Check out how this gets rid of so many "to do" as well as
"deprecated" comments.
Next qustion: The elements in the stack become more and more
complicated. It's probably worth converting them from arrays into
first-class objects. But this is for another patch.
Bug: T353266
Change-Id: If14acd1070617ca8c4d15be6b1759bd47ead4926
For example, use convenient upstream methods, and generally make the
test setup a bit more readable.
Bug: T353227
Change-Id: Ifab71041fcc3f804315793ca7b783f84829c7a0f
Same arguments as in Iafa2412. The one reason to use more detailled
per-method @covers annotations is to avoid "accidental coverage"
where code is marked as being covered by tests that don't assert
anything that would be meaningful for this code. This is especially a
problem with older, bigger classes with lots of side effects.
But all the new classes we introduced over the years are small, with
predictable, local effects.
That's also why we keep the more detailled @covers annotations for
the original Cite class.
Bug: T353227
Bug: T353269
Change-Id: I69850f4d740d8ad5a7c2368b9068dc91e47cc797
I wanted to make this a unit test but it turns out the
Sanitizer::safeEncodeAttribute() calls currently make this
impossible.
Bug: T353269
Change-Id: I5266e7b8b67db1c812dc9e4675d0c079ab1f9a40
This patch only moves existing code around without changing any
behavior. What I basically did was merging the old "guardedReferences"
method into "references", and then splitting the resulting code in
other ways. Now we see a few other concepts emerging. But the idea
something would be "guarded" (how?) is gone.
The most critical detail in this patch are the new method names, and
how the code is split. The names should tell a story, and the methods
should do exactly what the name says. Suggestions?
Bug: T353266
Change-Id: I8b7921ce24487e9657e4193ea6a2e3e7d7b0b1c3
This removes almost 200 lines from the main class.
This patch intentionally doesn't make any changes to the code but
only moves it around. Further improvements are for later patches.
Bug: T353269
Change-Id: Ic73f1b7458b3f7b7b89806a88a1111161e3cf094
> We lose useful coverage and spend valuable time keeping these tags
> accurate through refactors (or worse, forget to do so).
>
> I am not disabling the "only track coverage of specified subject"
> benefits, nor am I claiming coverage in in classes outside the
> subject under test.
>
> Tracking tiny per-method details wastes time in keeping tags
> in sync during refactors, and time to realize (and fix) when people
> inevitably don't keep them in sync, and time lost in finding
> uncovered code to write tests for only to realize it was already
> covered but "not yet claimed".
https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/q/owner:Krinkle+is:merged+message:%2522Widen%2522
Change-Id: Iafa241210b81ba1cbfee74e3920fb044c86d09fc
The main benefit is that the two lines that set and reset
$this->inReferencesGroup are now next to each other. More can be
done in later patches.
Bug: T353266
Change-Id: Ib3f40c40e0b1854f8e5a32af600f28931fffdb8c
This moves the actual parsing down to be done much later in the
process. This won't make any difference in production but makes it
easier to refactor the code further.
Note I tried to use a StatusValue object but couldn't because it
merges seemingly identical messages, while the plain array is fine
with containing duplicates. There is one parser test that covers
this. While we could change this it needs discussion and most
probably a PM decision.
Change-Id: I7390b688a33dace95753470a927bbe4de43ea03a
Two problems:
1. Manipulating globals directly affects all following tests. They
are not independent from each other. This problem can be seen in
CiteTest.
2. Some test cases in testValidateRef don't test what you think.
For example, the test for a conflicting "extends" + "follow" was not
failing because of the conflict but because "extends" was disabled
and disallowed.
Change-Id: Iaa4e1f3f3222155d59984e577cba3f0b8dec40c3
This patch makes only sense together with I5a64ac4 where it is split
from. See I5a64ac4 for details.
The idea is that this patch just re-arranges the code without making
any changes to how the code behaves. This leaves a minimal change
behind that's much easier to revert, if needed.
Bug: T298278
Change-Id: Ie78313b7f3ac1ec7bce5ac7512e60a3bb011480a
This patch does two things:
1. The "normalization" function was never only doing normalization,
but also all the necessary HTML encoding. This is now more visible
and split into two separate functions.
2. To make this easier we change the order slightly. Because of this
the normalization step must now consider spaces. Before spaces have
been converted to underscores by escapeIdForLink.
The results are all the exact same as before.
This is split from I5a64ac4 to make that easier to review.
Bug: T298278
Change-Id: I9435a2ddaa21559e29587c58b7523103141467f7
User-options related classes are being moved to
the MediaWiki\User\Options namespace in MediaWiki Core;
reflect that change here.
Bug: T352284
Depends-On: I42653491c19dde5de99e0661770e2c81df5d7e84
Change-Id: I22ff2effcf9b7f2162f5d57608d8ec3651b48dd7
This parser test is a bit obscure, in my opinion. We added it in
I8c4de96 to make sure we don't get thousand separators in most
places.
We continued reworking the code since then. By now it's effectively
impossible to "accidentally" get thousand separators. The
problematic methods from the Language class are not even accessible
any more from this code.
To make the tests more robust we now use createNoOpMock (done via
the previous patch) where it matters, specifically for all Language
and Parser mocks. This proves the problematic Language methods are
never called.
Bug: T253743
Bug: T238187
Change-Id: I9bfe1f4decfaf699996da63e19473c2c0d581d9d
Both Language and Parser are extremely complex classes with hundreds
of public methods. We really want to make sure we are not depending
on anything unexpected from these classes. If calls are made into
these classes we want to know exactly what is called.
Doing this also showed that some mocked methods are not even needed.
Change-Id: Icdfff6c07be78a47bf7cadb1813a72581a51272a
This reverts a very tiny part of Ib3fdc89 from 2 weeks ago. The
reasons are explained in Ib3fdc89. Short version:
* The ->parse() calls have drastic performance implications.
* Allowing wikitext and HTML in this message also makes T321217
worse.
The new message "cite_reference_backlink_symbol" is kept and still
used in the UI. Just not in these two messages any more. This is a
minor redundancy we want to get rid of at some point. But it's not
critical for the moment. This will be done as part of T321217.
Nothing will break on the wikis. Some wikis have customizations for
"cite_references_link_one" and "cite_references_link_many" in place.
This will continue to work as before Ib3fdc89.
Bug: T339973
Change-Id: I933771e3ad67cd530bcf5ee8469cef35ea1070d2
This is a mistake that exists in this codebase for who knows how
long.
Cite mis-uses the messaging system a lot for internal things we still
want to customize somehow, but are not labels that will ever be shown
on the screen. The prefix/suffix messages in this patch are meant to be
part of the HTML in id="…" attributes. Prefix/suffix must be a static
plain text strings. Using e.g. {{GENDER}} or {{PLURAL}} in these
messages is not even possible because there is no $1 parameter to use.
Note how all other similar messages already use ->plain().
A few wikis override these messages, but stick to the plain-text
convention, as they should:
https://global-search.toolforge.org/?q=.®ex=1&namespaces=8&title=Cite.*reference.*fix
This will continue to work.
This has minor performance implications. Fetching these messages is
faster if we can skip transformations.
Bug: T321217
Change-Id: I7969c255fe4ce897e904897081da5f52678721aa
The WikiEditor extension has a button and some help text that
is only applicable if the Cite extension is enabled. Move
that (with some modifications) to the Cite extension instead.
Bug: T339973
Depends-On: I8256660f9c6886d6764b45735284e00308fc56e5
Change-Id: Ib3fdc897dd3330f69c5832003d4c3cb1e6dba2f3
This is mostly because recent IDEs can understand createMock() quite
good. We usually don't add such hints every time we use createMock().
We would have a million of them. ;-)
Change-Id: If9e37807a6945c4408d374fc97664cd636020ffd
