chore: make function comment match function name

[pudongair]

make function comment match function name

Summary by CodeRabbit

This release includes internal documentation improvements that enhance clarity in our codebase. Although there are no visible changes to functionality, updated comments and test descriptions ensure that internal messaging aligns with current behaviors.

• Documentation
  • Refined internal comments to accurately reflect current naming and operational details.
• Tests
  • Updated test descriptions to clearly communicate the validation logic.

[coderabbitai]

Walkthrough

This pull request updates inline comments in three files. The modifications ensure that method and test function names mentioned in the comments accurately reflect the actual implementations. No logic changes or functional updates occur; the changes are restricted solely to updating documentation comments for clarity.

Changes

Files	Change Summary
x/captains/keeper/nodes.go x/claims/keeper/mock_captains_test.go	Updated method comments to align with the code: changed from getNodesStoreByOwner to getNodeByOwnerPrefixStore and from CalAndGetNodeHistoricalEmissionOnEpoch to CalcNodeCumulativeEmissionByEpoch.
x/captains/types/msg_test.go	Revised the test function comment to correctly state that it tests MsgClaimComputingPower ValidateBasic, replacing the previous reference to MsgUpdateNodeInfo ValidateBasic.

Suggested reviewers

• richardleeft

Poem

Hopping through the code on a sunny day,
I twirl and tweak the comments in a playful way.
Names now match the methods with a joyful cheer,
Each line a gentle hop, crystal clear.
A carrot for clarity, and hops that never stray!

Tip

⚡🧪 Multi-step agentic review comment chat (experimental)

• We're introducing multi-step agentic chat in review comments. This experimental feature enhances review discussions with the CodeRabbit agentic chat by enabling advanced interactions, including the ability to create pull requests directly from comments.
  - To enable this feature, set early_access to true under in the settings.

✨ Finishing Touches

• 📝 Generate Docstrings

---

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ 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 generate docstrings to generate docstrings for this 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.

[coderabbitai]

Actionable comments posted: 1

📜 Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between a7b9bc6 and 7002c45.

📒 Files selected for processing (3)

• x/captains/keeper/nodes.go (1 hunks)
• x/captains/types/msg_test.go (1 hunks)
• x/claims/keeper/mock_captains_test.go (1 hunks)

🔇 Additional comments (2)

x/captains/keeper/nodes.go (1)

219-224: Accurate Documentation Update.
The inline comment for the helper function now correctly uses the updated method name getNodeByOwnerPrefixStore and clearly describes its purpose. This change aligns the comment with the actual function signature and improves code clarity.

x/claims/keeper/mock_captains_test.go (1)

307-308: Updated Comment Alignment.
The comment preceding the CalcNodeCumulativeEmissionByEpoch method has been updated to match the method’s name. This ensures that the documentation accurately reflects the function’s purpose and improves maintainability.

[coderabbitai]

🛠️ Refactor suggestion

Correct Test Function Documentation.
The comment above the TestMsgClaimComputingPowerValidateBasic function still references MsgUpdateNodeInfo ValidateBasic, which does not match the function’s intent. To align the comment with the function name, please update it to reference MsgClaimComputingPower ValidateBasic.

You can apply the following diff:

-// TestMsgClaimComputingPowerValidateBasic tests MsgUpdateNodeInfo ValidateBasic
+// TestMsgClaimComputingPowerValidateBasic tests MsgClaimComputingPower ValidateBasic

📝 Committable suggestion

‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.

Suggested change

	// TestMsgClaimComputingPowerValidateBasic tests MsgUpdateNodeInfo ValidateBasic
	func (suite *MsgTestSuite) TestMsgClaimComputingPowerValidateBasic() {
	// TestMsgClaimComputingPowerValidateBasic tests MsgClaimComputingPower ValidateBasic
	func (suite *MsgTestSuite) TestMsgClaimComputingPowerValidateBasic() {