Revert "Merge pull request #3379 from Open-Systems-Pharmacology/3014

[benjaperez1983]

Fixes #3014

Description

Undo the changes from #3014 to develop branch

Type of change

Please mark relevant options with an x in the brackets.

• Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
• New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
• Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to not work as expected)
• This change requires documentation changes (link at least one user or developer documentation issue):
• Algorithm update - updates algorithm documentation/questions/answers etc.
• Other (please describe):

How Has This Been Tested?

Please describe the tests that you ran to verify your changes. Provide instructions so we can reproduce. Please also list any relevant details for your test configuration

• Integration tests
• Unit tests
• Manual tests
• No tests required

Reviewer checklist

Mark everything that needs to be checked before merging the PR.

• Check if the code is well documented
• Check if the behavior is what is expected
• Check if the code is well tested
• Check if the code is readable and well formatted
• Additional checks (document below if any)
• Check if documentation update issue(s) are created if the option This change requires a documentation update above is selected

Screenshots (if appropriate):

Questions (if appropriate):

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Refactor
  • Internal improvements to application naming logic for enhanced code clarity and maintainability.

[coderabbitai]

No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉

ℹ️ Recent review info

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Organization UI

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

Run ID: 09485e94-0dde-4d46-b4c0-26a5462b86e8

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 1999ab6 and 06b00ed.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)

• src/PKSim.Core/Services/EventBuildingBlockCreator.cs

---

📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

The change modifies application naming in the event building block creation service by replacing a multi-step padding-based naming scheme with a simpler 1-based index approach. The iteration pattern is refactored from mapping to ToList() with indexing to direct MapFrom(...).Each(...) calls, while preserving per-item processing logic.

Changes

Cohort / File(s)	Summary
Application Naming Refactor src/PKSim.Core/Services/EventBuildingBlockCreator.cs	Replaces padding-based name generation with direct 1-based indexing (index + 1). Removes width calculation and zero-padding logic. Refactors iteration from ToList() indexing to MapFrom(...).Each(...). Adds clarifying comment about 1-based nomenclature.

Estimated code review effort

🎯 2 (Simple) | ⏱️ ~8 minutes

Poem

🐰 A simpler path for naming apps so fine,
No padding tricks, just index plus one divine,
Application_001 through countless more,
Now sorted neat, much cleaner than before!

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 3 | ❌ 1

❌ Failed checks (1 warning)

Check name	Status	Explanation	Resolution
Linked Issues check	⚠️ Warning	The PR title indicates reverting issue #3014, but the code changes show removal of the padding-based index naming scheme (e.g., Application_001) that was implemented to address #3014's requirements.	Clarify whether this PR should revert #3014 changes entirely or if the implementation needs refinement. The current changes contradict the stated objective of maintaining sequential naming for better sorting.

✅ Passed checks (3 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Description Check	✅ Passed	Check skipped - CodeRabbit’s high-level summary is enabled.
Title check	✅ Passed	The title clearly describes the main change: reverting a specific pull request (#3379/issue #3014) related to multiple-dose application naming.
Out of Scope Changes check	✅ Passed	The changes in EventBuildingBlockCreator.cs are directly related to reverting the application naming logic from issue #3014, with no unrelated modifications present.

_{✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings.}

✨ Finishing Touches

• 📝 Generate docstrings (stacked PR)
• 📝 Generate docstrings (commit on current branch)

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create PR with unit tests
• Post copyable unit tests in a comment
• Commit unit tests in branch revert-3014-multiple-dose-from-develop

Tip

Try Coding Plans. Let us write the prompt for your AI agent so you can ship faster (with fewer bugs).
Share your feedback on Discord.

---

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

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.}

[msevestre]

@ALL: let's make sure we add tests in the future for domain changes. IT's not becuase it was not tested before that it should not be tested when making changes to the domain