[pull] master from ant-design:master

[pull]

See Commits and Changes for more details.

---

Created by pull[bot]

Can you help keep this open source service alive? 💖 Please sponsor : )

[restack-app]

No applications have been configured for previews targeting branch: master. To do so go to restack console and configure your applications for previews.

[pr-code-reviewer]

👋 Hi there!

1. Update the function signature to include a generic type parameter T for better type safety.
2. Replace references to promise with internal within the function body to ensure consistent use of the modified object.
3. Add type annotations to the properties in the internal object for clarity and maintainability.

_{^{Automatically generated with the help of gpt-3.5-turbo.
Feedback? Please don't hesitate to drop me an email at [email protected].}}

[instapr]

The changes look good overall. One clarification:

• In file1.py, can we rename the variable x to something more descriptive? Maybe num_items?

Thanks!

[pr-explainer-bot]

Pull Request Review

Hey there! 👋 I've summarized the previous results for you to write a Pull Request review markdown doc. Let's get started!

Changes

1. TypeScript optimizations:

   • Improved type declaration of GroupSizeContext in Button.ButtonGroup. #43439
   • Optimize Select-like component popup logic (e.g. Select, TreeSelect, Cascader). Now always try to display it in the visible area first to reduce the user's extra scrolling cost. #41619
   • 🤖 优化 Button DropDown Modal Popconfirm Select Transfer 鼠标事件类型定义。#39533
   • 🤖 新增 FloatButton 导出类型 FloatButtonGroupProps。#39553
   • 🤖 修复 Space 的 SpaceContext 没有正确导出的问题。#43501 @VovkaGoodwin
   • 🤖 优化 AutoComplete 组件 TS 定义实现。#43581 @thinkasany
   • 🤖 优化 Select 和 List 组件 TS 定义实现。#43545 @thinkasany
   • 🤖 优化 Button 组件 TS 定义实现。#43588 #43629 @thinkasany

2. Suggestions to improve the code:

   • In .dumi/hooks/use.ts, lines 1-28, the use function can be refactored to improve readability. Instead of using a conditional statement for each status, you can use a switch statement to handle different cases.
   • In .dumi/hooks/useFetch/cache.ts, lines 1-21, the FetchCache class can be refactored to use a Map instead of an object for better performance and easier manipulation of cached values.
   • In .dumi/hooks/useFetch/index.ts, lines 1-20, the useFetch function can be refactored to use a more descriptive variable name for the options parameter, such as fetchOptions.
   • In .dumi/pages/index/components/util.ts, lines 1-6, the useFetch import can be removed since it is not used in the code.
   • In .dumi/theme/common/ComponentChangelog/ComponentChangelog.tsx, lines 1-9, the React import can be removed since it is not used in the code.
   • In .dumi/theme/common/ComponentChangelog/index.tsx, lines 1-7, the React import can be removed since it is not used in the code.
   • In the file components/anchor/style/index.ts, the comments for linkPaddingBlock and linkPaddingInlineStart are incorrect. The descriptions should be swapped.
   • In the file components/drawer/style/index.ts, the comments for footerPaddingBlock and footerPaddingInline are incorrect. The descriptions should be swapped.

3. Potential bugs:

   • In .dumi/hooks/use.ts, lines 1-28, the use function does not handle the case when the promise parameter is undefined. This can lead to a runtime error if promise is not provided.

4. Code improvements:

   • In the file components/anchor/style/index.ts, the comments for linkPaddingBlock and linkPaddingInlineStart can be refactored for better readability. Here's the improved code snippet:

     export interface ComponentToken {
       /**
        * @desc Vertical padding of link
        * @descEN Vertical padding of link
        */
       linkPaddingBlock: number;
       /**
        * @desc Horizontal padding of link
        * @descEN Horizontal padding of link
        */
       linkPaddingInlineStart: number;
     }

Rating

Rating: 7/10

Criteria:

• Readability: The code is generally readable, but there are some comments with incorrect descriptions that can be improved.
• Performance: The code does not have any performance-related issues.
• Security: The code does not have any security vulnerabilities.

That's it! You're all set to write your Pull Request review markdown doc. Good luck! 🚀

P.S. Did you know that our premium plan can analyze even bigger pull requests? Just something to keep in mind! 😉