Fix CTF date format #65
Conversation
WalkthroughThe changes mainly involve updating date format parsing from an old format to a new one within Changes
Poem
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 as PR comments)
Additionally, you can add CodeRabbit Configuration File (
|
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
Review details
Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: ASSERTIVE
Files selected for processing (1)
- cog/ctf.py (2 hunks)
Additional comments not posted (2)
cog/ctf.py (2)
79-79: Update to the new date format is correctly implemented.This change ensures that the date format is consistent with standard practices, improving readability and reducing potential errors in date parsing.
153-153: Database context switch is correctly implemented.Switching the database context to
DCSQLtestis a significant change. Ensure that all related database operations are compatible with the new database context.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
Review details
Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: ASSERTIVE
Files selected for processing (1)
- cog/ctf.py (2 hunks)
Additional comments not posted (4)
cog/ctf.py (4)
79-79: Updated date format to match the new standard.
153-153: Switched database context to 'CTF' for specific operations.
79-79: Ensure the date format change is consistent across all usages.Verification successful
The verification confirms that the old date format
%y/%m/%d %H:%M:%Sis not used anywhere in the codebase.
Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify all date format usages in the codebase. # Test: Search for datetime.strptime usage with the old format. Expect: No occurrences. rg --type python $'datetime.strptime.*\'%y/%m/%d %H:%M:%S\''Length of output: 96
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify all date format usages in the codebase. # Test: Search for datetime.strptime usage with the old format. Expect: No occurrences. rg $'datetime.strptime.*\'%y/%m/%d %H:%M:%S\''Length of output: 51
153-153: Database context switch should be verified for consistency.Verification successful
The database context switch to "USE CTF;" is consistently used in the codebase.
cog/ctf.py: Lines containingcursor.execute("USE CTF;")are consistent.Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the database context switch consistency. # Test: Search for database context switches. Expect: Consistent usage of "USE CTF;". rg --type python $'cursor.execute.*"USE .*;"'Length of output: 77
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the database context switch consistency. # Test: Search for database context switches. Expect: Consistent usage of "USE CTF;". rg --type py $'cursor.execute.*"USE .*;"'Length of output: 232
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
Review details
Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: ASSERTIVE
Files selected for processing (1)
- cog/ctf.py (2 hunks)
Additional comments not posted (1)
cog/ctf.py (1)
153-153: Database context switch should be verified for consistency.Verification successful
The verification of database context switches shows consistent usage of
USE CTF;but no instances ofUSE Discord;orUSE DCSQLtest;. This indicates that the context switch toCTFis consistent.
- Instances of
USE CTF;found in:
cog/ctf.pycog/core/sql_acc.pyScripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the database context switch from 'Discord' to 'DCSQLtest' and 'CTF'. # Test: Search for database context switches. Expect: Consistent usage of 'DCSQLtest' and 'CTF'. rg --type python $'USE Discord;' rg --type python $'USE DCSQLtest;' rg --type python $'USE CTF;'Length of output: 192
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the database context switch from 'Discord' to 'DCSQLtest' and 'CTF'. # Test: Search for database context switches. Expect: Consistent usage of 'DCSQLtest' and 'CTF'. rg -t py 'USE Discord;' rg -t py 'USE DCSQLtest;' rg -t py 'USE CTF;'Length of output: 299
Bug: #65 Change-Id: I8805fe6461ddd8236571e30e33bc7b6619914e65
Bug: #65 Change-Id: I8805fe6461ddd8236571e30e33bc7b6619914e65
Bug: #65 Change-Id: I8805fe6461ddd8236571e30e33bc7b6619914e65
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
Review details
Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: ASSERTIVE
Files selected for processing (2)
- cog/ctf.py (3 hunks)
- pyproject.toml (1 hunks)
Additional context used
Ruff
cog/ctf.py
16-16: Comment contains ambiguous
，(FULLWIDTH COMMA). Did you mean,(COMMA)? (RUF003)
16-16: Comment contains ambiguous
，(FULLWIDTH COMMA). Did you mean,(COMMA)? (RUF003)
16-16: Comment contains ambiguous
，(FULLWIDTH COMMA). Did you mean,(COMMA)? (RUF003)
20-20: Missing return type annotation for public function
get_ctf_makers(ANN201)
22-22: Unnecessary open mode parameters (UP015)
Remove open mode parameters
32-32: Missing return type annotation for public function
generate_ctf_id(ANN201)
33-33: Standard pseudo-random generators are not suitable for cryptographic purposes (S311)
37-37: Missing return type annotation for public function
on_ready(ANN201)Add return type annotation:
None
37-37: Missing type annotation for
selfin method (ANN101)
43-43: Missing return type annotation for special method
__init__(ANN204)Add return type annotation:
None
43-43: Missing type annotation for
selfin method (ANN101)
50-50: Trailing comma missing (COM812)
Add trailing comma
54-54:
button_callback_1is too complex (11 > 10) (C901)
54-54: Missing return type annotation for public function
button_callback_1(ANN201)Add return type annotation:
None
54-54: Missing type annotation for
selfin method (ANN101)
54-54: Missing type annotation for function argument
button(ANN001)
54-54: Unused method argument:
button(ARG002)
54-54: Missing type annotation for function argument
interaction(ANN001)
56-56: Missing type annotation for
selfin method (ANN101)
56-56: Missing type annotation for
*args(ANN002)
56-56: Missing type annotation for
**kwargs(ANN003)
61-61: Missing return type annotation for private function
callback(ANN202)Add return type annotation:
None
61-61: Missing type annotation for
selfin method (ANN101)
67-67: Possible SQL injection vector through string-based query construction (S608)
70-70: Possible SQL injection vector through string-based query construction (S608)
74-74:
datetime.datetime.now()called without atzargument (DTZ005)
75-75: Naive datetime constructed using
datetime.datetime.strptime()without %z (DTZ007)
76-76: String contains ambiguous
！(FULLWIDTH EXCLAMATION MARK). Did you mean!(EXCLAMATION MARK)? (RUF001)
79-79: Naive datetime constructed using
datetime.datetime.strptime()without %z (DTZ007)
80-80: String contains ambiguous
！(FULLWIDTH EXCLAMATION MARK). Did you mean!(EXCLAMATION MARK)? (RUF001)
88-88: Possible SQL injection vector through string-based query construction (S608)
97-97: Possible SQL injection vector through string-based query construction (S608)
102-102: Possible SQL injection vector through string-based query construction (S608)
105-105: Comment contains ambiguous
，(FULLWIDTH COMMA). Did you mean,(COMMA)? (RUF003)
106-108: Use a single
ifstatement instead of nestedifstatements (SIM102)
110-110: String contains ambiguous
！(FULLWIDTH EXCLAMATION MARK). Did you mean!(EXCLAMATION MARK)? (RUF001)
114-114: Comment contains ambiguous
，(FULLWIDTH COMMA). Did you mean,(COMMA)? (RUF003)
116-116: Possible SQL injection vector through string-based query construction (S608)
117-117: Comment contains ambiguous
，(FULLWIDTH COMMA). Did you mean,(COMMA)? (RUF003)
118-118: Possible SQL injection vector through string-based query construction (S608)
121-121: Possible SQL injection vector through string-based query construction (S608)
124-124: Possible SQL injection vector through string-based query construction (S608)
129-129: Possible SQL injection vector through string-based query construction (S608)
135-135: Possible SQL injection vector through string-based query construction (S608)
141-141: String contains ambiguous
！(FULLWIDTH EXCLAMATION MARK). Did you mean!(EXCLAMATION MARK)? (RUF001)
142-142: Trailing comma missing (COM812)
Add trailing comma
145-145: Trailing comma missing (COM812)
Add trailing comma
148-148: Comment contains ambiguous
，(FULLWIDTH COMMA). Did you mean,(COMMA)? (RUF003)
150-150: Possible SQL injection vector through string-based query construction (S608)
151-151: Possible SQL injection vector through string-based query construction (S608)
160-160: Use explicit conversion flag (RUF010)
Replace with conversion flag
160-160:
datetime.datetime.now()called without atzargument (DTZ005)
166-166: Trailing comma missing (COM812)
Add trailing comma
169-169: Trailing comma missing (COM812)
Add trailing comma
176-176: Trailing comma missing (COM812)
Add trailing comma
179-179: Trailing comma missing (COM812)
Add trailing comma
191-191: Do not catch blind exception:
Exception(BLE001)
196-196: String contains ambiguous
？(FULLWIDTH QUESTION MARK). Did you mean?(QUESTION MARK)? (RUF001)
200-200: Missing return type annotation for public function
create(ANN201)Add return type annotation:
None
201-201: Missing type annotation for
selfin method (ANN101)
202-202: Missing type annotation for function argument
ctx(ANN001)
209-209:
datetime.datetime.now()called without atzargument (DTZ005)
211-211:
datetime.datetime.now()called without atzargument (DTZ005)
212-212: Comment contains ambiguous
，(FULLWIDTH COMMA). Did you mean,(COMMA)? (RUF003)
219-219: String contains ambiguous
！(FULLWIDTH EXCLAMATION MARK). Did you mean!(EXCLAMATION MARK)? (RUF001)
232-232: Comment contains ambiguous
，(FULLWIDTH COMMA). Did you mean,(COMMA)? (RUF003)
234-234: Possible SQL injection vector through string-based query construction (S608)
240-240: Naive datetime constructed using
datetime.datetime.strptime()without %z (DTZ007)
241-241:
datetime.datetime.now()called without atzargument (DTZ005)
243-243: Naive datetime constructed using
datetime.datetime.strptime()without %z (DTZ007)
244-244: Comment contains ambiguous
，(FULLWIDTH COMMA). Did you mean,(COMMA)? (RUF003)
253-253: Trailing comma missing (COM812)
Add trailing comma
263-263: String contains ambiguous
，(FULLWIDTH COMMA). Did you mean,(COMMA)? (RUF001)
265-265: Comment contains ambiguous
，(FULLWIDTH COMMA). Did you mean,(COMMA)? (RUF003)
266-266: String contains ambiguous
！(FULLWIDTH EXCLAMATION MARK). Did you mean!(EXCLAMATION MARK)? (RUF001)
274-276: Possible SQL injection vector through string-based query construction (S608)
279-279: Do not catch blind exception:
Exception(BLE001)
284-284: Comment contains ambiguous
，(FULLWIDTH COMMA). Did you mean,(COMMA)? (RUF003)
290-290: Missing return type annotation for public function
list_all(ANN201)Add return type annotation:
None
290-290: Missing type annotation for
selfin method (ANN101)
290-290: Missing type annotation for function argument
ctx(ANN001)
303-303: Missing return type annotation for public function
setup(ANN201)Add return type annotation:
None
303-303: Missing type annotation for function argument
bot(ANN001)
Additional comments not posted (4)
pyproject.toml (1)
5-5: Version number update approved.The increment from "0.1.5.dev0" to "0.1.6.dev0" correctly reflects the minor changes made in this update.
cog/ctf.py (3)
79-79: Date format consistency check.The update to use the date format
'%Y-%m-%d %H:%M:%S'in this condition is consistent with the PR's objective to fix the date format issues. Ensure all other instances in the codebase are updated similarly.Verification successful
The search for the old date format
'%y/%m/%d %H:%M:%S'did not produce any results, indicating that this format is not present in the codebase.Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify all date format usages in the codebase. # Test: Search for the old date format usage. Expect: No occurrences. rg --type python $'%y/%m/%d %H:%M:%S'Length of output: 69
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify all date format usages in the codebase. # Test: Search for the old date format usage. Expect: No occurrences. rg --type py $'%y/%m/%d %H:%M:%S'Length of output: 34
Tools
Ruff
79-79: Naive datetime constructed using
datetime.datetime.strptime()without %z (DTZ007)
153-153: Database usage update approved.Changing the query from
USE Discord;toUSE CTF;aligns with the updated context of the application. Ensure that all related database interactions are updated to reflect this change.Verification successful
The verification shows that all instances of
USE Discord;have been successfully updated toUSE CTF;in the codebase. The occurrences ofUSE CTF;in the relevant files confirm this update.
- Locations where
USE CTF;is found:
cog/ctf.pycog/core/sql_acc.pyScripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify all database usage in the codebase. # Test: Search for the old database usage. Expect: No occurrences. rg --type python $'USE Discord;'Length of output: 64
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify all database usage in the codebase. # Test: Search for the old database usage. Expect: No occurrences. rg --type py $'USE Discord;' # Test: Search for the new database usage. Expect: Occurrences. rg --type py $'USE CTF;'Length of output: 279
209-211: Date format in function options updated.The change to the date format in the options for the
createcommand reflects the new standard set in the PR. This change should help prevent inconsistencies in date handling across the system.Verification successful
The verification confirms that the old date format
%y/%m/%d %H:%M:%Sis no longer present in the codebase, indicating that the new date format has been consistently applied.
Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify all function options date format usages in the codebase. # Test: Search for the old date format usage. Expect: No occurrences. rg --type python $'%y/%m/%d %H:%M:%S'Length of output: 69
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify all function options date format usages in the codebase. # Test: Search for the old date format usage. Expect: No occurrences. rg --type py '%y/%m/%d %H:%M:%S'Length of output: 34
Tools
Ruff
209-209:
datetime.datetime.now()called without atzargument (DTZ005)
211-211:
datetime.datetime.now()called without atzargument (DTZ005)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
Outside diff range comments (5)
cog/ctf.py (5)
Line range hint
20-20: Add Return Type Annotation forget_ctf_makersThe function
get_ctf_makersis missing a return type annotation. It's good practice to add type annotations for better code clarity and maintenance.- def get_ctf_makers(): + def get_ctf_makers() -> dict:Tools
Ruff
76-76: String contains ambiguous
！(FULLWIDTH EXCLAMATION MARK). Did you mean!(EXCLAMATION MARK)? (RUF001)
79-79: Naive datetime constructed using
datetime.datetime.strptime()without %z (DTZ007)
80-80: String contains ambiguous
！(FULLWIDTH EXCLAMATION MARK). Did you mean!(EXCLAMATION MARK)? (RUF001)
Line range hint
32-32: Consider Using Cryptographically Secure Random Number GeneratorThe function
generate_ctf_idusesrandom.randintwhich is not suitable for cryptographic purposes. If the ID needs to be secure, consider usingsecretsmodule which is designed for generating cryptographically strong random numbers.- import random + import secrets - return str(random.randint(100000000000000000, 999999999999999999)) + return str(secrets.randbelow(999999999999999999) + 100000000000000000)Tools
Ruff
76-76: String contains ambiguous
！(FULLWIDTH EXCLAMATION MARK). Did you mean!(EXCLAMATION MARK)? (RUF001)
79-79: Naive datetime constructed using
datetime.datetime.strptime()without %z (DTZ007)
80-80: String contains ambiguous
！(FULLWIDTH EXCLAMATION MARK). Did you mean!(EXCLAMATION MARK)? (RUF001)
Line range hint
37-37: Add Type Annotations toon_readyMethodThe
on_readymethod is missing type annotations forselfand the return type. Adding these will enhance code readability and maintain consistency.- async def on_ready(self): + async def on_ready(self: CTF) -> None:Tools
Ruff
76-76: String contains ambiguous
！(FULLWIDTH EXCLAMATION MARK). Did you mean!(EXCLAMATION MARK)? (RUF001)
79-79: Naive datetime constructed using
datetime.datetime.strptime()without %z (DTZ007)
80-80: String contains ambiguous
！(FULLWIDTH EXCLAMATION MARK). Did you mean!(EXCLAMATION MARK)? (RUF001)
Line range hint
54-54: Reduce Complexity inbutton_callback_1MethodThe
button_callback_1method is complex and handles multiple operations. Consider refactoring to reduce complexity and improve maintainability. Breaking down into smaller helper functions can help.Tools
Ruff
76-76: String contains ambiguous
！(FULLWIDTH EXCLAMATION MARK). Did you mean!(EXCLAMATION MARK)? (RUF001)
79-79: Naive datetime constructed using
datetime.datetime.strptime()without %z (DTZ007)
80-80: String contains ambiguous
！(FULLWIDTH EXCLAMATION MARK). Did you mean!(EXCLAMATION MARK)? (RUF001)
Line range hint
291-291: Add Return Type Annotation forlist_allThe
list_allmethod could benefit from a return type annotation to clarify what the method is expected to return.- async def list_all(self, ctx): + async def list_all(self, ctx) -> None:Tools
Ruff
76-76: String contains ambiguous
！(FULLWIDTH EXCLAMATION MARK). Did you mean!(EXCLAMATION MARK)? (RUF001)
79-79: Naive datetime constructed using
datetime.datetime.strptime()without %z (DTZ007)
80-80: String contains ambiguous
！(FULLWIDTH EXCLAMATION MARK). Did you mean!(EXCLAMATION MARK)? (RUF001)
Review details
Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: ASSERTIVE
Files selected for processing (1)
- cog/ctf.py (4 hunks)
Additional context used
Ruff
cog/ctf.py
16-16: Comment contains ambiguous
，(FULLWIDTH COMMA). Did you mean,(COMMA)? (RUF003)
16-16: Comment contains ambiguous
，(FULLWIDTH COMMA). Did you mean,(COMMA)? (RUF003)
16-16: Comment contains ambiguous
，(FULLWIDTH COMMA). Did you mean,(COMMA)? (RUF003)
20-20: Missing return type annotation for public function
get_ctf_makers(ANN201)
22-22: Unnecessary open mode parameters (UP015)
Remove open mode parameters
32-32: Missing return type annotation for public function
generate_ctf_id(ANN201)
33-33: Standard pseudo-random generators are not suitable for cryptographic purposes (S311)
37-37: Missing return type annotation for public function
on_ready(ANN201)Add return type annotation:
None
37-37: Missing type annotation for
selfin method (ANN101)
43-43: Missing return type annotation for special method
__init__(ANN204)Add return type annotation:
None
43-43: Missing type annotation for
selfin method (ANN101)
50-50: Trailing comma missing (COM812)
Add trailing comma
54-54:
button_callback_1is too complex (11 > 10) (C901)
54-54: Missing return type annotation for public function
button_callback_1(ANN201)Add return type annotation:
None
54-54: Missing type annotation for
selfin method (ANN101)
54-54: Missing type annotation for function argument
button(ANN001)
54-54: Unused method argument:
button(ARG002)
54-54: Missing type annotation for function argument
interaction(ANN001)
56-56: Missing type annotation for
selfin method (ANN101)
56-56: Missing type annotation for
*args(ANN002)
56-56: Missing type annotation for
**kwargs(ANN003)
61-61: Missing return type annotation for private function
callback(ANN202)Add return type annotation:
None
61-61: Missing type annotation for
selfin method (ANN101)
67-67: Possible SQL injection vector through string-based query construction (S608)
70-70: Possible SQL injection vector through string-based query construction (S608)
74-74:
datetime.datetime.now()called without atzargument (DTZ005)
75-75: Naive datetime constructed using
datetime.datetime.strptime()without %z (DTZ007)
76-76: String contains ambiguous
！(FULLWIDTH EXCLAMATION MARK). Did you mean!(EXCLAMATION MARK)? (RUF001)
79-79: Naive datetime constructed using
datetime.datetime.strptime()without %z (DTZ007)
80-80: String contains ambiguous
！(FULLWIDTH EXCLAMATION MARK). Did you mean!(EXCLAMATION MARK)? (RUF001)
88-88: Possible SQL injection vector through string-based query construction (S608)
97-97: Possible SQL injection vector through string-based query construction (S608)
102-102: Possible SQL injection vector through string-based query construction (S608)
105-105: Comment contains ambiguous
，(FULLWIDTH COMMA). Did you mean,(COMMA)? (RUF003)
106-108: Use a single
ifstatement instead of nestedifstatements (SIM102)
110-110: String contains ambiguous
！(FULLWIDTH EXCLAMATION MARK). Did you mean!(EXCLAMATION MARK)? (RUF001)
114-114: Comment contains ambiguous
，(FULLWIDTH COMMA). Did you mean,(COMMA)? (RUF003)
116-116: Possible SQL injection vector through string-based query construction (S608)
117-117: Comment contains ambiguous
，(FULLWIDTH COMMA). Did you mean,(COMMA)? (RUF003)
118-118: Possible SQL injection vector through string-based query construction (S608)
121-121: Possible SQL injection vector through string-based query construction (S608)
124-124: Possible SQL injection vector through string-based query construction (S608)
129-129: Possible SQL injection vector through string-based query construction (S608)
135-135: Possible SQL injection vector through string-based query construction (S608)
141-141: String contains ambiguous
！(FULLWIDTH EXCLAMATION MARK). Did you mean!(EXCLAMATION MARK)? (RUF001)
142-142: Trailing comma missing (COM812)
Add trailing comma
145-145: Trailing comma missing (COM812)
Add trailing comma
148-148: Comment contains ambiguous
，(FULLWIDTH COMMA). Did you mean,(COMMA)? (RUF003)
150-150: Possible SQL injection vector through string-based query construction (S608)
151-151: Possible SQL injection vector through string-based query construction (S608)
160-160: Use explicit conversion flag (RUF010)
Replace with conversion flag
160-160:
datetime.datetime.now()called without atzargument (DTZ005)
166-166: Trailing comma missing (COM812)
Add trailing comma
169-169: Trailing comma missing (COM812)
Add trailing comma
176-176: Trailing comma missing (COM812)
Add trailing comma
179-179: Trailing comma missing (COM812)
Add trailing comma
191-191: Do not catch blind exception:
Exception(BLE001)
196-196: String contains ambiguous
？(FULLWIDTH QUESTION MARK). Did you mean?(QUESTION MARK)? (RUF001)
200-200: Missing return type annotation for public function
create(ANN201)Add return type annotation:
None
201-201: Missing type annotation for
selfin method (ANN101)
202-202: Missing type annotation for function argument
ctx(ANN001)
209-209:
datetime.datetime.now()called without atzargument (DTZ005)
211-211:
datetime.datetime.now()called without atzargument (DTZ005)
212-212: Comment contains ambiguous
，(FULLWIDTH COMMA). Did you mean,(COMMA)? (RUF003)
219-219: String contains ambiguous
！(FULLWIDTH EXCLAMATION MARK). Did you mean!(EXCLAMATION MARK)? (RUF001)
232-232: Comment contains ambiguous
，(FULLWIDTH COMMA). Did you mean,(COMMA)? (RUF003)
234-234: Possible SQL injection vector through string-based query construction (S608)
240-240: Naive datetime constructed using
datetime.datetime.strptime()without %z (DTZ007)
241-241:
datetime.datetime.now()called without atzargument (DTZ005)
243-243: Naive datetime constructed using
datetime.datetime.strptime()without %z (DTZ007)
244-244: Comment contains ambiguous
，(FULLWIDTH COMMA). Did you mean,(COMMA)? (RUF003)
253-253: Trailing comma missing (COM812)
Add trailing comma
263-263: String contains ambiguous
，(FULLWIDTH COMMA). Did you mean,(COMMA)? (RUF001)
265-265: Comment contains ambiguous
，(FULLWIDTH COMMA). Did you mean,(COMMA)? (RUF003)
266-266: String contains ambiguous
！(FULLWIDTH EXCLAMATION MARK). Did you mean!(EXCLAMATION MARK)? (RUF001)
270-270: Comment contains ambiguous
，(FULLWIDTH COMMA). Did you mean,(COMMA)? (RUF003)
270-270: Comment contains ambiguous
，(FULLWIDTH COMMA). Did you mean,(COMMA)? (RUF003)
275-277: Possible SQL injection vector through string-based query construction (S608)
280-280: Do not catch blind exception:
Exception(BLE001)
285-285: Comment contains ambiguous
，(FULLWIDTH COMMA). Did you mean,(COMMA)? (RUF003)
291-291: Missing return type annotation for public function
list_all(ANN201)Add return type annotation:
None
291-291: Missing type annotation for
selfin method (ANN101)
291-291: Missing type annotation for function argument
ctx(ANN001)
304-304: Missing return type annotation for public function
setup(ANN201)Add return type annotation:
None
304-304: Missing type annotation for function argument
bot(ANN001)
| start: Option(str, f"開始作答日期 ({datetime.now().strftime('%y-%m-%d %H:%M:%S')})", required = False, default = ""), # 時間格式 | ||
| # pylint: disable-next = line-too-long | ||
| end: Option(str, f"截止作答日期 ({datetime.now().strftime('%y/%m/%d %H:%M:%S')})", required = False, default = "")): | ||
| end: Option(str, f"截止作答日期 ({datetime.now().strftime('%y-%m-%d %H:%M:%S')})", required = False, default = "")): |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Address Use of datetime.now() Without Timezone
The method create uses datetime.now() without specifying a timezone. This can lead to issues if the application is used in multiple timezones.
- start: Option(str, f"開始作答日期 ({datetime.now().strftime('%y-%m-%d %H:%M:%S')})", required = False, default = "")
+ start: Option(str, f"開始作答日期 ({datetime.now(timezone.utc).strftime('%y-%m-%d %H:%M:%S')})", required = False, default = "")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.
| start: Option(str, f"開始作答日期 ({datetime.now().strftime('%y-%m-%d %H:%M:%S')})", required = False, default = ""), # 時間格式 | |
| # pylint: disable-next = line-too-long | |
| end: Option(str, f"截止作答日期 ({datetime.now().strftime('%y/%m/%d %H:%M:%S')})", required = False, default = "")): | |
| end: Option(str, f"截止作答日期 ({datetime.now().strftime('%y-%m-%d %H:%M:%S')})", required = False, default = "")): | |
| start: Option(str, f"開始作答日期 ({datetime.now(timezone.utc).strftime('%y-%m-%d %H:%M:%S')})", required = False, default = ""), # 時間格式 | |
| # pylint: disable-next = line-too-long | |
| end: Option(str, f"截止作答日期 ({datetime.now().strftime('%y-%m-%d %H:%M:%S')})", required = False, default = "")): |
Tools
Ruff
209-209:
datetime.datetime.now()called without atzargument (DTZ005)
211-211:
datetime.datetime.now()called without atzargument (DTZ005)
CTF end time format analyze bug
Summary by CodeRabbit
Bug Fixes
Chores
0.1.6.dev0in preparation for the next development cycle.