Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Fix replies being ignored #488

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jul 28, 2024
Merged

Fix replies being ignored #488

merged 1 commit into from
Jul 28, 2024

Conversation

kevinlul
Copy link
Contributor

Four months ago in #434 (1e12130), a change was introduced that synchronized the ignore condition between the message ping and message search listeners. This added a new condition to ignore replies for message search. This behaviour is incorrect, unintuitive, and undocumented as all replies are ignored, not just direct replies, and there are no merits of ignoring even those for message search. This should fix most cases reported in #454, though there still remain uncommon cases of Discord not sending the message event. This also updates the logic in PingMessageListener so it can safely handle replies to other users containing a mention while ignoring reply mentions.

Four months ago in #434 (1e12130), a change was introduced that synchronized the ignore condition between the message ping and message search listeners. This added a new condition to ignore replies for message search. This behaviour is incorrect, unintuitive, and undocumented as all replies are ignored, not just direct replies, and there are no merits of ignoring even those for message search.
This should fix most cases reported in #454, though there still remain uncommon cases of Discord not sending the message event.
This also updates the logic in PingMessageListener so it can safely handle replies to other users containing a mention while ignoring reply mentions.
@kevinlul kevinlul requested a review from AlphaKretin July 28, 2024 15:24
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jul 28, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 46.77%. Comparing base (c5b7be3) to head (34cec09).
Report is 19 commits behind head on master.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master     #488      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   47.74%   46.77%   -0.98%     
==========================================
  Files          36       35       -1     
  Lines        4905     4840      -65     
  Branches      252      245       -7     
==========================================
- Hits         2342     2264      -78     
- Misses       2562     2575      +13     
  Partials        1        1              
Flag Coverage Δ
contract ?
unit 46.77% <100.00%> (-0.05%) ⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

Copy link
Contributor

@AlphaKretin AlphaKretin left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

We've been discussing this change, all looks good at a glance

@kevinlul kevinlul merged commit b8f4deb into master Jul 28, 2024
6 checks passed
@kevinlul kevinlul deleted the 454 branch July 28, 2024 15:28
@kevinlul kevinlul added the bug Something isn't working label Aug 25, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
bug Something isn't working
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants