Skip to content

Comments

feat: add /x/acpio package#188

Open
johnstcn wants to merge 8 commits intomainfrom
cj/exp/acp-a
Open

feat: add /x/acpio package#188
johnstcn wants to merge 8 commits intomainfrom
cj/exp/acp-a

Conversation

@johnstcn
Copy link
Member

@johnstcn johnstcn commented Feb 19, 2026

Relates to coder/internal#1333

Adds /x/acpio package

🤖 Written by Opus 4.5 using Mux

@github-actions
Copy link

✅ Preview binaries are ready!

To test with modules: agentapi_version = "agentapi_188" or download from: https://github.com/coder/agentapi/releases/tag/agentapi_188

@johnstcn johnstcn marked this pull request as ready for review February 19, 2026 09:58
Comment on lines 107 to 114
Id: len(c.messages),
Role: st.ConversationRoleUser,
Message: message,
Time: c.clock.Now(),
})
// Add placeholder for streaming agent response
c.messages = append(c.messages, st.ConversationMessage{
Id: len(c.messages),
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

As we have logic for removing placeholder messages I'd like to confirm something: Do we ever return placeholders messages to the user? If we do we might end up re-using an ID and that could be a little funky.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

IIRC it's used in the UI on initial send.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Okay, if so, we should probably not re-use the ID within a conversation. Our react frontend will likely key={message.id} and this could cause some funky behavior.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

What if we instead mutate the placeholder message content?
The alternative is that we have a gap in the monotonically increasing message IDs, which may not be an issue?

Copy link
Contributor

@DanielleMaywood DanielleMaywood Feb 24, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I can't think of any issues with having a gap (we probably shouldn't use IDs for indexing anyways)

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.

2 participants