Closed
Bug 1012660
Opened 10 years ago
Closed 10 years ago
Remove _chatRoomFieldsList from IRC code
Categories
(Chat Core :: IRC, defect)
Tracking
(Not tracked)
RESOLVED
FIXED
1.6
People
(Reporter: clokep, Assigned: clokep)
References
Details
Attachments
(1 file, 3 obsolete files)
13.86 KB,
patch
|
clokep
:
review+
|
Details | Diff | Splinter Review |
This has become obsolete, we can now directly set the chatRoomFields now that joinChat returns a conversation object for IRC (see bug 1003200).
Assignee | ||
Comment 1•10 years ago
|
||
Attachment #8424812 -
Flags: review?(aleth)
Assignee | ||
Comment 2•10 years ago
|
||
This blocks bug 955366 since this code should be removed or switched to a NormalizedMap.
Blocks: 955366
Comment 3•10 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 8424812 [details] [diff] [review] Patch v1 Review of attachment 8424812 [details] [diff] [review]: ----------------------------------------------------------------- Well spotted! This is a nice simplification and improves the error handling too. ::: chat/protocols/irc/ircBase.jsm @@ +1086,1 @@ > return conversationErrorMessage(this, aMessage, "error.noChannel"); It's not strictly speaking part of this bug, but as you are touching all these connection errors anyway... please add a conv.joining = false to the errors which imply joining failed. @@ +1096,1 @@ > return serverErrorMessage(this, aMessage, Shouldn't this be a conversationErrorMessage now we have a tab open despite not being able to join the channel? You also have to remove chatRoomFields on the conversation so it doesn't reconnect. @@ +1201,5 @@ > }, > "437": function(aMessage) { // ERR_UNAVAILRESOURCE > // <nick/channel> :Nick/channel is temporarily unavailable > + conversationErrorMessage(this, aMessage, "error.unavailable"); > + return true; Are you intentionally allowing reconnections here due to the "temporarily"? @@ +1285,5 @@ > return false; > }, > "471": function(aMessage) { // ERR_CHANNELISFULL > // <channel> :Cannot join channel (+l) > + conversationErrorMessage(this, aMessage, "error.channelFull"); ditto @@ +1295,5 @@ > return false; > }, > "473": function(aMessage) { // ERR_INVITEONLYCHAN > // <channel> :Cannot join channel (+i) > + conversationErrorMessage(this, aMessage, "error.inviteOnly"); I don't think we want reconnections here.
Attachment #8424812 -
Flags: review?(aleth) → review-
Assignee | ||
Comment 4•10 years ago
|
||
(In reply to aleth [:aleth] from comment #3) > ::: chat/protocols/irc/ircBase.jsm > @@ +1086,1 @@ > > return conversationErrorMessage(this, aMessage, "error.noChannel"); > > It's not strictly speaking part of this bug, but as you are touching all > these connection errors anyway... please add a conv.joining = false to the > errors which imply joining failed. Good point! I should probably abstract this out better. > @@ +1096,1 @@ > > return serverErrorMessage(this, aMessage, > > Shouldn't this be a conversationErrorMessage now we have a tab open despite > not being able to join the channel? Probably, serverErrorMessage shouldn't really be used anyway. > You also have to remove chatRoomFields on the conversation so it doesn't > reconnect. No. I want this to attempt to reconnect. The user might have closed other channels, etc. > @@ +1201,5 @@ > > "437": function(aMessage) { // ERR_UNAVAILRESOURCE > > // <nick/channel> :Nick/channel is temporarily unavailable > > + conversationErrorMessage(this, aMessage, "error.unavailable"); > > + return true; > > Are you intentionally allowing reconnections here due to the "temporarily"? Yes. This can also be called with a nick, by the way. > > @@ +1285,5 @@ > > "471": function(aMessage) { // ERR_CHANNELISFULL > > // <channel> :Cannot join channel (+l) > > + conversationErrorMessage(this, aMessage, "error.channelFull"); > > ditto Yes. > @@ +1295,5 @@ > > return false; > > }, > > "473": function(aMessage) { // ERR_INVITEONLYCHAN > > // <channel> :Cannot join channel (+i) > > + conversationErrorMessage(this, aMessage, "error.inviteOnly"); > > I don't think we want reconnections here. You're probably right, I was very iffy on this one. I'll delete _chatRoomFields here.
Assignee | ||
Comment 5•10 years ago
|
||
Attachment #8424812 -
Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #8425426 -
Flags: review?(aleth)
Comment 6•10 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 8425426 [details] [diff] [review] Patch v2 Review of attachment 8425426 [details] [diff] [review]: ----------------------------------------------------------------- ::: chat/protocols/irc/ircUtils.jsm @@ +218,5 @@ > > +// Print an error message into a conversation, optionally mark the conversation > +// as not joined and/or not rejoinable. > +function conversationErrorMessage(aAccount, aMessage, aError, > + aJoining, aRejoinable = true) { I think this would be clearer with aJoinFailed = false as the default (when it's true, joining is set to false). I can't see any use case for aJoining = true and passing undefined as a parameter always looks weird.
Attachment #8425426 -
Flags: review?(aleth) → review-
Assignee | ||
Comment 7•10 years ago
|
||
The double negatives make my head hurt slightly, but I agree that passing undefined always seems "wrong".
Attachment #8425426 -
Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #8425454 -
Flags: review?(aleth)
Comment 8•10 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 8425454 [details] [diff] [review] Patch v3 Review of attachment 8425454 [details] [diff] [review]: ----------------------------------------------------------------- Yeah, double negatives are unfortunate but better than the alternative. Looks good, thanks!
Attachment #8425454 -
Flags: review?(aleth) → review+
Comment 9•10 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 8425454 [details] [diff] [review] Patch v3 Review of attachment 8425454 [details] [diff] [review]: ----------------------------------------------------------------- ::: chat/protocols/irc/ircUtils.jsm @@ +225,5 @@ > conv.writeMessage(aMessage.servername, _(aError, aMessage.params[1]), > {error: true, system: true}); > delete conv._pendingMessage; > + > + // If a value for joining is explictly given, mark it. Nit: you could save yourself the isMuc if you did if (aAccount.isMUCName){ if (aJoinfailed) ... if (!rejoinable) ... } Not going to r- for this though.
Assignee | ||
Updated•10 years ago
|
Keywords: checkin-needed
Assignee | ||
Comment 10•10 years ago
|
||
Carrying the review forward for changing the nit.
Attachment #8425454 -
Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #8425529 -
Flags: review+
Assignee | ||
Comment 11•10 years ago
|
||
https://hg.mozilla.org/comm-central/rev/0568cdefd554
Status: ASSIGNED → RESOLVED
Closed: 10 years ago
Keywords: checkin-needed
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Target Milestone: --- → 1.6
You need to log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description
•