This moves some code from settings_display.js
into the new module settings_config.js.
Extracting this module breaks some dependencies
on settings_display.js (which has some annoying
transitive dependencies, including jQuery).
In particular this isolates stream_data from
from settings_display.js.
Two of the three structures that we moved here
weren't even directly used by settings_display.js,
since we do a lot of rendering in the modules
admin.js and setting.js.
We make get_all_display_settings() a function
to avoid a require-time dependency on page_params.
Breaking the dependencies simplifies a few
node tests.
Most of the node test complexity came from the
following commit in March 2019:
5a130097bf
The commit itself seems harmless enough, but
dependencies can have a somewhat "viral" nature,
where making stream_data depend on settings_display
caused us to modify four different node tests.
This refactoring is the first step toward sharing
our markdown code with mobile. This focuses on
the Zulip layer, not the underlying third party `marked`
library.
In this commit we do a one-time initialization to
wire up the markdown functions, but after further
discussions with Greg, it might make more sense
to just pass in helpers on every use of markdown
(which is generally only once per sent message).
I'll address that in follow-up commits.
Even though it looks like a pretty invasive change,
you will note that we barely needed to modify the
node tests to make this pass. And we have pretty
decent test coverage here.
All of the places where we used to depend on
other Zulip modules now use helper functions that
any client (e.g. mobile) can configure themselves.
Or course, in the webapp, we configure these from
modules like people/stream_data/hash_util/etc.
Even in places where markdown used to deal directly with
data structures from other modules, we now use functions.
We may revisit this in a future commit, and we might
just pass data directly for certain things.
I decided to keep the helpers data structure completely flat,
so we don't have ugly nested names like
`helpers.emoji.get_emoji_codepoint`. Because of this,
some of the names aren't 1:1, which I think is fine.
For example, we map `user_groups.is_member_of` to
`is_member_of_user_group`.
It's likely that mobile already has different names
for their versions of these functions, so trying for
fake consistency would only help the webapp. In some
cases, I think the webapp functions have names that
could be improved, but we can clean that up in future
commits, and since the names aren't coupled to markdown
itself (i.e. only the config), we will be less
constrained.
It's worth noting that `marked` has an `options`
data structure that it uses for configuration, but
I didn't piggyback onto it, since the `marked`
options are more at the lexing/parsing layer vs.
the app-data layer stuff that our helpers mostly
help with.
Hopefully it's obvious why I just put helpers in
the top-level namespace for the module rather than
passing it around through multiple layers of the
parser.
There were a couple places in markdown where we
were doing awkward `hasOwnProperty` checks for
emoji-related stuff. Now we use the Python
principle of ask-forgiveness-not-permission and
just handle the getters returning falsy data. (It
should be `undefined`, but any falsy value is
unworkable in the places I changed, so I use
the simpler, less brittle form.)
We also break our direct dependency on
`emoji_codes.json` (with some help from the
prior commit).
In one place I rename streamName to stream_name,
fixing up an ancient naming violation that goes
way back to before this code was even extracted
away from echo.js. I didn't bother to split this
out into a separate commit, since 2 of the 4
lines would be immediately re-modified in the
subsequent commit.
Note that we still depend on `fenced_code`
via the global namespace, instead of simply
requiring it directly or injecting it. The
reason I'm postponing any action there is that
we'll have to change things once we move
markdown into a shared library. (The most
likely outcome is that we'll rename/move both files
at the same time and fix the namespace/require
details as part of that commit.)
Also the markdown code still relies on `_` being
available in the global namespace. We aren't
quite ready to share code with mobile yet, but the
underscore dependency should not be problematic,
since mobile already uses underscore to use the
webapp's shared typing_status module.
This mostly moves logic into people.js.
The people functions added here are glorified
two-liners.
One thing that changes here is that we
are a bit more rigorous about duplicate
names.
The code is slightly awkward, because this
commit preserves the strange behavior
that if 'alice|42' doesn't match on
the user with the name "alice" and user_id
"42", we instead look for a user whose
name is "alice|42". That seems like a
misfeature to me, but there's a test for
it, so I want to check with Tim that it's not
intentional behavior before I simplify
the code.
We add this API to emoji.js, so that markdown
doesn't need to look at internal data structures
(or even need to understand any kind of record
format for results).
Here are the functions:
get_realm_emoji_url()
get_emoji_name()
get_emoji_codepoint()
We use the API now in markdown, which eliminates
the need for the markdown parser to require
the emoji JSON file.
Each function has a simple docstring:
get_emoji_name('1f384') === 'holiday_tree'
get_emoji_codepoint('avocado') === '1f951'
get_realm_emoji_url('shrug') === '/user_avatars/2/emoji/images/31.png'
Also we have simple test coverage for the API
(including tests that verify the docstrings).
This name was misleading, because we weren't
actually setting realm_filters (that's what
`page_params.realm_filters = realm_filters`
is for); we were instead updating our
realm filter rules.
This allows us to collect coverage for Handlebars templates, and also
improves the readability of Handlebars-related stack traces.
Signed-off-by: Anders Kaseorg <anders@zulipchat.com>
These functions were just shims that were
used in the somewhat painful migration from
subject_* to topic_*.
The commit 4572be8c27
fixed it so that the client never needs to
deal with "subject_links".
So now we just go back to simpler code:
message.topic_links = links
links = message.topic_links
I am not quite ready to declare victory on
the subject/topic migration, but we are super
close. In this commit I bump a blueslip
warning to a blueslip error, so that we'll
be notified of any codepath that is still
using the janky fall-back-to-subject defensive
code here.
If we go a couple days without any errors, then
we can remove the blueslip warning and the
defensive code immediately and then inline
the callers at our leisure. I wouldn't be
wildly against keeping these wrappers in some
parts of the code, but that debate is out of
the scope of this immediate fix, and I haven't
thought hard about it yet.
We can basically sweep set_message_topic() now,
if we wanted to, since it's truly just a one-liner.
(At one point it was encapsulating something
like `message.subject = foo`).
This required a tiny change to compose_fade
test setup.
Most of this logic is specific to markdown
message processing, so we move the code to
markdown.js.
The only responsibility that we leave with
`emoji.js` is to provide us with a list
of translations (regex and replacement text).
But now `markdown.js` actually (directly) executes
those translations against Zulip messages
as part of its preprocessing.
This should simplify the upcoming mobile conversion.
Instead of mobile needing to duplicate this fairly
complex function, they will just need to pass
us in a list similar to `emoji_translations` inside
of `emoji.js`. That code has a comment that shows
what the data structure looks like.
I am 99% sure we can rely on trimRight() and
trim() being available in all browsers that
we support. I verified in FF.
This removes the util dependency from both
modules touched here.
We now treat util like a leaf module and
use "require" to import it everywhere it's used.
An earlier version of this commit moved
util into our "shared" library, but we
decided to wait on that. Once we're ready
to do that, we should only need to do a
simple search/replace on various
require/zrequire statements plus a small
tweak to one of the custom linter checks.
It turns out we don't really need util.js
for our most immediate code-sharing goal,
which is to reuse our markdown code on
mobile. There's a little bit of cleanup
still remaining to break the dependency,
but it's minor.
The util module still calls the global
blueslip module in one place, but that
code is about to be removed in the next
few commits.
I am pretty confident that once we start
sharing things like the typeahead code
more aggressively, we'll start having
dependencies on util. The module is barely
more than 300 lines long, so we'll probably
just move the whole thing into shared
rather than break it apart. Also, we
can continue to nibble away at the
cruftier parts of the module.
We used to have a block of code doing this just in the presence
endpoint because that's where we'd had error-handling problems with it
not being present, but it seems more correct for it to run
unconditionally on all HTTP requests.
This requires adding a dependency of channel on reload_state, which we
record in the webpack configuration for now.
webpack optimizes JSON modules using JSON.parse("{…}"), which is
faster than the normal JavaScript parser.
Update the backend to use emoji_codes.json too instead of the three
separate JSON files.
Signed-off-by: Anders Kaseorg <anders@zulipchat.com>
I believe we can remove these and rely on
other parts of our testing/code-review
to ensure template quality.
These tests never really exercised our
app code, as evidenced by us not regressing
any of the 100%-line-coverage files.
We have a couple other ways that we verify
the correct format of the templates:
- webpack (can they compile?)
- check-templates (are they nicely indented?)
For deep testing, we have Casper, which
exercises most of our most important templates
in some meaningful way.
I think it's pretty rare that we get bugs
now that are directly caused by bad templates,
and an even smaller subset of them would
have been caught by the node tests.
If that trend changes in the future, I would prefer to
just do something "greenfield" to address
any common problems rather than resurrect
this code, but we could always resurrect it
from git.
The template node tests did check a little bit of
detail about which fields are there, but not
in an integrated way, so that aspect of the tests
wasn't very useful either.
This effectively reverts the following
commit from May 2019:
be527905ca
The implementation of closest() was a bit
buggy and complex. It's easy enough
to just stub the method yourself. We may
want to eventually re-implement it, but we
should follow the template of parent/set_parent.
If you fail to stub `closest` zjquery gives
a fairly helpful error message:
Error: You must create a stub for $("link-stub").closest
We stub out jquery elements rather than giving
the illusion of having real DOM.
Also, we make it so that the message_store
interaction has an assertion attached to it.
In the next commit we're going to change what the
server sends for the following:
- page_params
- server responses to /json/users/me/presence
We will **not** yet be changing the format of the data
that we get in events when users update their presence.
It's also just a bit in flux what our final formats
will be for various presence payloads, and different
optimizations may lead us to use different data
structures in different payloads.
So for now we decouple these two things:
raw_info: this is intended to represent a
snapshot of the latest data from the
server, including some data like
timestamps that are only used
in downstream calculations and not
user-facing
exports.presence_info: this is calculated
info for modules like buddy_data that
just need to know active vs. idle and
last_active_date
Another change that happens here is we rename
set_info_for_user to update_info_for_event,
which just makes it clear that the function
expects data in the "event" format (as opposed
to the format for page_params or server
responses).
As of now keeping the intermediate raw_info data
around feels slightly awkward, because we just
immediately calculate presence_info for any kind
of update. This may be sorta surprising if you
just skim the code and see the various timeout
constants. You would think we might be automatically
expiring "active" statuses in the client due to
the simple passage of time, but in fact the precise
places we do this are all triggered by new data
from the server and we re-calculate statuses
immediately.
(There are indirect ways that clients
have timing logic, since they ask the
server for new data at various intervals, but a
smarter client could simply expire users on its
own, or at least with a more efficient transfer
of info between it and the server. One of
the thing that complicates client-side logic
is that server and client clocks may be out
of sync. Also, it's not inherently super expensive
to get updates from the server.)
The important details for the test setup here
are just the number of users who are active.
We don't need to simulate the currently awkward
way of populating this data.
The _.each calls with an inline function expression have already been
converted to for…of loops. We could do that here, but using .forEach
when we’re just reusing an existing function seems like a good
guideline.
Signed-off-by: Anders Kaseorg <anders@zulipchat.com>
Steve Howell
shubhamgupta2956
Anders Kaseorg
Vishnu KS
Tim Abbott