-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 281
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
Cleaned up adapter #544
Cleaned up adapter #544
Conversation
Stevenic
commented
Oct 15, 2018
- Updated code to use async/await
- Fixed status codes returned by processActivity().
- Added ability to pass ConversationParamters to createConversation().
- Updated code to use async/await - Fixed status codes returned by processActivity(). - Added ability to pass ConversationParamters to createConversation().
}); | ||
} catch (err) { | ||
return Promise.reject(err); | ||
public createConversation(reference: Partial<ConversationReference>, logic: (context: TurnContext) => Promise<void>): Promise<void>; |
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 C# SDK has a single method here called:
public virtual async Task CreateConversationAsync(string channelId, string serviceUrl, MicrosoftAppCredentials credentials, ConversationParameters conversationParameters, BotCallbackHandler callback, CancellationToken cancellationToken)
Neither of the overloads here seem to align with that.
Can you please remove this change - which is adding new interfaces / functionality - into a different PR?
} catch (err) { | ||
return Promise.reject(err); | ||
public createConversation(reference: Partial<ConversationReference>, logic: (context: TurnContext) => Promise<void>): Promise<void>; | ||
public createConversation(reference: Partial<ConversationReference>, params: ConversationParameters, logic: (context: TurnContext) => Promise<void>): Promise<void>; |
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.
Why wouldn't this overload be async as well?
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 overload is new, but doesn't have a test.
} | ||
|
||
// Initialize params | ||
params.bot = reference.bot; |
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 logic in here seems like it should be closer to the C# code, if changes are going to be made. Wouldn't be hard to much more closly align them.
I would suggest removing this change from this PR, and have this PR just do the async/await change.
How about we make this separate PRs?
|
Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build 1905
💛 - Coveralls |