Skip to content

Conversation

@google-labs-jules
Copy link

This submission improves type safety in src/lib/string.ts and src/lib/geo-location.ts by adding explicit types and removing a @ts-expect-error.


PR created automatically by Jules for task 13952484139380514309 started by @serhalp

This commit improves type safety in two leaf-node modules by removing `@ts-expect-error` and implicit `any` types.

In `src/lib/string.ts`, the `capitalize` function was updated to use explicit `string` types for its parameters, eliminating the implicit `any` types.

In `src/lib/geo-location.ts`, the `@ts-expect-error` in the `getGeoLocationFromAPI` function was removed by adding a type assertion to the `res.json()` call, ensuring the `geo` property is correctly typed.
@google-labs-jules
Copy link
Author

👋 Jules, reporting for duty! I'm here to lend a hand with this pull request.

When you start a review, I'll add a 👀 emoji to each comment to let you know I've read it. I'll focus on feedback directed at me and will do my best to stay out of conversations between you and other bots or reviewers to keep the noise down.

I'll push a commit with your requested changes shortly after. Please note there might be a delay between these steps, but rest assured I'm on the job!

For more direct control, you can switch me to Reactive Mode. When this mode is on, I will only act on comments where you specifically mention me with @jules. You can find this option in the Pull Request section of your global Jules UI settings. You can always switch back!


For security, I will only act on instructions from the user who triggered this task.

New to Jules? Learn more at jules.google/docs.

@github-actions
Copy link

📊 Benchmark results

Comparing with 6f14f0d

  • Dependency count: 1,044 (no change)
  • Package size: 304 MB (no change)
  • Number of ts-expect-error directives: 375 ⬇️ 0.80% decrease vs. 6f14f0d

@serhalp serhalp changed the title Fix: Improve Type Safety in Leaf Modules build(types): fix a few type errors Dec 31, 2025
@serhalp serhalp marked this pull request as ready for review December 31, 2025 17:12
@serhalp serhalp requested a review from a team as a code owner December 31, 2025 17:12
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