Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Guild.bulk_ban optimization #10016

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

Guild.bulk_ban optimization #10016

wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

iyad-f
Copy link
Contributor

@iyad-f iyad-f commented Nov 18, 2024

Summary

This PR modifies Guild.bulk_ban to use the ban endpoint if the length of given users is 1.

Checklist

  • If code changes were made then they have been tested.
    • I have updated the documentation to reflect the changes.
  • This PR fixes an issue.
  • This PR adds something new (e.g. new method or parameters).
  • This PR is a breaking change (e.g. methods or parameters removed/renamed)
  • This PR is not a code change (e.g. documentation, README, ...)

@iyad-f
Copy link
Contributor Author

iyad-f commented Nov 18, 2024

i type hinted user_ids with list[int, str] because otherwise http.bulk_ban wont accept it, maybe this is not the solution.

@Rapptz
Copy link
Owner

Rapptz commented Nov 18, 2024

Believe it or not the endpoint itself already does this, kind of. When this was implemented on Discord's side they changed it so single ban is just a special case of bulk ban. There's no real benefit in doing this in the code, it's just an extra branch that the backend already does.

@Rapptz Rapptz closed this Nov 18, 2024
@iyad-f
Copy link
Contributor Author

iyad-f commented Nov 18, 2024

I see so there is no seperate strict rate limit for bulk-ban, is it calculated just with the normal ban endpoint?

@iyad-f iyad-f deleted the bulk-ban branch November 18, 2024 16:17
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