Improve typing of normalizeRecipients
#4122
Open
Conversation
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
|
Withdrawn pending analysis of test failures. |
... and, in so doing, fix a subtle bug. There are fortunately only three callsites. Two of these would always pass a list; the third, `matchRecipients`, might not. This meant that if the name of a stream happened to be a user's e-mail, `isMessageInNarrow` would incorrectly consider messages in that stream to also be in the private-message narrow with that user. Fix this by checking that a message passed to `matchRecipients` is of type `"private"` before analyzing its `display_recipient`. Then eliminate the relevant code.
rk-for-zulip
force-pushed
the
normalize-recipients-typing
branch
from
c0101d6 to
214c32d
Compare
|
(Test failure was due to the mock |
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
There's a
TODOnext tonormalizeRecipients, so do it (fixing a minor bug in the process).Also, add documentation for it. (The documentation is based on its original implementation and use in a241966, the comment noted in the commit. Its use has expanded beyond that... although not necessarily for the better.)