Skip to content

docs: read zipcode in the unregistered UDT example - #1270

Open
laozhej wants to merge 1 commit into
scylladb:masterfrom
laozhej:fix/udt-zipcode-example-294
Open

laozhej wants to merge 1 commit into
scylladb:masterfrom
laozhej:fix/udt-zipcode-example-294

Conversation

@laozhej

@laozhej laozhej commented Nov 15, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Read address.zipcode in the unregistered UDT example so the documented zipcode variable contains 78723 rather than the street address.

Fixes #294.

Validation: executed the documented attribute-read lines using the displayed Address namedtuple and verified both values; git diff --check passed.

AI assistance: OpenAI Codex generated this documentation correction and performed the validation above.

Pre-review checklist

  • I have split my patch into logically separate commits.
  • All commit messages clearly explain what they change and why.
  • I added relevant tests for new features and bug fixes.
  • All commits compile, pass static checks and pass test.
  • PR description sums up the changes and reasons why they should be introduced.
  • I have provided docstrings for the public items that I want to introduce.
  • I have adjusted the documentation.
  • I added appropriate Fixes: annotations to PR description.

@coderabbitai

coderabbitai Bot commented Nov 15, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Explain Change →

No actionable comments were generated in the recent review.

Summary

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • Documentation
    • Corrected the user-defined types example to assign the ZIP code from the address’s ZIP code field.

The User Defined Types example now assigns zipcode from address.zipcode instead of address.street.

Suggested reviewers: thobbs

Change: Other · Severity of issue fixed: Low

Merge Risk: Minimal · up to 3516d

This corrects a documentation typo so the example's zipcode variable holds the zip code and not the street. It has no runtime impact and is ready to merge.

Pre-merge checks: Passed 4

Check name Status Explanation
Title check Passed The title names the change: the unregistered UDT example now reads zipcode from address.zipcode. It matches the single-line docs change in the summary.
Description check Passed The description states the purpose, links Fixes #294, and gives validation steps. The checklist is partly marked. Tests and docstrings are unchecked, which fits a docs-only change.
Linked Issues check Passed #294 requires changing the final zipcode assignment in the UDT example from address.street to address.zipcode. The whole-PR diff (merge base to head) changes docs/user-defined-types.rst line 110…
Out of Scope Changes check Passed The whole-PR diff contains one changed line (+1/-1) in docs/user-defined-types.rst. It directly implements #294. No unrelated changes were found.
Full details: Linked Issues check

Explanation

#294 requires changing the final zipcode assignment in the UDT example from address.street to address.zipcode. The whole-PR diff (merge base to head) changes docs/user-defined-types.rst line 110 to zipcode = address.zipcode. This matches the issue. The change is documentation only, so no coding requirement or automated test applies.

  • Autofix · Keep fixing CodeRabbit findings and required CI, and resolving merge conflicts
Recent review info

Run configuration

  • Source mode: Auto
  • Repository: Unavailable
  • Branch: Unavailable
  • File: No configuration file from this repository applied
  • Commit: Unavailable
  • Layers: Organization UI
  • Review profile: QUIET
  • Plan: Advanced
  • Run ID: 7c6af59d-3c26-49b1-af5d-465e34339483
Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 175493a and 3516dc3.

Files selected for processing: 1

  • docs/user-defined-types.rst

Included review availability: This review used your included allowance. Your plan provides up to 1 included review per hour; 0 remain after this review.

This branch has not been deployed

No deployments
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

docs: Issue in page User Defined Types

1 participant