feat(toolbox): Add string utility function for_each_csv_item() to toolbox

[steverough]

SDB-10203

[gemini-code-assist]

Summary of Changes

Hello @steverough, I'm Gemini Code Assist¹! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed!

This pull request introduces a new string utility function, for_each_csv_item(), to the toolbox library. This function provides a robust and efficient way to parse comma-separated value strings, iterating over each item and handling edge cases like empty fields and trailing delimiters. The addition aims to enhance string manipulation capabilities within the toolbox and is accompanied by thorough unit tests to ensure correctness.

Highlights

• New Utility Function: A new string utility function, for_each_csv_item(), has been added to the toolbox::util namespace to facilitate iterating over items in a comma-separated value (CSV) string.
• Robust CSV Parsing: The for_each_csv_item() function is designed to correctly handle various CSV scenarios, including empty strings, multiple consecutive commas, and trailing commas, ensuring accurate parsing of each item.
• Efficiency with string_view: The new function leverages std::string_view for its input and for passing items to the provided callable, promoting efficient string handling by avoiding unnecessary memory allocations and copies.
• Noexcept Specification: The for_each_csv_item() function includes a noexcept specification that is conditional on the noexcept status of the underlying split_pair function and the user-provided callable, ensuring proper exception safety guarantees.
• Comprehensive Unit Tests: Extensive unit tests have been added to String.ut.cpp to validate the behavior of for_each_csv_item() across a wide range of inputs, confirming its correctness and robustness.
• Header Inclusion: The String.hpp header now includes <string_view> to support the new functionality.

Using Gemini Code Assist

The full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips.

Invoking Gemini

You can request assistance from Gemini at any point by creating a comment using either /gemini <command> or @gemini-code-assist <command>. Below is a summary of the supported commands on the current page.

Feature	Command	Description
Code Review	/gemini review	Performs a code review for the current pull request in its current state.
Pull Request Summary	/gemini summary	Provides a summary of the current pull request in its current state.
Comment	@gemini-code-assist	Responds in comments when explicitly tagged, both in pull request comments and review comments.
Help	/gemini help	Displays a list of available commands.

Customization

To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a .gemini/ folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.

Limitations & Feedback

Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for Github and other Google products, sign up here.

You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension.

Footnotes

1. Review the Privacy Notices, Generative AI Prohibited Use Policy, Terms of Service, and learn how to configure Gemini Code Assist in GitHub here. Gemini can make mistakes, so double check it and use code with caution. ↩

[gemini-code-assist]

Code Review

This pull request introduces a new string utility function, for_each_csv_item(), along with its corresponding unit tests. The implementation is functionally correct and the tests cover a good range of edge cases. However, I've identified opportunities for improvement in both the function's implementation and the test suite's structure to enhance readability and maintainability. My review includes suggestions to refactor the core logic to be more explicit and to streamline the repetitive test code.