Fix jsanitize when recursive_msonable=True

[Andrew-S-Rosen]

Summary

Closes #726 by fixing the jsanitize(recursive_msonable=True) behavior.

Checklist

• Google format doc strings added. Check with ruff.
• Type annotations included. Check with mypy.
• Tests added for new features/fixes.
• If applicable, new classes/functions/modules have duecredit @due.dcite decorators to reference relevant papers by DOI (example)

Summary by CodeRabbit

• New Features

  • Enhanced the jsanitize function to improve sanitization of MSONable objects, ensuring consistent and thorough data cleaning.

• Tests

  • Introduced a new test case for the jsanitize function to validate handling of nested MSONable objects, improving test coverage and reliability.

[coderabbitai]

Walkthrough

The changes in this pull request focus on enhancing the jsanitize function within the src/monty/json.py file to improve its handling of MSONable objects when the recursive_msonable parameter is set to True. The updated implementation now recursively sanitizes the output of as_dict() for MSONable objects. Additionally, a new test case is introduced in tests/test_json.py to validate this functionality, ensuring that nested MSONable structures are processed correctly.

Changes

File	Change Summary
src/monty/json.py	Modified jsanitize to recursively sanitize MSONable objects when recursive_msonable=True.
tests/test_json.py	Added a test case for jsanitize to handle nested MSONable objects; included minor adjustments.

Assessment against linked issues

Objective	Addressed	Explanation
The jsanitize function does not behave as expected with recursive_msonable=True (#726)	✅

Possibly related PRs

• Fix removal of recursive_msonable keyword argument in internal jsanitize calls #671: This PR addresses modifications to the jsanitize function in monty/json.py, specifically related to the handling of the recursive_msonable parameter, which is directly relevant to the changes made in the main PR regarding the recursive sanitization of MSONable objects.

🐇 In the code, I hop and play,
Making MSONables clean today!
With jsanitize, all is right,
Recursive magic, pure delight!
Nested structures, now they gleam,
In our JSON world, we dream! 🌟

---

Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media?

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

🪧 Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

• Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
  • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
  • Generate unit testing code for this file.
  • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
• Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
  • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
  • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
• PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
  • @coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
  • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
  • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
  • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)

• @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
• @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
• @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
• @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
• @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
• @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
• @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
• @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

• Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
• Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
• Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

CodeRabbit Configuration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

• You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
• Please see the configuration documentation for more information.
• If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json

Documentation and Community

• Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
• Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
• Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 82.57%. Comparing base (a3d35a6) to head (84f8975).

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master     #728   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   82.57%   82.57%           
=======================================
  Files          27       27           
  Lines        1584     1584           
  Branches      284      284           
=======================================
  Hits         1308     1308           
  Misses        215      215           
  Partials       61       61           

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

[coderabbitai]

Actionable comments posted: 0

🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (1)

tests/test_json.py (1)

797-808: LGTM! Consider improving test readability.

The test case effectively verifies recursive MSONable serialization by checking both top-level and nested object fields. The implementation is thorough and well-structured.

Consider renaming the test object for better clarity:

-        DoubleGoodMSONClass = GoodMSONClass(1, 2, 3)
-        DoubleGoodMSONClass.values = [GoodMSONClass(1, 2, 3)]
+        nested_mson_obj = GoodMSONClass(1, 2, 3)
+        nested_mson_obj.values = [GoodMSONClass(1, 2, 3)]

📜 Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between a3d35a6 and 84f8975.

📒 Files selected for processing (2)

• src/monty/json.py (1 hunks)
• tests/test_json.py (1 hunks)

🔇 Additional comments (1)

src/monty/json.py (1)

995-1001: Implementation looks good!

The recursive jsanitize call on the output of as_dict() ensures proper serialization of nested MSONable objects while maintaining all sanitization parameters. This effectively fixes the issue described in PR #726 where nested MSONable objects weren't being properly sanitized.

[Andrew-S-Rosen]

If approved, could we also get a version release after this PR? 🙏