-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 673
recipient: Finish reconciling the ways we identify a PM conversation #4356
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
Merged
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
6 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
af84897
narrow [nfc]: Take whole own-user in isMessageInNarrow, to have ID.
gnprice aee9c5e
narrow: Use user IDs in isMessageInNarrow, instead of emails.
gnprice 7e769af
recipient [nfc]: Delete normalizeRecipientsSansMe!
gnprice 723635b
recipient: Use IDs in isSameRecipient; cut out normalizeRecipients!
gnprice fe0a2e9
unread: Use IDs, not emails, in getUnreadCountForNarrow.
gnprice e7315cd
recipient [nfc]: Add explicit helper pmUnreadsKeyFromPmKeyIds.
gnprice 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 hidden or 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 hidden or 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 hidden or 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 hidden or 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 hidden or 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 hidden or 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 hidden or 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 hidden or 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
Oops, something went wrong.
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.
Could call
pmUnreadsKeyFromPmKeyIdsto getsenderIdhere, I suppose—as long assenderIdandunreadPms[].sender_idare made to agree in being anumberor astring(for the.findthat they're used in here).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.
Yeah. I think that will most naturally come after converting these to our own
Immutable.Mapor similar data structure, and perhaps after converting the both of these (state.unread.pmsandstate.unread.huddles) into a single such data structure.With the data structures as they are, with
.sender_ida number, if we ranidsthroughpmUnreadsKeyFromPmKeyIdswe'd have to convert it back from string to number in order to do the search (or else convert everysender_idinto a string to do the comparison, which would be inefficient.) That conversion would make sense only because we know the key isn't just any string but has a particular structure... but the same facts about its structure mean we can just use the number directly and skip converting to a string and back.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.
Makes sense—I figured that was in the plan. 🙂