Files

wangziqi b6d398b102 feat: 导入导出错误信息 Markdown 渲染升级

Phase 1: 共用类型定义
- apps/server/src/common/import-result.types.ts — ImportRowError + ImportResult<T>
- apps/admin/src/types/import.ts — 前端对应类型 + ImportDisplayConfig

Phase 2: 后端增强
- students.service.ts — batchImport/matchImport 改为 ImportResult 格式
  · 每行跳过时收集 ImportRowError（code + reason）
  · reason 支持 markdown 标记（**字段名** / `值`）
- archive.service.ts — batchImportArchive 统一用 ImportResult 格式
  · 各 Sheet 错误使用标准 error code
- archive.controller.ts — 日志使用新的 success 字段

Phase 3: 前端基础
- 安装 react-markdown
- ImportResultModal 组件（共用导入结果弹窗）
  · Statistic 成功统计 + Table 错误明细
  · 原因列支持 react-markdown 渲染（粗体字段名、等宽代码值）
  · 错误类型用 Tag 颜色区分
- api/index.ts — 403 错误从 console.warn 改为 message.warning 用户可见

Phase 4: 前端集成
- Students/index.tsx — 替换硬编码导入结果弹窗
  · 删除'后端只返回统计汇总'注释和跳过原因 hardcode
  · 新格式自动使用 ImportResultModal，旧格式兼容
- StudentProfileContent/index.tsx — 替换内联导入 Modal 为 ImportResultModal

2026-07-20 15:25:14 +08:00

2.8 KiB

Raw Blame History

name, description

name	description
requesting-code-review	Use when completing tasks, implementing major features, or before merging to verify work meets requirements

Requesting Code Review

Dispatch a code reviewer subagent to catch issues before they cascade. The reviewer gets precisely crafted context for evaluation — never your session's history. This keeps the reviewer focused on the work product, not your thought process, and preserves your own context for continued work.

Core principle: Review early, review often.

When to Request Review

Mandatory:

After each task in subagent-driven development
After completing major feature
Before merge to main

Optional but valuable:

When stuck (fresh perspective)
Before refactoring (baseline check)
After fixing complex bug

How to Request

1. Get git SHAs:

BASE_SHA=$(git rev-parse HEAD~1)  # or origin/main
HEAD_SHA=$(git rev-parse HEAD)

2. Dispatch code reviewer subagent:

Dispatch a general-purpose subagent, filling the template at code-reviewer.md

Placeholders:

{DESCRIPTION} - Brief summary of what you built
{PLAN_OR_REQUIREMENTS} - What it should do
{BASE_SHA} - Starting commit
{HEAD_SHA} - Ending commit

3. Act on feedback:

Fix Critical issues immediately
Fix Important issues before proceeding
Note Minor issues for later
Push back if reviewer is wrong (with reasoning)

Example

[Just completed Task 2: Add verification function]

You: Let me request code review before proceeding.

BASE_SHA=$(git log --oneline | grep "Task 1" | head -1 | awk '{print $1}')
HEAD_SHA=$(git rev-parse HEAD)

[Dispatch code reviewer subagent]
  DESCRIPTION: Added verifyIndex() and repairIndex() with 4 issue types
  PLAN_OR_REQUIREMENTS: Task 2 from docs/superpowers/plans/deployment-plan.md
  BASE_SHA: a7981ec
  HEAD_SHA: 3df7661

[Subagent returns]:
  Strengths: Clean architecture, real tests
  Issues:
    Important: Missing progress indicators
    Minor: Magic number (100) for reporting interval
  Assessment: Ready to proceed

You: [Fix progress indicators]
[Continue to Task 3]

Integration with Workflows

Subagent-Driven Development:

Review after EACH task
Catch issues before they compound
Fix before moving to next task

Executing Plans:

Review after each task or at natural checkpoints
Get feedback, apply, continue

Ad-Hoc Development:

Review before merge
Review when stuck

Red Flags

Never:

Skip review because "it's simple"
Ignore Critical issues
Proceed with unfixed Important issues
Argue with valid technical feedback

If reviewer wrong:

Push back with technical reasoning
Show code/tests that prove it works
Request clarification

See template at: code-reviewer.md

2.8 KiB Raw Blame History