-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 283
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
port: fix issues w/ ExpectReplies, invoke in SkillDialog #2966
port: fix issues w/ ExpectReplies, invoke in SkillDialog #2966
Conversation
conversationId: string, | ||
activity: Activity | ||
) => Promise<InvokeResponse>); | ||
postActivity: <T = any>( |
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.
This is the fix to remove the unnecessary as
casting here. The signatures are equivalent due as T
is defaulted to any
.
Also includes some small cleanup/formatting changes. Fixes #2962
c94af39
to
ec889ba
Compare
|
||
// Ensure the TurnState has the InvokeResponseKey, since this activity | ||
// is not being sent through the adapter, where it would be added to TurnState. | ||
if (a.type === ActivityTypes.InvokeResponse) { |
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.
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.
The JS code looks good 👍
@gabog, @johnataylor do we need to use TryAdd in .NET or some sort of "TrySet"?
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 want to do a last-write wins in .NET if I'm correctly recall the implementation around TeamsActivityHandler. .Add()
(depending on the class/implementation) normally throws an exception iirc.
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.
Looks good to me, @EricDahlvang, would you be able to take a quick pass and make sure nothing is missing?
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.
lgtm
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.
This looks fine... Are we squared away in .NET with test coverage? If not can you do a pass at testing the JS E2E with @gabog's assistance and make sure test coverage is added for these changes in JS?
(Either update the PR with some unit tests (preferable) or file an issue for R12 to add appropriate unit tests)
I've created #2969 so we don't hold up the new RC. |
Also includes some small cleanup/formatting changes. Fixes #2962
Also includes some small cleanup/formatting changes.
Fixes #2962