[F] Some version has incompatible construct in class PacketUpsertUserAll

[moqiaoduo]

No description provided.

[gemini-code-assist]

Summary of Changes

Hello @moqiaoduo, I'm Gemini Code Assist¹! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed!

This pull request addresses a compatibility issue with the PacketUpsertUserAll class by enhancing the Shim.cs helper. It introduces a new conditional check to correctly identify and instantiate PacketUpsertUserAll using an alternative constructor signature. This ensures that the application can adapt to different versions or implementations of this class, preventing MissingMethodException errors and improving the robustness of the system's packet handling.

Highlights

• Constructor Compatibility: Added support for an alternative constructor signature for the PacketUpsertUserAll class within Shim.cs to address potential version incompatibilities.
• Dynamic Instantiation: The Shim.cs helper now dynamically checks for and invokes a constructor matching the signature (int, UserData, int, Action<int>, Action<PacketStatus>).
• GameManager Integration: The newly supported constructor invocation specifically passes GameManager.GetMaxTrackCount() as one of its arguments during instantiation.

Using Gemini Code Assist

The full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips.

Invoking Gemini

You can request assistance from Gemini at any point by creating a comment using either /gemini <command> or @gemini-code-assist <command>. Below is a summary of the supported commands on the current page.

Feature	Command	Description
Code Review	/gemini review	Performs a code review for the current pull request in its current state.
Pull Request Summary	/gemini summary	Provides a summary of the current pull request in its current state.
Comment	@gemini-code-assist	Responds in comments when explicitly tagged, both in pull request comments and review comments.
Help	/gemini help	Displays a list of available commands.

Customization

To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a .gemini/ folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.

Limitations & Feedback

Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for Github and other Google products, sign up here.

You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension.

Footnotes

1. Review the Privacy Notices, Generative AI Prohibited Use Policy, Terms of Service, and learn how to configure Gemini Code Assist in GitHub here. Gemini can make mistakes, so double check it and use code with caution. ↩

[gemini-code-assist]

Code Review

This pull request adds support for a new constructor signature for PacketUpsertUserAll to maintain compatibility with a different game version. The change is correct, but it contributes to a pattern of growing if-else if chains for reflection-based object creation. I've added a suggestion to refactor this logic for better long-term maintainability by using a more data-driven approach.

[gemini-code-assist]

While this new else if block is correct, the growing chain of if-else if statements for constructor resolution is becoming hard to maintain. Each block has very similar logic. Consider refactoring this method to use a more data-driven approach, for example, by using a list of 'strategies'.

Each strategy could define the constructor parameter types and a way to build the arguments array. This would reduce code duplication and make it easier to add support for new constructor signatures in the future.

Here's a conceptual example of how it could look for CreatePacketUpsertUserAll:

private record ConstructorStrategy(Type[] ParamTypes, Func<int, UserData, Action<int>, Action<PacketStatus>, object[]> BuildArgs);

public static readonly PacketUpsertUserAllCreator CreatePacketUpsertUserAll = Iife<PacketUpsertUserAllCreator>(() =>
{
    var strategies = new[]
    {
        new ConstructorStrategy(
            [typeof(int), typeof(UserData), typeof(Action<int>), typeof(Action<PacketStatus>)],
            (index, src, onDone, onError) => [index, src, onDone, onError]),
        new ConstructorStrategy(
            [typeof(int), typeof(UserData), typeof(string), typeof(Action<int>), typeof(Action<PacketStatus>)],
            (index, src, onDone, onError) => [index, src, GetAccessToken(index), onDone, onError]),
        new ConstructorStrategy(
            [typeof(int), typeof(UserData), typeof(int), typeof(Action<int>), typeof(Action<PacketStatus>)],
            (index, src, onDone, onError) => [index, src, GameManager.GetMaxTrackCount(), onDone, onError])
    };

    var type = typeof(PacketUpsertUserAll);
    foreach (var (paramTypes, buildArgs) in strategies)
    {
        if (type.GetConstructor(paramTypes) is ConstructorInfo ctor)
        {
            return (index, src, onDone, onError) =>
            {
                var args = buildArgs(index, src, onDone, onError);
                return (PacketUpsertUserAll)ctor.Invoke(args);
            };
        }
    }

    throw new MissingMethodException("No matching PacketUpsertUserAll constructor found");
});

A similar approach could be taken for CreatePacketUploadUserPlaylog, which has a similar structure, though it would require a different Func signature in its ConstructorStrategy.

[clansty]

3