This repository has been archived by the owner on Nov 21, 2024. It is now read-only.
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 370
Avoid rendering messages with duplicate IDs #387
Open
benlangfeld
wants to merge
1
commit into
dev
Choose a base branch
from
feature/avoid-duplicate-message-ids
base: dev
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains 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
This file contains 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
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
|
@@ -89,7 +89,7 @@ Candy.View.Template = (function(self){ | |
|
||
self.Message = { | ||
pane: '<div class="message-pane-wrapper"><ul class="message-pane"></ul></div>', | ||
item: '<li><small data-timestamp="{{timestamp}}">{{time}}</small><div>' + | ||
item: '<li data-message-id="{{id}}"><small data-timestamp="{{timestamp}}">{{time}}</small><div>' + | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. why not just There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Just to avoid potential colision with any reserved name. Happy to change it if you're confident that There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I meant just |
||
'<a class="label" href="#" class="name">{{displayName}}</a>' + | ||
'<span class="spacer">▸</span>{{{message}}}</div></li>' | ||
}; | ||
|
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 was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
can we rely on the fact that each client behaves like it should & generates a unique id for the message, also that not two clients generate the same id for different messages?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
We cleanly handle the case where a message does not have an ID, but there's no way to implement this for clients which generate non-unique IDs. I'll post some more cogent thoughts once I'm really awake.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think the best we could do here is to make this behaviour optional and enable it when all clients are controlled or meet the requirements for globally unique IDs.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
yes, I'd go for this option as well. Another solution would be to generate when receiving a unique id based on message body, from jid and date.. but this might generate false duplicates :/