Skip to content

Conversation

@AmsterGet
Copy link
Member

@AmsterGet AmsterGet commented Dec 12, 2025

Summary by CodeRabbit

Release Notes

  • Bug Fixes
    • Fixed an error that occurred when using HTTP retries with an empty or undefined configuration. The retry mechanism now properly handles these scenarios, allowing retries to function correctly regardless of configuration state.

✏️ Tip: You can customize this high-level summary in your review settings.

@coderabbitai
Copy link

coderabbitai bot commented Dec 12, 2025

Walkthrough

This pull request fixes an error that occurred when restClientConfig was undefined during HTTP retries. The fix adds optional chaining to safely access the debug property, includes a test case to verify the fix, and documents the change in the changelog.

Changes

Cohort / File(s) Summary
Bug fix: undefined restClientConfig guard
lib/rest.js
Added optional chaining to safely access restClientConfig.debug in the retry logging handler, preventing errors when restClientConfig is undefined.
Test coverage
__tests__/rest.spec.js
Added test case verifying that the onRetry handler does not throw an exception when restClientConfig is undefined and an ECONNABORTED error is simulated.
Documentation
CHANGELOG.md
Added entry in new "Fixed" section documenting the error fix for empty restClientConfig during HTTP retries.

Estimated code review effort

🎯 2 (Simple) | ⏱️ ~10 minutes

  • Extra attention on lib/rest.js: verify that optional chaining properly guards against undefined restClientConfig in all retry-related paths.

Possibly related PRs

Poem

🐰 A config that's missing? Oh dear, oh no more!
We guard with precision, as rabbits adore,
With optional chaining, so safe and so spry,
No errors will hop—just retries fly by! 🚀

Pre-merge checks and finishing touches

✅ Passed checks (3 passed)
Check name Status Explanation
Description Check ✅ Passed Check skipped - CodeRabbit’s high-level summary is enabled.
Title check ✅ Passed The title clearly and specifically describes the main change: fixing an error that occurs when restClientConfig is empty during HTTP retries, which directly aligns with the changes across CHANGELOG.md, lib/rest.js, and tests/rest.spec.js.
Docstring Coverage ✅ Passed No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check.
✨ Finishing touches
  • 📝 Generate docstrings
🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
  • Create PR with unit tests
  • Post copyable unit tests in a comment
  • Commit unit tests in branch bugfix/EPMRPP-110768-fix-error-for-empty-restClientConfig-while-using-HTTP-retries

📜 Recent review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 999d824 and ff4d907.

📒 Files selected for processing (3)
  • CHANGELOG.md (1 hunks)
  • __tests__/rest.spec.js (1 hunks)
  • lib/rest.js (1 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (3)
lib/rest.js (1)

153-153: LGTM! Clean fix using optional chaining.

The optional chaining prevents a TypeError when restClientConfig is undefined, and makes this code consistent with other usages in the file (e.g., lines 74, 151).

__tests__/rest.spec.js (1)

138-156: LGTM! Well-structured test for the edge case.

The test appropriately validates that the onRetry callback handles undefined restClientConfig safely. The test structure follows existing patterns and includes proper mock cleanup.

CHANGELOG.md (1)

1-2: LGTM! Changelog appropriately documents the fix.

The entry clearly describes the fix and follows the standard changelog format.


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.

❤️ Share

Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.

@AmsterGet AmsterGet merged commit 45b48d7 into develop Dec 19, 2025
7 checks passed
@AmsterGet AmsterGet deleted the bugfix/EPMRPP-110768-fix-error-for-empty-restClientConfig-while-using-HTTP-retries branch December 19, 2025 09:10
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants