Conversation
최신 첨삭 버전의 문항별 최종 작성본을 전체 검증 후 저장하고, API-019 구현 상태와 REQ-006 진행 문서를 갱신한다.
5 tasks
📝 WalkthroughWalkthrough최신 첨삭 버전에 대한 문항별 최종 작성본 일괄 저장 PUT API가 추가되었다. 관련 예외 코드, 서비스 검증/저장 로직, DTO, 컨트롤러, 테스트, 문서가 함께 변경되었다. Changes최종 작성본 일괄 저장 기능
Possibly related PRs
🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 4 | ❌ 1❌ Failed checks (1 warning)
✅ Passed checks (4 passed)
Comment |
Backend CI Report
|
Codecov Report❌ Patch coverage is 📢 Thoughts on this report? Let us know! |
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
🧹 Nitpick comments (3)
src/main/java/com/daon/rewrite/reviewversion/entity/ReviewVersionQuestionResult.java (1)
108-115: 📐 Maintainability & Code Quality | 🔵 Trivial | ⚡ Quick win
countCodePoints중복 정의.동일한 코드포인트 계산 로직이
ReviewVersionCommandService.countCodePoints(184-186행)에도 존재합니다. 두 구현이 향후 divergence 되면 저장된finalAnswerLength와 검증 시 사용하는 길이 기준이 어긋날 수 있습니다. 공용 유틸리티로 추출하는 것을 권장합니다.🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate. In `@src/main/java/com/daon/rewrite/reviewversion/entity/ReviewVersionQuestionResult.java` around lines 108 - 115, `ReviewVersionQuestionResult.countCodePoints` duplicates the same code-point length logic already present in `ReviewVersionCommandService.countCodePoints`, so the two can drift apart. Extract this into a shared utility or common helper and have both `updateFinalAnswer` and `ReviewVersionCommandService` call that single implementation to keep `finalAnswerLength` and validation length consistent.src/test/java/com/daon/rewrite/reviewversion/service/ReviewVersionCommandServiceTest.java (1)
155-177: 📐 Maintainability & Code Quality | 🔵 Trivial | ⚡ Quick win첨삭 버전(reviewVersion) NOT_FOUND 케이스 테스트 누락.
현재
saveMyFinalAnswersThrowsNotFoundWhenCoverLetterIsMissingOtherOwnerOrDeleted는 자기소개서(coverLetter) 기준의 NOT_FOUND만 검증합니다. PR 인수 기준은 "존재하지 않는 자기소개서/첨삭 버전" 모두에 대해 NOT_FOUND를 요구하지만, 존재하는 자기소개서에 대해 잘못된/존재하지 않는versionId를 전달하는 케이스에 대한 테스트가 없습니다.As per path instructions,
**/*Test.java: "Add or update tests for new or changed behavior."🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate. In `@src/test/java/com/daon/rewrite/reviewversion/service/ReviewVersionCommandServiceTest.java` around lines 155 - 177, The current `ReviewVersionCommandServiceTest.saveMyFinalAnswersThrowsNotFoundWhenCoverLetterIsMissingOtherOwnerOrDeleted` only covers missing/unauthorized/deleted cover letters, but it does not verify the NOT_FOUND behavior for a valid cover letter paired with an invalid or nonexistent review version. Add a test in `ReviewVersionCommandServiceTest` that saves an accessible cover letter, then calls `service.saveMyFinalAnswers` with a bad `versionId` and asserts `BusinessException` with `ErrorCode.NOT_FOUND`, using the existing `assertNotFound` pattern or a dedicated helper if needed.Source: Path instructions
src/main/java/com/daon/rewrite/reviewversion/dto/SaveFinalAnswersResponse.java (1)
16-27: 📐 Maintainability & Code Quality | 🔵 Trivial | ⚡ Quick win시간대 변환 로직 중복 가능성.
API_ZONE을 이용한 Instant→LocalDateTime 변환이 이미 다른 응답 DTO(예: 첨삭 버전 상세 응답의createdAt변환)에서도 동일하게 사용되는 것으로 보입니다. 새 DTO에서 동일한 상수/로직을 다시 정의하면 향후 시간대 정책이 바뀔 때 일부 DTO만 갱신되는 불일치 위험이 있습니다. 공통 유틸리티(예:TimeZoneUtils또는 매핑 헬퍼)로 추출하는 것을 권장합니다.♻️ 제안 예시
-public record SaveFinalAnswersResponse( - String coverLetterId, - String reviewVersionId, - List<QuestionResultResponse> questionResults, - LocalDateTime updatedAt -) { - private static final ZoneId API_ZONE = ZoneId.of("Asia/Seoul"); - - public static SaveFinalAnswersResponse from(SaveFinalAnswersResult result) { +public record SaveFinalAnswersResponse( + String coverLetterId, + String reviewVersionId, + List<QuestionResultResponse> questionResults, + LocalDateTime updatedAt +) { + public static SaveFinalAnswersResponse from(SaveFinalAnswersResult result) { return new SaveFinalAnswersResponse( result.coverLetterId(), result.reviewVersionId(), result.questionResults().stream() .map(QuestionResultResponse::from) .toList(), - LocalDateTime.ofInstant(result.updatedAt(), API_ZONE) + ApiTimeConverter.toLocalDateTime(result.updatedAt()) ); }🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate. In `@src/main/java/com/daon/rewrite/reviewversion/dto/SaveFinalAnswersResponse.java` around lines 16 - 27, `SaveFinalAnswersResponse.from` is duplicating the Instant-to-LocalDateTime conversion policy with its own `API_ZONE` constant, which can drift from other DTO mappings. Extract this conversion into the shared time-mapping utility or existing helper used by other response DTOs (for example the same place that handles `createdAt`), and have `from(SaveFinalAnswersResult)` delegate to that shared method instead of defining its own zone/logic.
🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents
Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the
rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate.
Inline comments:
In
`@src/main/java/com/daon/rewrite/reviewversion/service/ReviewVersionCommandService.java`:
- Around line 89-152: The duplicate `questionResultId` check in
`ReviewVersionCommandService` is tied to `normalizedAnswers`, so a repeated ID
can be missed when the first entry has a null/blank `finalAnswer`. Update the
validation flow to track already-seen IDs separately in
`validateQuestionResultId` (or the surrounding validation method) using a
dedicated Set, and use that Set for duplicate detection regardless of answer
validity. Keep the existing `normalizedAnswers` map only for collecting valid
answers, and ensure the duplicate error is added for the second occurrence even
if the first one failed answer validation.
---
Nitpick comments:
In
`@src/main/java/com/daon/rewrite/reviewversion/dto/SaveFinalAnswersResponse.java`:
- Around line 16-27: `SaveFinalAnswersResponse.from` is duplicating the
Instant-to-LocalDateTime conversion policy with its own `API_ZONE` constant,
which can drift from other DTO mappings. Extract this conversion into the shared
time-mapping utility or existing helper used by other response DTOs (for example
the same place that handles `createdAt`), and have
`from(SaveFinalAnswersResult)` delegate to that shared method instead of
defining its own zone/logic.
In
`@src/main/java/com/daon/rewrite/reviewversion/entity/ReviewVersionQuestionResult.java`:
- Around line 108-115: `ReviewVersionQuestionResult.countCodePoints` duplicates
the same code-point length logic already present in
`ReviewVersionCommandService.countCodePoints`, so the two can drift apart.
Extract this into a shared utility or common helper and have both
`updateFinalAnswer` and `ReviewVersionCommandService` call that single
implementation to keep `finalAnswerLength` and validation length consistent.
In
`@src/test/java/com/daon/rewrite/reviewversion/service/ReviewVersionCommandServiceTest.java`:
- Around line 155-177: The current
`ReviewVersionCommandServiceTest.saveMyFinalAnswersThrowsNotFoundWhenCoverLetterIsMissingOtherOwnerOrDeleted`
only covers missing/unauthorized/deleted cover letters, but it does not verify
the NOT_FOUND behavior for a valid cover letter paired with an invalid or
nonexistent review version. Add a test in `ReviewVersionCommandServiceTest` that
saves an accessible cover letter, then calls `service.saveMyFinalAnswers` with a
bad `versionId` and asserts `BusinessException` with `ErrorCode.NOT_FOUND`,
using the existing `assertNotFound` pattern or a dedicated helper if needed.
🪄 Autofix (Beta)
Fix all unresolved CodeRabbit comments on this PR:
- Push a commit to this branch (recommended)
- Create a new PR with the fixes
ℹ️ Review info
⚙️ Run configuration
Configuration used: Repository UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
Run ID: accf64c8-3e0a-4e18-8dfc-4fb2b25cf500
📒 Files selected for processing (12)
docs/api/README.mddocs/status.mdsrc/main/java/com/daon/rewrite/global/exception/ErrorCode.javasrc/main/java/com/daon/rewrite/reviewversion/controller/ReviewVersionController.javasrc/main/java/com/daon/rewrite/reviewversion/dto/SaveFinalAnswersRequest.javasrc/main/java/com/daon/rewrite/reviewversion/dto/SaveFinalAnswersResponse.javasrc/main/java/com/daon/rewrite/reviewversion/entity/ReviewVersionQuestionResult.javasrc/main/java/com/daon/rewrite/reviewversion/service/ReviewVersionCommandService.javasrc/main/java/com/daon/rewrite/reviewversion/service/SaveFinalAnswerInput.javasrc/main/java/com/daon/rewrite/reviewversion/service/SaveFinalAnswersResult.javasrc/test/java/com/daon/rewrite/reviewversion/controller/ReviewVersionControllerTest.javasrc/test/java/com/daon/rewrite/reviewversion/service/ReviewVersionCommandServiceTest.java
중복 questionResultId 감지를 답변 유효성과 분리하고, 첨삭 버전 NOT_FOUND 및 finalAnswer 갱신 저장 테스트를 보강한다.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🧹 Nitpick comments (1)
src/test/java/com/daon/rewrite/reviewversion/repository/ReviewVersionRepositoryTest.java (1)
129-153: 📐 Maintainability & Code Quality | 🔵 Trivial | 💤 Low value픽스처 생성 코드 중복.
saveFirstReviewVersionRoundTripsQuestionSnapshots(41-63행)와 동일한 CoverLetter/CoverLetterQuestion/ReviewVersion 생성 로직이 반복되고 있습니다. 공통 private 헬퍼 메서드로 추출하면 테스트 가독성과 유지보수성이 개선됩니다. 다만 필수는 아니며 우선순위는 낮습니다.🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate. In `@src/test/java/com/daon/rewrite/reviewversion/repository/ReviewVersionRepositoryTest.java` around lines 129 - 153, The test setup in ReviewVersionRepositoryTest repeats the same CoverLetter, CoverLetterQuestion, and ReviewVersion fixture creation that already exists in saveFirstReviewVersionRoundTripsQuestionSnapshots. Extract the shared setup into a private helper method (or a small fixture builder) and reuse it from updateFinalAnswerRoundTripsUpdatedAnswerAndLength and the existing test, keeping the assertions unchanged. Use the existing create/save calls on CoverLetter.draft, CoverLetterQuestion.create, and ReviewVersion.first so the duplicated setup is centralized and easier to maintain.
🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents
Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the
rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate.
Nitpick comments:
In
`@src/test/java/com/daon/rewrite/reviewversion/repository/ReviewVersionRepositoryTest.java`:
- Around line 129-153: The test setup in ReviewVersionRepositoryTest repeats the
same CoverLetter, CoverLetterQuestion, and ReviewVersion fixture creation that
already exists in saveFirstReviewVersionRoundTripsQuestionSnapshots. Extract the
shared setup into a private helper method (or a small fixture builder) and reuse
it from updateFinalAnswerRoundTripsUpdatedAnswerAndLength and the existing test,
keeping the assertions unchanged. Use the existing create/save calls on
CoverLetter.draft, CoverLetterQuestion.create, and ReviewVersion.first so the
duplicated setup is centralized and easier to maintain.
ℹ️ Review info
⚙️ Run configuration
Configuration used: Repository UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
Run ID: 0b535531-b880-47e2-a32f-fe92efa0b68e
📒 Files selected for processing (3)
src/main/java/com/daon/rewrite/reviewversion/service/ReviewVersionCommandService.javasrc/test/java/com/daon/rewrite/reviewversion/repository/ReviewVersionRepositoryTest.javasrc/test/java/com/daon/rewrite/reviewversion/service/ReviewVersionCommandServiceTest.java
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (2)
- src/test/java/com/daon/rewrite/reviewversion/service/ReviewVersionCommandServiceTest.java
- src/main/java/com/daon/rewrite/reviewversion/service/ReviewVersionCommandService.java
8 tasks
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
작업 내용
REVIEW_VERSION_NOT_LATEST로 응답합니다.finalAnswer를 전체 payload로 검증한 뒤 한 번에 저장합니다.finalAnswertrim, blank, 5000자 초과, 누락/중복/알 수 없는questionResultIdvalidation을 처리합니다.finalAnswerLength를 Unicode code point 기준으로 함께 갱신합니다.관련 이슈
문서 반영
docs/api/README.mddocs/status.md확인 결과
./gradlew test./gradlew checkgit diff --checkSummary by CodeRabbit