[Java] Update auto-generated Java bindings

[ldk-java] / src / main / java / org / ldk / structs / ChannelMessageHandler.java

diff --git a/src/main/java/org/ldk/structs/ChannelMessageHandler.java b/src/main/java/org/ldk/structs/ChannelMessageHandler.java
index 73d0ca172a3e26e54d33e93e15abdc2326dd33f1..b8367adc84aa20464577ae03a856b9cc124779e9 100644 (file)
--- a/src/main/java/org/ldk/structs/ChannelMessageHandler.java
+++ b/src/main/java/org/ldk/structs/ChannelMessageHandler.java
@@ -94,12 +94,19 @@ public class ChannelMessageHandler extends CommonBase {
                 * is believed to be possible in the future (eg they're sending us messages we don't
                 * understand or indicate they require unknown feature bits), no_connection_possible is set
                 * and any outstanding channels should be failed.
+                * 
+                * Note that in some rare cases this may be called without a corresponding
+                * [`Self::peer_connected`].
                 */
                void peer_disconnected(byte[] their_node_id, boolean no_connection_possible);
                /**
                 * Handle a peer reconnecting, possibly generating channel_reestablish message(s).
+                * 
+                * May return an `Err(())` if the features the peer supports are not sufficient to communicate
+                * with us. Implementors should be somewhat conservative about doing so, however, as other
+                * message handlers may still wish to communicate with this peer.
                 */
-               void peer_connected(byte[] their_node_id, Init msg);
+               Result_NoneNoneZ peer_connected(byte[] their_node_id, Init msg);
                /**
                 * Handle an incoming channel_reestablish message from the given peer.
                 */
@@ -215,10 +222,12 @@ public class ChannelMessageHandler extends CommonBase {
                                arg.peer_disconnected(their_node_id, no_connection_possible);
                                Reference.reachabilityFence(arg);
                        }
-                       @Override public void peer_connected(byte[] their_node_id, long msg) {
+                       @Override public long peer_connected(byte[] their_node_id, long msg) {
                                org.ldk.structs.Init msg_hu_conv = null; if (msg < 0 || msg > 4096) { msg_hu_conv = new org.ldk.structs.Init(null, msg); }
-                               arg.peer_connected(their_node_id, msg_hu_conv);
+                               Result_NoneNoneZ ret = arg.peer_connected(their_node_id, msg_hu_conv);
                                Reference.reachabilityFence(arg);
+                               long result = ret == null ? 0 : ret.clone_ptr();
+                               return result;
                        }
                        @Override public void handle_channel_reestablish(byte[] their_node_id, long msg) {
                                org.ldk.structs.ChannelReestablish msg_hu_conv = null; if (msg < 0 || msg > 4096) { msg_hu_conv = new org.ldk.structs.ChannelReestablish(null, msg); }
@@ -436,6 +445,9 @@ public class ChannelMessageHandler extends CommonBase {
         * is believed to be possible in the future (eg they're sending us messages we don't
         * understand or indicate they require unknown feature bits), no_connection_possible is set
         * and any outstanding channels should be failed.
+        * 
+        * Note that in some rare cases this may be called without a corresponding
+        * [`Self::peer_connected`].
         */
        public void peer_disconnected(byte[] their_node_id, boolean no_connection_possible) {
                bindings.ChannelMessageHandler_peer_disconnected(this.ptr, InternalUtils.check_arr_len(their_node_id, 33), no_connection_possible);
@@ -446,13 +458,20 @@ public class ChannelMessageHandler extends CommonBase {
 
        /**
         * Handle a peer reconnecting, possibly generating channel_reestablish message(s).
+        * 
+        * May return an `Err(())` if the features the peer supports are not sufficient to communicate
+        * with us. Implementors should be somewhat conservative about doing so, however, as other
+        * message handlers may still wish to communicate with this peer.
         */
-       public void peer_connected(byte[] their_node_id, Init msg) {
-               bindings.ChannelMessageHandler_peer_connected(this.ptr, InternalUtils.check_arr_len(their_node_id, 33), msg == null ? 0 : msg.ptr);
+       public Result_NoneNoneZ peer_connected(byte[] their_node_id, Init msg) {
+               long ret = bindings.ChannelMessageHandler_peer_connected(this.ptr, InternalUtils.check_arr_len(their_node_id, 33), msg == null ? 0 : msg.ptr);
                Reference.reachabilityFence(this);
                Reference.reachabilityFence(their_node_id);
                Reference.reachabilityFence(msg);
+               if (ret >= 0 && ret <= 4096) { return null; }
+               Result_NoneNoneZ ret_hu_conv = Result_NoneNoneZ.constr_from_ptr(ret);
                if (this != null) { this.ptrs_to.add(msg); };
+               return ret_hu_conv;
        }
 
        /**