Fix: avoid unintended @@skip_touch_context persistence when @skip_touch_context is true#2486
Open
knaito-asial wants to merge 1 commit into
Open
Fix: avoid unintended @@skip_touch_context persistence when @skip_touch_context is true#2486knaito-asial wants to merge 1 commit into
knaito-asial wants to merge 1 commit into
Conversation
…ch_context is true
|
|
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Previously, touch_context used the expression:
This unintentionally mutated @@skip_touch_context to true when @skip_touch_context was true and @@skip_touch_context was nil.
As a result, the class variable remained true across subsequent requests, even though the instance variable was correctly reset.
This led to touch_context being skipped globally, even in contexts where it should have run.
To fix this, we now evaluate both flags independently to avoid side-effects:
Example of the bug in production
Let me know if any additional context is helpful!