Skip to content

PM-16705: Improve the node validation logic #5250

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

Merged

Conversation

david-livefront
Copy link
Collaborator

@david-livefront david-livefront commented May 22, 2025

🎟️ Tracking

PM-16705

📔 Objective

This PR updates the accessibility event node logic to utilize the RootNode instead of the source node if the source node is null. This helps us combat issues where the the node is null when the event comes through but we do not receive another event.

This does cause performance to suffer a little bit but a recent change that checks for the accessibility action first mitigates the worst aspects of this performance issue.

⏰ Reminders before review

  • Contributor guidelines followed
  • All formatters and local linters executed and passed
  • Written new unit and / or integration tests where applicable
  • Protected functional changes with optionality (feature flags)
  • Used internationalization (i18n) for all UI strings
  • CI builds passed
  • Communicated to DevOps any deployment requirements
  • Updated any necessary documentation (Confluence, contributing docs) or informed the documentation team

🦮 Reviewer guidelines

  • 👍 (:+1:) or similar for great changes
  • 📝 (:memo:) or ℹ️ (:information_source:) for notes or general info
  • ❓ (:question:) for questions
  • 🤔 (:thinking:) or 💭 (:thought_balloon:) for more open inquiry that's not quite a confirmed issue and could potentially benefit from discussion
  • 🎨 (:art:) for suggestions / improvements
  • ❌ (:x:) or ⚠️ (:warning:) for more significant problems or concerns needing attention
  • 🌱 (:seedling:) or ♻️ (:recycle:) for future improvements or indications of technical debt
  • ⛏ (:pick:) for minor or nitpick changes

@david-livefront david-livefront requested review from brian-livefront and a team as code owners May 22, 2025 21:22
Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented May 22, 2025

Logo
Checkmarx One – Scan Summary & Detailsd94876c8-e7f0-4ddf-a185-323c0f344f22

Great job, no security vulnerabilities found in this Pull Request

@david-livefront david-livefront force-pushed the PM-16705-improved-accessibility-node-validation branch from e705d75 to 496f714 Compare May 22, 2025 21:44
@david-livefront
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Thanks @SaintPatrck

@david-livefront david-livefront enabled auto-merge May 22, 2025 22:04
Copy link

codecov bot commented May 22, 2025

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 82.61%. Comparing base (d5c0412) to head (496f714).
Report is 2 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #5250      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   82.67%   82.61%   -0.07%     
==========================================
  Files         686      689       +3     
  Lines       51218    51320     +102     
  Branches     6937     6937              
==========================================
+ Hits        42347    42399      +52     
- Misses       6567     6618      +51     
+ Partials     2304     2303       -1     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

@david-livefront david-livefront added this pull request to the merge queue May 22, 2025
Merged via the queue into main with commit 3551e75 May 22, 2025
9 checks passed
@david-livefront david-livefront deleted the PM-16705-improved-accessibility-node-validation branch May 22, 2025 22:39
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants