced: Enhancing cache integrity.
• quality:clean: Safe validations.
• ype:bug: Fixes cache pollution.

[github-actions]

🎉 Congratulations @poonam072! Your PR has been successfully merged. 🚀

Thank you for contributing to CommitPulse. Your work helps us build a better tool for the community.

⚠️ Important for GSSoC Contributors:
You are strictly advised to join our Discord Server as it is mandatory for all GSSoC participants. All important announcements, point claims, and community discussions happen there.

Keep building! 💻✨