http-client-java, support method with kind=lropaging #9284
Merged
Conversation
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
weidongxu-microsoft
changed the title
microsoft-github-policy-service
bot
added
the
emitter:client:java
Contributor
|
No changes needing a change description found. |
Collaborator
|
You can try these changes here
|
weidongxu-microsoft
requested review from
XiaofeiCao,
anuchandy,
haolingdong-msft and
srnagar
as code owners
haolingdong-msft
approved these changes
Jan 5, 2026
haolingdong-msft
approved these changes
Jan 5, 2026
XiaofeiCao
approved these changes
Jan 5, 2026
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
4 participants
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Mainly a bug fix, when method of lropaging contains more than one response (and the 200 response is not the first in array).
Previous code took a too simplistic approach (of always checking the first response in array in pageable op).
Tested with Azure/typespec-azure#3695, compile pass, impl code looks correct.
May adjust more (if necessary), when verify that test case after azure-http-specs publish.