Skip to content

Conversation

@mitchcapper
Copy link
Contributor

@mitchcapper mitchcapper commented Aug 17, 2018

If we didn't want to do async/Task support we could avoid changing the protocol library, (and the library itself has to use .wait as it has locks). This is a bit more future proof / forward planning per the direction it seems you want to be going. Suggest using ?w=1 when reviewing the changes to see the content items.

signal-csharp/libsignal-protocol-dotnet#5

Closes #18

@Trolldemorted
Copy link
Contributor

Do we really need the asynchronity? I think it doesn't make that much sense that deep in the stack, especially with the locks around.

@mitchcapper mitchcapper force-pushed the callback_support_for_decrypt_pr branch from 5aba4cc to 3b16878 Compare November 7, 2018 21:09
@mitchcapper mitchcapper force-pushed the callback_support_for_decrypt_pr branch from 3b16878 to d5df931 Compare October 26, 2019 10:34
@mitchcapper
Copy link
Contributor Author

Updated Add GetStrippedMessage that takes a SessionRecord instead and use it so callback support on new sessions works. I described this in #18 but didn't submit up the change.

…tocol-dotnet for it)

Add GetStrippedMessage that takes a SessionVersion instead and use it so callback support on new sessions works
@mitchcapper mitchcapper force-pushed the callback_support_for_decrypt_pr branch from d5df931 to bff067d Compare February 14, 2021 10:02
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.

Don't save session until after message fully handled?

2 participants