[CDX-496] Add PreFilterExpressionPerSection support to Autocomplete requests - #104
Open
HHHindawy wants to merge 1 commit into
Open
Conversation
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Pull request overview
Adds support for pre_filter_expression on Autocomplete requests, including a per-section variant that uses bracket notation (pre_filter_expression[Section]=...) consistent with Constructor.io’s documented query param shape.
Changes:
- Added
PreFilterExpressionandPreFilterExpressionPerSectionsupport toAutocompleteRequestrequest-parameter generation. - Implemented URL querystring serialization for per-section pre-filter expressions in
Helpers.MakeUrl. - Added unit/integration tests validating parameter generation and request serialization behavior.
Reviewed changes
Copilot reviewed 7 out of 7 changed files in this pull request and generated no comments.
Show a summary per file
| File | Description |
|---|---|
| src/Constructorio_NET.Tests/utils/HelpersTest.cs | Adds a URL-formation test for bracketed per-section pre_filter_expression in autocomplete URLs. |
| src/Constructorio_NET.Tests/models/Autocomplete/AutocompleteRequestTest.cs | Adds request-parameter unit tests for global and per-section pre-filter expressions. |
| src/Constructorio_NET.Tests/client/modules/AutocompleteTests.cs | Adds integration tests asserting pre_filter_expression is included (global and per-section) in Autocomplete requests. |
| src/constructor.io/utils/Helpers.cs | Serializes PRE_FILTER_EXPRESSION_PER_SECTION into bracket-notation query params (pre_filter_expression[Section]=...). |
| src/constructor.io/utils/Constants.cs | Introduces PRE_FILTER_EXPRESSION_PER_SECTION constant. |
| src/constructor.io/models/common/PreFilterExpressionPerSection.cs | Adds a model to associate a PreFilterExpression with a specific autocomplete section. |
| src/constructor.io/models/Autocomplete/AutocompleteRequest.cs | Adds new request properties and includes them in GetRequestParameters(). |
💡 Add a code-review agent skill or configure MCP servers for context-aware, tailored reviews. Learn more in the docs.
Alexey-Pavlov
requested changes
Sep 4, 2026
Alexey-Pavlov
left a comment
Alexey-Pavlov
left a comment
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
LGTM! Left a few comments, could you please take a look?
| parameters.Add(Constants.PRE_FILTER_EXPRESSION, this.PreFilterExpression.GetExpression()); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| if (this.PreFilterExpressionPerSection != null && this.PreFilterExpressionPerSection.Count > 0) |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If we would set together pre_filter_expression= and pre_filter_expression[Section]=- it will throw
{
"message": "Both dictionary and non dictionary value is supplied for pre_filter_expression key."
}
Can we throw here, or at least say "mutually exclusive" in the doc?
| /// Gets or sets per-section filter expressions used to scope results for specific sections. | ||
| /// Serialized as pre_filter_expression[Section]={...}. | ||
| /// </summary> | ||
| public List<PreFilterExpressionPerSection> PreFilterExpressionPerSection { get; set; } |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggested change
| public List<PreFilterExpressionPerSection> PreFilterExpressionPerSection { get; set; } | |
| public Dictionary<string, PreFilterExpression> PreFilterExpressionPerSection { get; set; } |
List<> lets you pass the same section twice:
{
"message": "pre_filter_expression: Products: Invalid JSON string"
}
|
|
||
| foreach (var sectionExpression in preFilterExpressionPerSection) | ||
| { | ||
| if (sectionExpression?.Section == null || sectionExpression.Expression == null) |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Section == null lets "" and " " through, so we send pre_filter_expression[ ]=..., the API accepts it, but should we validate it?
Comment on lines
+378
to
+382
| bool hasProductsKey = Regex.Match(url, "&pre_filter_expression%5BProducts%5D=").Success; | ||
| bool hasSuggestionsKey = Regex.Match(url, "&pre_filter_expression%5BSearch%20Suggestions%5D=").Success; | ||
| bool hasBrandExpression = url.Contains(OurEscapeDataString("XYZ")); | ||
| bool hasGroupExpression = url.Contains(OurEscapeDataString("All")); | ||
| Assert.That(hasProductsKey && hasSuggestionsKey && hasBrandExpression && hasGroupExpression, "url should have bracketed per-section pre_filter_expression"); |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It passes even if we emit the JSON unescaped
Also, there is one `Assert. ', it hides which part failed, maybe we can make a few asserts as the fmt_options test above?
Suggested change
| bool hasProductsKey = Regex.Match(url, "&pre_filter_expression%5BProducts%5D=").Success; | |
| bool hasSuggestionsKey = Regex.Match(url, "&pre_filter_expression%5BSearch%20Suggestions%5D=").Success; | |
| bool hasBrandExpression = url.Contains(OurEscapeDataString("XYZ")); | |
| bool hasGroupExpression = url.Contains(OurEscapeDataString("All")); | |
| Assert.That(hasProductsKey && hasSuggestionsKey && hasBrandExpression && hasGroupExpression, "url should have bracketed per-section pre_filter_expression"); | |
| string productsParameter = "&pre_filter_expression%5BProducts%5D=" + OurEscapeDataString(filterProducts.GetExpression()); | |
| string suggestionsParameter = "&pre_filter_expression%5BSearch%20Suggestions%5D=" + OurEscapeDataString(filterSuggestions.GetExpression()); | |
| Assert.That(url, Does.Contain(productsParameter), "url should have the escaped Products expression"); | |
| Assert.That(url, Does.Contain(suggestionsParameter), "url should have the escaped Search Suggestions expression"); | |
| Assert.That(url, Does.Not.Contain("{"), "url should not contain unescaped json"); | |
| Assert.That(url, Does.Not.Contain("&pre_filter_expression="), "url should not have the non per-section form"); |
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
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.
No description provided.