Conversation
![chatgpt-codex-connector[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/1144995?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 593d6bca6b
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: e66745c68b
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
| let path = save_image_generation_result_to_cwd( | ||
| &ctx.turn_context.cwd, | ||
| &image_item.id, | ||
| &image_item.result, | ||
| ) | ||
| .await?; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
handle_output_item_done propagates save_image_generation_result_to_cwd failures with ?. Any decode/write error (e.g. unwritable cwd, unexpected payload format) now fails the whole turn even though the model already produced an image response. This makes image generation brittle and can surface as turn-level failures unrelated to model output.
Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 56dd35488d
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: e9cb0e09b5
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
| if !generated.result.is_empty() | ||
| && !generated.result.starts_with("data:") | ||
| && !generated.result.starts_with("http://") | ||
| && !generated.result.starts_with("https://") | ||
| && !generated.result.starts_with("file://") | ||
| { | ||
| ts_msg!( | ||
| self, | ||
| "{} {} {}", | ||
| "generated image".style(self.magenta), | ||
| generated.call_id, | ||
| generated.result.style(self.dimmed) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
ImageGenerationEnd now prints generated.result whenever it is not a URL/data URI. For normal image-gen responses this value is raw base64 image data, so this branch emits very large blobs to stderr, degrading CLI performance and flooding logs/output. The previous behavior only printed the call id, avoiding this payload dump.
Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.
2 participants
Codex now saves the generated image on to your current working directory.