zulip/zerver/views/reactions.py

143 lines
6.6 KiB
Python
Raw Normal View History

from django.http import HttpRequest, HttpResponse
from django.utils.translation import ugettext as _
from typing import Text
from zerver.decorator import \
has_request_variables, REQ, to_non_negative_int
from zerver.lib.actions import do_add_reaction, do_add_reaction_legacy,\
do_remove_reaction, do_remove_reaction_legacy
from zerver.lib.emoji import check_emoji_code_consistency,\
check_emoji_name_consistency, check_valid_emoji
from zerver.lib.message import access_message
from zerver.lib.request import JsonableError
from zerver.lib.response import json_success
from zerver.models import Message, Reaction, UserMessage, UserProfile
def create_historical_message(user_profile, message):
# type: (UserProfile, Message) -> None
# Users can see and react to messages sent to streams they
# were not a subscriber to; in order to receive events for
# those, we give the user a `historical` UserMessage objects
# for the message. This is the same trick we use for starring
# messages.
UserMessage.objects.create(user_profile=user_profile,
message=message,
flags=UserMessage.flags.historical | UserMessage.flags.read)
@has_request_variables
def add_reaction_backend(request, user_profile, message_id, emoji_name):
# type: (HttpRequest, UserProfile, int, Text) -> HttpResponse
# access_message will throw a JsonableError exception if the user
# cannot see the message (e.g. for messages to private streams).
message, user_message = access_message(user_profile, message_id)
check_valid_emoji(message.sender.realm, emoji_name)
# We could probably just make this check be a try/except for the
# IntegrityError from it already existing, but this is a bit cleaner.
if Reaction.objects.filter(user_profile=user_profile,
message=message,
emoji_name=emoji_name).exists():
raise JsonableError(_("Reaction already exists"))
if user_message is None:
create_historical_message(user_profile, message)
do_add_reaction_legacy(user_profile, message, emoji_name)
return json_success()
@has_request_variables
def remove_reaction_backend(request, user_profile, message_id, emoji_name):
# type: (HttpRequest, UserProfile, int, Text) -> HttpResponse
# access_message will throw a JsonableError exception if the user
# cannot see the message (e.g. for messages to private streams).
message = access_message(user_profile, message_id)[0]
# We could probably just make this check be a try/except for the
# IntegrityError from it already existing, but this is a bit cleaner.
if not Reaction.objects.filter(user_profile=user_profile,
message=message,
emoji_name=emoji_name).exists():
raise JsonableError(_("Reaction does not exist"))
do_remove_reaction_legacy(user_profile, message, emoji_name)
return json_success()
@has_request_variables
def add_reaction(request: HttpRequest, user_profile: UserProfile, message_id: int,
emoji_name: str=REQ(),
emoji_code: str=REQ(),
reaction_type: str=REQ(default="unicode_emoji")) -> HttpResponse:
message, user_message = access_message(user_profile, message_id)
if Reaction.objects.filter(user_profile=user_profile,
message=message,
emoji_code=emoji_code,
reaction_type=reaction_type).exists():
raise JsonableError(_("Reaction already exists."))
query = Reaction.objects.filter(message=message,
emoji_code=emoji_code,
reaction_type=reaction_type)
if query.exists():
# If another user has already reacted to this message with
# same emoji code, we treat the new reaction as a vote for the
# existing reaction. So the emoji name used by that earlier
# reaction takes precendence over whatever was passed in this
# request. This is necessary to avoid a message having 2
# "different" emoji reactions with the same emoji code (and
# thus same image) on the same message, which looks ugly.
#
# In this "voting for an existing reaction" case, we shouldn't
# check whether the emoji code and emoji name match, since
# it's possible that the (emoji_type, emoji_name, emoji_code)
# triple for this existing rection xmay not pass validation
# now (e.g. because it is for a realm emoji that has been
# since deactivated). We still want to allow users to add a
# vote any old reaction they see in the UI even if that is a
# deactivated custom emoji, so we just use the emoji name from
# the existing reaction with no further validation.
emoji_name = query.first().emoji_name
else:
# Otherwise, use the name provided in this request, but verify
# it is valid in the user's realm (e.g. not a deactivated
# realm emoji).
check_emoji_code_consistency(message.sender.realm, emoji_code, reaction_type)
check_emoji_name_consistency(emoji_name, emoji_code, reaction_type)
if user_message is None:
create_historical_message(user_profile, message)
do_add_reaction(user_profile, message, emoji_name, emoji_code, reaction_type)
return json_success()
@has_request_variables
def remove_reaction(request: HttpRequest, user_profile: UserProfile, message_id: int,
emoji_code: str=REQ(),
reaction_type: str=REQ(default="unicode_emoji")) -> HttpResponse:
message, user_message = access_message(user_profile, message_id)
if not Reaction.objects.filter(user_profile=user_profile,
message=message,
emoji_code=emoji_code,
reaction_type=reaction_type).exists():
raise JsonableError(_("Reaction doesn't exist."))
# Unlike adding reactions, while deleting a reaction, we don't
# check whether the provided (emoji_type, emoji_code) pair is
# valid in this realm. Since there's a row in the database, we
# know it was valid when the user added their reaction in the
# first place, so it is safe to just remove the reaction if it
# exists. And the (reaction_type, emoji_code) pair may no longer be
# valid in legitimate situations (e.g. if a realm emoji was
# deactivated by an administrator in the meantime).
do_remove_reaction(user_profile, message, emoji_code, reaction_type)
return json_success()