fix bug where the entire document text would be included instead of just visible content #3351
Conversation
This file contains 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
…ust visible content In #3269, the `ContextItem` and `ContextFile` types were merged. The former had a `text` field that I neglected to update in that PR to use the new `content` name (and it was not caught by the typechecker). This could lead to poor context in chat whenever `getEnhancedContext` is used. Instead of including just the visible portion of the file, the entire file's content would be included.
sqs
force-pushed
the
sqs/fix-visible-sel-bug
branch
from
51eac26
to
28293eb
Compare
|
@philipp-spiess This is backport-worthy, don't you think? Sorry about this bug! |
valerybugakov
approved these changes
Mar 8, 2024
steveyegge
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 13, 2024
…ust visible content (#3351)
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
In #3269, the
ContextItemandContextFiletypes were merged. The former had atextfield that I neglected to update in that PR to use the newcontentname (and it was not caught by the typechecker).This could lead to poor context in chat whenever
getEnhancedContextis used. Instead of including just the visible portion of the file, the entire file's content would be included.Test plan
I have not been able to repro this, but it is obviously a bug.