This will let us render reply links on wikitech and run visual diffs
(which runs in anonymous user mode). This will be reverted after
the visual diff test run.
Change-Id: Ibf175a7f5b1e68f66c257fc26ba9e4b55f752fbd
This data was added to core in I328f533e6cdb11c0c3a873d23bab1a113dfa39be
and it will have been in production for 4 weeks next week which is
enough for all content to have rolled over.
Change-Id: I3d568eed56446f26aa329bfa554d609b8bcb973a
Reasons:
* Various other methods dealing with ranges already live there
* It would be neat if ContentThreadItem was just a value class
without a lot of logic, similar to DatabaseThreadItem,
particularly for writing unit tests
* The methods access global state through Title, which can't
be fixed while they're in ContentThreadItem (see I9dfccc83)
The computation is now always done, instead of only when needed,
but that's a small drawback, since it's fast (fast enough that
I don't see the difference in the time taken when running tests),
and we were already computing it for all comments in many places.
Change-Id: Ic718a964e309ae3a8e15e299081f46d4db860731
* Looks for heading IDs matching "h-<heading text>-%" that once
existed on the target page.
* For such IDs, finds where those items currently exist,
presumably in an archive.
Pros:
* Doesn't need to know anything about the local wiki's archiving
conventions, so can be deployed universally.
Cons:
* ID conflicts will return matches in unrelated archives, e.g.
MassMessages.
Bug: T349653
Change-Id: Ie94efd0503e9f4689d3421babe445f9f4e2b4fb7
User-options related classes are being moved to the MediaWiki\User\Options namespace in MediaWiki Core; reflect that change here.
Bug: T352284
Depends-On: I9822eb1553870b876d0b8a927e4e86c27d83bd52
Change-Id: Iaf161106c323461929abe9b8a021bbb3e34c4ae7
This might be a matter of personal preference. Not sure if it's
worth it. Both is well readable. On the other hand, the method
exists. Why not use it?
Change-Id: Id66fc6c888db6ae1cf28e60a51f90d9ae2cdb6ee
This reverts commit 7aaaf51dfd.
Reason for revert: This is not right and doesn't work either.
See T351461#9358034 for why this strategy will not work right now.
We need a different strategy to prevent duplicate transforms if
they continue.
Change-Id: I97efee9197359ecdccdf89a0be850a707a11cc98
* getText() could be called multiple times on a ParserCache object
which would fire the ParserOutputPostCacheTransform handler
multiple times.
But, I could not track down how this could happen right now.
* As a separate issue, while conceptually there are no restrictions
against calling getText() multiple times, there is a semantics and
performance issue if that did actually happen. getText() does a
bunch of transformations and makes no effort to avoid duplicate
work. It will accumulate more transformations over time via the
OutputTranform pipeline and it is preferable for getText() and/or
the OutputTransform pipeline to guarantee semantics where the
pipeline won't be run multiple times on the same content. That will
free both hook handlers (like this) and the transforms themselves
to avoid checks as in this patch.
This patch should be reverted once such a change is made to core.
Bug: T351461
Change-Id: If5dfa0954e3fd2b7dbea1ed29b475be07f0f3986
* This patch enables DT to work with Parsoid HTML without changing
the functionality for legacy HTML.
* The code comments document some of the decisions being made here.
Some of these decisions are temporary and need better solutions
but this patch will let us run visual diff tests and expose any
other latent bugs.
TODO
----
* We need to add new tests to verify CommentFormatter expectations
for Parsoid HTML. I'll tackle this in a followup patch.
Known issues:
-------------
* Performance: Since the getText() transformed output in ParserOutput
is not cached, if DiscussionTools is to switch over to Parsoid HTML,
we have to add some form of caching of the transformed output because
transformHtml can take a couple seconds in the p99 case which is too
long to render uncached!
* Longer-term: Since this hook is called when getText() is
called, all calls to getText() will now invoke this handler
(which will return but still has to do a bunch of checks to
determine this won't apply). Presumably, transformHtml() is
idempotent because when some other code (other extensions, for ex)
calls getText(), we will run the transfromHtml() on previously
transformed content.
My understanding is that getText() is going the way of the dodo
and that getText() callers will have to explicit call the output
transform pipeline code (and presumably this issue of repeatedly
calling the same transforms on previously transformed content will
be addressed there).
* Some CSS doesn't apply to Parsoid HTML because intervening <section>
tags interfere with existing query selectors -- will be addressed
separately.
Bug: T341010
Change-Id: I9846193656cdc658f5237df0a133d9d4dcc20d00
According to EventLogging 'editattemptstep' data the error hasn't
happened in the last 90 days, and according to Logstash data the
warning hasn't happened in the last 90 days either.
The problem this guards against shouldn't be possible in a world
without RESTBase, but keep the checks as assertions just in case.
Change-Id: Id7eaf14294f8a7bb877f6a0e00a90976e560fc54
While this method is not a huge bottleneck in this codebase it still
sticks out because it calls end() and array_pop() literally millions
of times. (Tested by running the unit test suite, which currently
takes about 30 seconds on my machine.)
Because of the way the method is used in this codebase (see especially
ImmutableRange::computePosition) $a is almost always a sub-element of
$b, or the other way around. It's almost never necessary to go all the
way up to the root element. We can use this additional knowledge and
stop much, much earlier. The extra code is worth it because we know it
will succeed very, very often.
When I measure the runtime of this method alone it goes down to less
than 1% of the previous runtime. The final loop at the end of the
method is almost never executed now (about 30 times in 15,000).
I also micro-benchmarked the final loop and optimized it to work with
passive array-indexes instead of actively manipulating the array with
array_pop().
Change-Id: Iffcaa8848780a85fde38e322649050c687567f29
It does the same as before.
I think performance is not a concern here, and wasn't my motivation
either. But I hope this makes the code easier to read and to reason
with.
I added a pure unit test case (without involving an actual Language
object) to cover the previously uncovered digits feature.
Change-Id: I6a0fc86035817eabb42b55e58183ae094c052aa6
I was curious why running the CommentParserTest takes so long. I
found this is one of the bottlenecks because it's called so often,
but many link titles that are parsed as user names turn out to be
something else. This little hack speeds up the test by 15% and has
probably a similar impact in production scenarios.
Change-Id: I5a0b3a49ba5793c8a345baaa7118fed500c082b6
I was curious why running some of the PHPUnit tests in this code base
takes so long. While I could not spot an obvious bottleneck I found
a lot of code that is extremely hot, e.g. called a hundred thousand
times. A few obvious optimizations are possible in this code, e.g.
not calling the surprisingly expensive DOMCompat::getClassList
multiple times.
Change-Id: If22bbc1aedd2c36db1ab2343de5737009050b7bb
There is nothing in this preg_replace call that needs to be executed
"as code". A normal preg_replace can do the same.
The pattern looks a bit different but really does have the exact same
effect as before.
Change-Id: I3597d632f2ecbe5b7ccef39a394075327c9bea79
