Skip to content

fix: parse built-in repl prompts instead of faulty custom markers - #55

Draft
shadowusr wants to merge 1 commit into
masterfrom
users/shadowusr/TESTPLANE-1089
Draft

fix: parse built-in repl prompts instead of faulty custom markers#55
shadowusr wants to merge 1 commit into
masterfrom
users/shadowusr/TESTPLANE-1089

Conversation

@shadowusr

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

No description provided.

@chatgpt-codex-connector chatgpt-codex-connector Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: e575ef281b

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

Comment on lines 351 to +353
this._buffer = "";
this._pending = {
startMarker,
endMarker,
kind: "prompt",

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

P2 Badge Ignore the startup prompt before completing raw lines

When sendRaw() is the first operation on a fresh ReplConnection, the REPL's initial > prompt can arrive after this prompt waiter is installed but before the line has been evaluated. That startup prompt then resolves the fallback command immediately, so the next raw line can be completed by the fallback's later undefined\n> output and return the wrong result while the user's actual output remains on the socket; drain or explicitly ignore the connection's initial prompt before using prompt-only completion.

Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.

@shadowusr
shadowusr marked this pull request as draft July 28, 2026 09:31
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant