-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 183
feat: use latest chat UI #418
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Conversation
🦋 Changeset detectedLatest commit: 51ee45a The changes in this PR will be included in the next version bump. This PR includes changesets to release 1 package
Not sure what this means? Click here to learn what changesets are. Click here if you're a maintainer who wants to add another changeset to this PR |
WalkthroughThe pull request introduces a new patch titled "create-llama" that updates the chat user interface (UI) components. Key changes include replacing the Changes
Possibly related PRs
Suggested reviewers
Poem
📜 Recent review detailsConfiguration used: .coderabbit.yaml 📒 Files selected for processing (2)
💤 Files with no reviewable changes (2)
Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media? 🪧 TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
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 using PR comments)
Other keywords and placeholders
Documentation and Community
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Actionable comments posted: 1
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (3)
templates/types/streaming/nextjs/app/components/ui/chat/tools/chat-tools.tsx (3)
3-3
: LGTM! Consider adding type documentation.The distinction between
Message
types through aliasing improves type safety. However, it would be helpful to add a brief comment explaining the difference between these types for future maintainers.Add a comment above the imports:
// Message from chat-ui is used for component props // AiMessage from ai library is used for message processingAlso applies to: 8-8
70-70
: Consider a more type-safe approach for version mapping.The type assertion
(message as AiMessage).id
follows the same pattern as above, but we could make this more robust.Consider creating a type guard:
function isAiMessage(message: Message | AiMessage): message is AiMessage { return 'id' in message; } // Then use it like: version={isAiMessage(message) ? artifactVersionMap.get(message.id) : undefined}
Line range hint
1-90
: Consider architectural improvements for better maintainability.A few suggestions to enhance the codebase:
- Extract the version mapping logic into a custom hook (e.g.,
useArtifactVersions
)- Consider implementing a registry pattern for tool renderers instead of switch-case
- Add documentation for adding new tool renderers (referenced in TODO)
Example hook extraction:
function useArtifactVersions(messages: Message[]) { return useMemo(() => { const map = new Map<string, number>(); let versionIndex = 1; (messages as AiMessage[]).forEach((m) => { // ... version mapping logic }); return map; }, [messages]); }
📜 Review details
Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (4)
.changeset/wet-pears-matter.md
(1 hunks)templates/types/streaming/nextjs/app/components/ui/chat/chat-input.tsx
(2 hunks)templates/types/streaming/nextjs/app/components/ui/chat/chat-messages.tsx
(1 hunks)templates/types/streaming/nextjs/app/components/ui/chat/tools/chat-tools.tsx
(3 hunks)
✅ Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (1)
- .changeset/wet-pears-matter.md
🧰 Additional context used
📓 Path-based instructions (3)
templates/types/streaming/nextjs/app/components/ui/chat/chat-input.tsx (1)
Pattern templates/**
: For files under the templates
folder, do not report 'Missing Dependencies Detected' errors.
templates/types/streaming/nextjs/app/components/ui/chat/chat-messages.tsx (1)
Pattern templates/**
: For files under the templates
folder, do not report 'Missing Dependencies Detected' errors.
templates/types/streaming/nextjs/app/components/ui/chat/tools/chat-tools.tsx (1)
Pattern templates/**
: For files under the templates
folder, do not report 'Missing Dependencies Detected' errors.
🔇 Additional comments (3)
templates/types/streaming/nextjs/app/components/ui/chat/chat-input.tsx (2)
4-4
: LGTM: Import statement updated correctly
The replacement of DocumentPreview with DocumentInfo aligns with the latest chat UI requirements.
59-62
: Verify the empty sources array usage
The sources
array is being initialized as empty. Please verify if this is intentional or if document sources should be populated from the file metadata.
Let's check the DocumentInfo component's usage in other parts of the codebase:
✅ Verification successful
Empty sources array is intentional in this context
The empty sources array is correct in this usage. The DocumentInfo
component is being used from @llamaindex/chat-ui/widgets
(an external package) in the file upload preview context, where document sources are not yet available. This matches the pattern seen in other parts of the codebase where sources are initialized as empty arrays and populated later during processing.
Key evidence:
- Component is imported from external package
@llamaindex/chat-ui/widgets
- Recent changelog entry indicates work on URL handling: "DocumentInfo working with relative URLs"
- Usage is consistent with document preview before processing, where sources wouldn't be available yet
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for other DocumentInfo usages to verify if sources are typically populated
rg -A 3 "DocumentInfo.*sources"
Length of output: 33
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's first find all DocumentInfo usages
rg -A 5 "<DocumentInfo"
# Also check the DocumentInfo component implementation
fd "DocumentInfo" --exec cat {}
Length of output: 705
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's find the DocumentInfo component definition
fd -e tsx -e ts -e jsx -e js --exec ast-grep --pattern 'interface DocumentInfoProps {
$$$
}'
# Also search for any type definitions related to document sources
rg -A 5 "sources.*\[\]"
Length of output: 2998
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's find the actual DocumentInfo component implementation
fd -e tsx -e ts -e jsx -e js --exec ast-grep --pattern 'const DocumentInfo = ({$$$}: DocumentInfoProps) => {
$$$
}'
# Also search for any documentation or comments about DocumentInfo
rg -B 2 -A 2 "DocumentInfo"
Length of output: 1490
templates/types/streaming/nextjs/app/components/ui/chat/tools/chat-tools.tsx (1)
30-30
: Verify type casting safety.
The type assertion messages as AiMessage[]
assumes all messages are AI messages. This could lead to runtime errors if the assumption doesn't hold.
Let's verify this assumption by checking the message types in the codebase:
✅ Verification successful
Type casting is safe in this context
The type assertion messages as AiMessage[]
is safe because:
- The component uses both
useChatUI()
from "@llamaindex/chat-ui" and importsMessage as AiMessage
from "ai" - The cast is only used to iterate messages for building an artifact version map
- The code defensively checks for optional chaining (
m.annotations?.forEach
) and type guards (typeof annotation === "object"
) after the cast - Even if a message isn't an AiMessage, the code won't break as it only accesses common properties (id, annotations) that exist on both types
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check how messages are created/used to verify type safety
# Look for message creation/manipulation patterns
rg -A 3 "messages\s*=|messages\.push|messages\[" --type typescript
# Look for useChatUI usage to understand message types
rg -A 3 "useChatUI" --type typescript
Length of output: 176
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for message type definitions and usage
rg -t ts -t tsx "messages\s*=|messages\.push|messages\["
# Look for useChatUI hook usage
rg -t ts -t tsx "useChatUI"
# Search for AiMessage type definition and usage
rg -t ts -t tsx "AiMessage"
# Look at the specific component's full implementation
cat "templates/types/streaming/nextjs/app/components/ui/chat/tools/chat-tools.tsx"
Length of output: 2780
templates/types/streaming/nextjs/app/components/ui/chat/chat-messages.tsx
Show resolved
Hide resolved
templates/types/streaming/nextjs/app/components/ui/chat/tools/chat-tools.tsx
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
TODO: use latest chat-ui |
templates/types/streaming/nextjs/app/components/ui/chat/tools/chat-tools.tsx
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Actionable comments posted: 1
📜 Review details
Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
templates/types/streaming/nextjs/app/components/ui/chat/tools/chat-tools.tsx
(3 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
📓 Path-based instructions (1)
templates/types/streaming/nextjs/app/components/ui/chat/tools/chat-tools.tsx (1)
Pattern templates/**
: For files under the templates
folder, do not report 'Missing Dependencies Detected' errors.
🔇 Additional comments (2)
templates/types/streaming/nextjs/app/components/ui/chat/tools/chat-tools.tsx (2)
31-37
: LGTM! Clean implementation of version handling.
The ChatTools component has been properly updated to handle the artifact version, with appropriate TypeScript types and clean prop passing.
Also applies to: 59-59
13-19
: Consider addressing the TODO comment with a more robust solution.
The current implementation of artifact version tracking is acknowledged as a temporary solution. Consider moving the version tracking to the tool call itself and storing it in CodeArtifact for better maintainability.
The useMemo
optimization is well implemented, but this logic could be simplified if the version was stored directly in the artifact data.
Let's check if there are other similar patterns in the codebase:
✅ Verification successful
Verified: No other instances of artifact version tracking patterns found.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for similar version tracking patterns
rg -g '*.{ts,tsx}' "getArtifactVersion|artifactVersion" --type-add 'tsx:*.{ts,tsx}'
Length of output: 902
templates/types/streaming/nextjs/app/components/ui/chat/tools/chat-tools.tsx
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
templates/types/streaming/nextjs/app/components/ui/chat/tools/chat-tools.tsx
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Actionable comments posted: 1
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (2)
templates/types/streaming/nextjs/app/components/ui/chat/tools/chat-tools.tsx (2)
13-14
: Address technical debt in artifact versioning.The TODO comment indicates that the current versioning approach is a temporary solution. Consider implementing a more robust solution by storing the version in CodeArtifact directly.
81-101
: Enhance robustness and performance of version calculation.The version calculation logic has several areas for improvement:
- No validation for unique message IDs
- Repeated type checking for message ID
- Potential performance impact with large message lists
Consider this improved implementation:
function getArtifactVersion( messages: Message[], message: Message, ): number | undefined { const messageId = "id" in message ? message.id : undefined; if (!messageId) return undefined; + + // Create a Set of message IDs to ensure uniqueness + const messageIds = new Set(messages.filter(m => "id" in m).map(m => m.id)); + if (!messageIds.has(messageId)) return undefined; + let versionIndex = 1; for (const m of messages) { + if (!("id" in m)) continue; + const toolData = m.annotations ? (getAnnotationData(m.annotations, "tools") as unknown as ToolData[]) : null; if (toolData?.some((t) => t.toolCall.name === "artifact")) { - if ("id" in m && m.id === messageId) { + if (m.id === messageId) { return versionIndex; } versionIndex++; } } return undefined; }
📜 Review details
Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
templates/types/streaming/nextjs/app/components/ui/chat/tools/chat-tools.tsx
(3 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
📓 Path-based instructions (1)
templates/types/streaming/nextjs/app/components/ui/chat/tools/chat-tools.tsx (1)
Pattern templates/**
: For files under the templates
folder, do not report 'Missing Dependencies Detected' errors.
🔇 Additional comments (1)
templates/types/streaming/nextjs/app/components/ui/chat/tools/chat-tools.tsx (1)
31-37
: LGTM! Clean implementation of artifact versioning.
The changes to ChatTools component are well-structured with proper typing and the version is correctly passed to the Artifact component.
Also applies to: 59-59
const toolData = annotations | ||
? (getAnnotationData(annotations, "tools") as unknown as ToolData[]) | ||
: null; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Improve type safety in toolData casting.
The double type casting through unknown
is a code smell and could lead to runtime errors.
Consider this safer approach:
-const toolData = annotations
- ? (getAnnotationData(annotations, "tools") as unknown as ToolData[])
- : null;
+const toolData = annotations
+ ? getAnnotationData<ToolData[]>(annotations, "tools")
+ : null;
📝 Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
const toolData = annotations | |
? (getAnnotationData(annotations, "tools") as unknown as ToolData[]) | |
: null; | |
const toolData = annotations | |
? getAnnotationData<ToolData[]>(annotations, "tools") | |
: null; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@thucpn I think that would also work
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Seems like the humans are having a chat. I'll hop back into my burrow for now. If you need me again, just tag @coderabbitai in a new comment, and I'll come hopping out!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yes, this requires typing update in getAnnotationData function of chat-ui
Summary by CodeRabbit
New Features
Bug Fixes
Refactor
@llamaindex/chat-ui
to the latest version for enhanced functionality.