Repository navigation
fix(shared): use slice(-2) for UEN T-series 2-digit year so future years reject - #10026
Merged
kevin9foong merged 3 commits intoSep 29, 2026
Merged
Conversation
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🟡 Changes recommended
Add a regression test covering a valid-checksum future T-series value.
Get a fresh assessment by requesting another Copilot review.
Pull request overview
Fixes future-year validation for T-series UENs by correctly extracting the final two year digits.
Changes:
- Replaces
substring(-2)withslice(-2).
File summaries
| File | Summary |
|---|---|
packages/shared/utils/uen-validation.ts |
Corrects T-series future-year validation. |
Review details
- Files reviewed: 1/1 changed files
- Comments generated: 1
- Review effort level: Lite
💡 Add a code-review agent skill or configure MCP servers for context-aware, tailored reviews. Learn more in the docs.
|
|
||
| const currentYear = parseInt( | ||
| new Date().getFullYear().toString().substring(-2), | ||
| new Date().getFullYear().toString().slice(-2), |
|
Warning Endor Labs detected 1 policy violations associated with this pull request. Please review the findings that caused the policy violations.
|
kevin9foong
reviewed
Sep 18, 2026
| }) | ||
|
|
||
| it('should reject a future T-series year with a valid checksum', () => { | ||
| // T99SS0032K has a valid checksum (via calcOtherCheckDigit) but year 99 |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
hey @soroush5, thanks for the contribution.
LGTM 👍 , but shall we update to remove the context about the previous substring(-2) as might not be useful in the long run?
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Done, trimmed it down to just what the test checks.
Author
|
Hi, gentle nudge on the UEN year fix. Can add more T-series cases if useful. |
kevin9foong
approved these changes
Sep 29, 2026
Contributor
|
LGTM 👍 |
|
This pull request does not currently match the merge queue conditions, so it cannot be queued from here. The box comes back if it matches again. |
kevin9foong
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 29, 2026
#10026 left the currentYear parseInt call split across lines, which fails the prettier/prettier lint rule in CI. Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5.5 (1M context) <[email protected]>
Author
|
Thanks for the review and the merge. |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
substring(-2) returns the whole year string, so the future-year guard never fired. One-line fix to slice(-2). Verified: fake T99 rejected after, valid T09 still passes.
Fixes #10025