Make Range optional in read source code endpoint

[maks-ivanov]

User description

This commit introduces a more structured approach to representing file ranges by adding a nested Range type to FileRange. The changes include:

Make range optional for read source code
#64

---

CodeAnt-AI Description

• Refactored the FileRange structure to include a nested Range type, enhancing the code's modularity and readability.
• Updated multiple test files to accommodate the new file_range structure, ensuring compatibility and correctness.
• Adjusted imports and references to use the new api_types::Range and lsp_types::Range where appropriate.

---

Changes walkthrough

Relevant files

Enhancement

python_tests.rs Refactor Python tests to use nested `Range` type in `FileRange` lsproxy/src/lsp/manager/language_tests/python_tests.rs Introduced api_types::Range as a nested type within FileRange. Updated test cases to use file_range instead of range. Adjusted imports to include api_types. +292/-232 js_tests.rs Update JS tests to use consistent `Range` type                                  lsproxy/src/lsp/manager/language_tests/js_tests.rs Changed Range to lsp_types::Range for consistency. Updated test cases to use file_range instead of range. Added import for Position and Range from api_types. +45/-36

💡 Usage Guide

Checking Your Pull Request

Every time you make a pull request, our system automatically looks through it. We check for security issues, mistakes in how you're setting up your infrastructure, and common code problems. We do this to make sure your changes are solid and won't cause any trouble later.

Talking to CodeAnt AI

Got a question or need a hand with something in your pull request? You can easily get in touch with CodeAnt AI right here. Just type the following in a comment on your pull request, and replace "Your question here" with whatever you want to ask:

@codeant-ai ask: Your question here

This lets you have a chat with CodeAnt AI about your pull request, making it easier to understand and improve your code.

Retrigger review

Ask CodeAnt AI to review the PR again, by typing:

@codeant-ai: review

Check Your Repository Health

To analyze the health of your code repository, visit our dashboard at app.codeant.ai. This tool helps you identify potential issues and areas for improvement in your codebase, ensuring your repository maintains high standards of code health.

[codeant-ai]

Pull Request Feedback 🔍

🔒 No security issues identified

⚡ Recommended areas for review Code Smell The repeated pattern of creating FileRange with nested Range and Position objects could be refactored to improve code readability and maintainability. Consider using a helper function or a builder pattern to reduce redundancy. Code Smell Similar to the C# tests, the repeated pattern of constructing FileRange objects with nested Range and Position could be refactored to enhance readability and reduce duplication.

[codeant-ai]

Suggestion: Consider using saturating_add instead of + 3 to prevent potential overflow when calculating the end line position. [possible issue]

Suggested change

	line: definition.range.end.line as u32 + 3,
	line: definition.range.end.line.saturating_add(3),

[codeant-ai]

Suggestion: Validate that the Url::parse method is used correctly to handle potential errors gracefully. [best practice]

Suggested change

	uri: Url::parse("file:///mnt/lsproxy_root/sample_project/java/AStar.java").unwrap(),
	uri: Url::parse("file:///mnt/lsproxy_root/sample_project/java/AStar.java").expect("Failed to parse URL"),

[maks-ivanov]

agentic-labs/lsproxy-python-sdk#67

[robmck1995]

LGTM