Add didVisitURL delegate method
#816
Merged
Conversation
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
|
So this is a totally fine place to begin, if we want to begin here. I think it's entirely acceptable to do the smallest possible work item to make something possible, and this would definitely meet that bar. So if you're happy with this approach, I think I say "let's do it". |
|
OK, @Lukasa, I think it's ready to go. |
Lukasa
approved these changes
Feb 21, 2025
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Trying to pave the way for closing #790 with some direction from @Lukasa.
I have no idea where is best to insert this new delegate method. I'm currently doing it first thing in
receiveResponseHead0, and not using an EventLoopFuture for back pressure management. The state machine seems pretty fragile and I don't want to leave too much of an imprint. Trying to be a part of an EventLoopFuture chain seems really complicated and would really leave a mark on the codebase, so I'm wondering if it's possible to just warn the user "do not block"?Anyway, just a jumping-off point and happy to take direction!