Repository navigation
Conversation
The UI callback of the job acted on whatever input the editor had by then, so the canceled job of a replaced input closed a reused compare editor while the new input was still initializing. Assisted-by: multiple AI agents and layers of automated tooling 🤖
Contributor
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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
The UI callback of the compare editor's initialization job did not check that its input is still the input of the editor. When an editor is reused for another input, the job of the previous input is canceled, and its callback then set the canceled state on the new input and closed the editor while that input was still initializing. The callback now returns early when the editor has moved on to another input.
CompareEditorReuseTestcovers the case: it fails without the change because the reused editor is closed, and passes with it.Follow-up to the review of #2990.