[WIP] Adding swagger to moclojer

[matheusfrancisco]

This is the implementation of closes #205 #226

I have added a flag to SWAGGER as an environment variable, which will enable the build for reitit routes. However, there are some additional steps required for reitit swagger. It requests that parameters such as name, query-params, path and body are specified, along with the response..

e.g:

["/plus"
         {:get {:summary "plus with spec query parameters"
                :parameters {:query {:x int?, :y int?}}
                :responses {200 {:body {:total int?}}}
                :handler (fn [{{{:keys [x y]} :query} :parameters}]
                           {:status 200
                            :body {:total (+ x y)}})}
          :post {:summary "plus with spec body parameters"
                 :parameters {:body {:x int?, :y int?}}
                 :responses {200 {:body {:total int?}}}
                 :handler (fn [{{{:keys [x y]} :body} :parameters}]
                            {:status 200
                             :body {:total (+ x y)}})}}]

Create a function that discovers all possible types of parameters or responses will be kind of verbose, but is not impossible, just want to be reasonable about our options.

So if we enable swagger we have to specify the parameter types or body or query parameters, what do you think?

- endpoint:
    method: GET
    path: /hello/:username
    parameters:
      path:
        username:
          type: string
    response:
      status: 200
      headers:
        Content-Type: application/json
      body: >
        {
          "hello": "{{path.username}}!"
        }

[coderabbitai]

Important

Review skipped

Ignore keyword(s) in the title.

Ignored keywords (2)

• WIP
• DO NOT MERGE

Please check the settings in the CodeRabbit UI or the .coderabbit.yaml file in this repository. To trigger a single review, invoke the @coderabbitai review command.

You can disable this status message by setting the reviews.review_status to false in the CodeRabbit configuration file.

---

Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

• Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
  • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>.
  • Generate unit testing code for this file.
  • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
• 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 testing code 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 and render them as a table.
  • @coderabbitai show all the console.log statements in this repository.
  • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
  • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
  • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

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 an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
• @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
• @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
• @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
• @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
• @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.
• Please see the configuration documentation for more information.
• 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/schema.v2.json

Documentation and Community

• Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
• Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
• Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

[avelino]

Having to specify the types of parameters is very bad, it complicates everything.

    parameters:
      path:
        username:
          type: string

We can assume that all parameters are string and when it's not a string the user specifies it explicitly, but even so, I don't like the parameters:. We can think of a better signature, for example: path: /hello/:username/:age|int

It's possible to parse what comes after the |.
@matheusfrancisco, do you think it makes sense? Is it more user-friendly?"

[J0sueTM]

@avelino I also think that parsing the uri seems more user friendly, and doesn't complicate our current implementation. One problem I have with ditching parameters altogether is that, yes, we can handle the parameters straight from the uri, but if in the future we add a body params to the request, it will come back anyways.

Anyways, I would definitely ditch the parameters field for now.

Thinking a bit better about the body request, maybe that should be its own field, while the others, going with the signature you gave looks fine.

- endpoint:
    method: GET
    ;; {} is optional
    path: /users/:age|int&name=avelino{&children=3|int}
    body:
      hello: string
      bye: int
    response:
      status: 200
      headers:
        Content-Type: application/json
      body: >
        {
          "hello": "{{body.hello}}!",
          "user": "avelino is {{path.age}} years old and has {{path.children}} children" 
        }

That's out of scope, I know, I just wanted to see how it would look like

[J0sueTM]

does destructing [k v] account for repeating headers?

would map returning ["something" 1 "something" 2] be treated without errors?