fix(command-parser): correct misleading whitespace error message#22
Merged
Conversation
…check
The post-tokenize arg-validation error claimed the argument contained
an invalid null byte, but the check is arg.includes(' ') - it rejects
embedded whitespace, not null bytes. The null-byte check is the
separate assertValidToken path. Update the message to describe what is
actually being rejected so operators chasing the error find the real
cause.
|
Warning You have reached your daily quota limit. Please wait up to 24 hours and I will start processing your requests again! |
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
1 participant
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Summary
parseCommand's post-tokenize argument check wasarg.includes(' ')but the error message claimed the argument contained an invalid null byte. The null-byte check is the separateassertValidTokenpath, so anyone chasing this error would look in the wrong place.Test plan
Note
Low Risk
The provided diff contains no file changes, so there is no functional or behavioral risk in this PR as presented.
Overview
No code changes are present in the provided diff (it only shows
+++ /dev/null), so the PR appears to be a no-op as submitted.Reviewed by Cursor Bugbot for commit 7c4bfd3. Configure here.