You can not select more than 25 topics Topics must start with a letter or number, can include dashes ('-') and can be up to 35 characters long.

150 lines
3.5 KiB

Change IDs to strings rather than numbers in API JSON output (#5019) * Fix JavaScript interface with long IDs Somewhat predictably, the JS interface handled IDs as numbers, which in JS are IEEE double-precision floats. This loses some precision when working with numbers as large as those generated by the new ID scheme, so we instead handle them here as strings. This is relatively simple, and doesn't appear to have caused any problems, but should definitely be tested more thoroughly than the built-in tests. Several days of use appear to support this working properly. BREAKING CHANGE: The major(!) change here is that IDs are now returned as strings by the REST endpoints, rather than as integers. In practice, relatively few changes were required to make the existing JS UI work with this change, but it will likely hit API clients pretty hard: it's an entirely different type to consume. (The one API client I tested, Tusky, handles this with no problems, however.) Twitter ran into this issue when introducing Snowflake IDs, and decided to instead introduce an `id_str` field in JSON responses. I have opted to *not* do that, and instead force all IDs to 64-bit integers represented by strings in one go. (I believe Twitter exacerbated their problem by rolling out the changes three times: once for statuses, once for DMs, and once for user IDs, as well as by leaving an integer ID value in JSON. As they said, "If you’re using the `id` field with JSON in a Javascript-related language, there is a very high likelihood that the integers will be silently munged by Javascript interpreters. In most cases, this will result in behavior such as being unable to load or delete a specific direct message, because the ID you're sending to the API is different than the actual identifier associated with the message." [1]) However, given that this is a significant change for API users, alternatives or a transition time may be appropriate. 1: https://blog.twitter.com/developer/en_us/a/2011/direct-messages-going-snowflake-on-sep-30-2011.html * Additional fixes for stringified IDs in JSON These should be the last two. These were identified using eslint to try to identify any plain casts to JavaScript numbers. (Some such casts are legitimate, but these were not.) Adding the following to .eslintrc.yml will identify casts to numbers: ~~~ no-restricted-syntax: - warn - selector: UnaryExpression[operator='+'] > :not(Literal) message: Avoid the use of unary + - selector: CallExpression[callee.name='Number'] message: Casting with Number() may coerce string IDs to numbers ~~~ The remaining three casts appear legitimate: two casts to array indices, one in a server to turn an environment variable into a number. * Back out RelationshipsController Change This was made to make a test a bit less flakey, but has nothing to do with this branch. * Change internal streaming payloads to stringified IDs as well Per https://github.com/tootsuite/mastodon/pull/5019#issuecomment-330736452 we need these changes to send deleted status IDs as strings, not integers.
7 years ago
Change IDs to strings rather than numbers in API JSON output (#5019) * Fix JavaScript interface with long IDs Somewhat predictably, the JS interface handled IDs as numbers, which in JS are IEEE double-precision floats. This loses some precision when working with numbers as large as those generated by the new ID scheme, so we instead handle them here as strings. This is relatively simple, and doesn't appear to have caused any problems, but should definitely be tested more thoroughly than the built-in tests. Several days of use appear to support this working properly. BREAKING CHANGE: The major(!) change here is that IDs are now returned as strings by the REST endpoints, rather than as integers. In practice, relatively few changes were required to make the existing JS UI work with this change, but it will likely hit API clients pretty hard: it's an entirely different type to consume. (The one API client I tested, Tusky, handles this with no problems, however.) Twitter ran into this issue when introducing Snowflake IDs, and decided to instead introduce an `id_str` field in JSON responses. I have opted to *not* do that, and instead force all IDs to 64-bit integers represented by strings in one go. (I believe Twitter exacerbated their problem by rolling out the changes three times: once for statuses, once for DMs, and once for user IDs, as well as by leaving an integer ID value in JSON. As they said, "If you’re using the `id` field with JSON in a Javascript-related language, there is a very high likelihood that the integers will be silently munged by Javascript interpreters. In most cases, this will result in behavior such as being unable to load or delete a specific direct message, because the ID you're sending to the API is different than the actual identifier associated with the message." [1]) However, given that this is a significant change for API users, alternatives or a transition time may be appropriate. 1: https://blog.twitter.com/developer/en_us/a/2011/direct-messages-going-snowflake-on-sep-30-2011.html * Additional fixes for stringified IDs in JSON These should be the last two. These were identified using eslint to try to identify any plain casts to JavaScript numbers. (Some such casts are legitimate, but these were not.) Adding the following to .eslintrc.yml will identify casts to numbers: ~~~ no-restricted-syntax: - warn - selector: UnaryExpression[operator='+'] > :not(Literal) message: Avoid the use of unary + - selector: CallExpression[callee.name='Number'] message: Casting with Number() may coerce string IDs to numbers ~~~ The remaining three casts appear legitimate: two casts to array indices, one in a server to turn an environment variable into a number. * Back out RelationshipsController Change This was made to make a test a bit less flakey, but has nothing to do with this branch. * Change internal streaming payloads to stringified IDs as well Per https://github.com/tootsuite/mastodon/pull/5019#issuecomment-330736452 we need these changes to send deleted status IDs as strings, not integers.
7 years ago
Change IDs to strings rather than numbers in API JSON output (#5019) * Fix JavaScript interface with long IDs Somewhat predictably, the JS interface handled IDs as numbers, which in JS are IEEE double-precision floats. This loses some precision when working with numbers as large as those generated by the new ID scheme, so we instead handle them here as strings. This is relatively simple, and doesn't appear to have caused any problems, but should definitely be tested more thoroughly than the built-in tests. Several days of use appear to support this working properly. BREAKING CHANGE: The major(!) change here is that IDs are now returned as strings by the REST endpoints, rather than as integers. In practice, relatively few changes were required to make the existing JS UI work with this change, but it will likely hit API clients pretty hard: it's an entirely different type to consume. (The one API client I tested, Tusky, handles this with no problems, however.) Twitter ran into this issue when introducing Snowflake IDs, and decided to instead introduce an `id_str` field in JSON responses. I have opted to *not* do that, and instead force all IDs to 64-bit integers represented by strings in one go. (I believe Twitter exacerbated their problem by rolling out the changes three times: once for statuses, once for DMs, and once for user IDs, as well as by leaving an integer ID value in JSON. As they said, "If you’re using the `id` field with JSON in a Javascript-related language, there is a very high likelihood that the integers will be silently munged by Javascript interpreters. In most cases, this will result in behavior such as being unable to load or delete a specific direct message, because the ID you're sending to the API is different than the actual identifier associated with the message." [1]) However, given that this is a significant change for API users, alternatives or a transition time may be appropriate. 1: https://blog.twitter.com/developer/en_us/a/2011/direct-messages-going-snowflake-on-sep-30-2011.html * Additional fixes for stringified IDs in JSON These should be the last two. These were identified using eslint to try to identify any plain casts to JavaScript numbers. (Some such casts are legitimate, but these were not.) Adding the following to .eslintrc.yml will identify casts to numbers: ~~~ no-restricted-syntax: - warn - selector: UnaryExpression[operator='+'] > :not(Literal) message: Avoid the use of unary + - selector: CallExpression[callee.name='Number'] message: Casting with Number() may coerce string IDs to numbers ~~~ The remaining three casts appear legitimate: two casts to array indices, one in a server to turn an environment variable into a number. * Back out RelationshipsController Change This was made to make a test a bit less flakey, but has nothing to do with this branch. * Change internal streaming payloads to stringified IDs as well Per https://github.com/tootsuite/mastodon/pull/5019#issuecomment-330736452 we need these changes to send deleted status IDs as strings, not integers.
7 years ago
Change IDs to strings rather than numbers in API JSON output (#5019) * Fix JavaScript interface with long IDs Somewhat predictably, the JS interface handled IDs as numbers, which in JS are IEEE double-precision floats. This loses some precision when working with numbers as large as those generated by the new ID scheme, so we instead handle them here as strings. This is relatively simple, and doesn't appear to have caused any problems, but should definitely be tested more thoroughly than the built-in tests. Several days of use appear to support this working properly. BREAKING CHANGE: The major(!) change here is that IDs are now returned as strings by the REST endpoints, rather than as integers. In practice, relatively few changes were required to make the existing JS UI work with this change, but it will likely hit API clients pretty hard: it's an entirely different type to consume. (The one API client I tested, Tusky, handles this with no problems, however.) Twitter ran into this issue when introducing Snowflake IDs, and decided to instead introduce an `id_str` field in JSON responses. I have opted to *not* do that, and instead force all IDs to 64-bit integers represented by strings in one go. (I believe Twitter exacerbated their problem by rolling out the changes three times: once for statuses, once for DMs, and once for user IDs, as well as by leaving an integer ID value in JSON. As they said, "If you’re using the `id` field with JSON in a Javascript-related language, there is a very high likelihood that the integers will be silently munged by Javascript interpreters. In most cases, this will result in behavior such as being unable to load or delete a specific direct message, because the ID you're sending to the API is different than the actual identifier associated with the message." [1]) However, given that this is a significant change for API users, alternatives or a transition time may be appropriate. 1: https://blog.twitter.com/developer/en_us/a/2011/direct-messages-going-snowflake-on-sep-30-2011.html * Additional fixes for stringified IDs in JSON These should be the last two. These were identified using eslint to try to identify any plain casts to JavaScript numbers. (Some such casts are legitimate, but these were not.) Adding the following to .eslintrc.yml will identify casts to numbers: ~~~ no-restricted-syntax: - warn - selector: UnaryExpression[operator='+'] > :not(Literal) message: Avoid the use of unary + - selector: CallExpression[callee.name='Number'] message: Casting with Number() may coerce string IDs to numbers ~~~ The remaining three casts appear legitimate: two casts to array indices, one in a server to turn an environment variable into a number. * Back out RelationshipsController Change This was made to make a test a bit less flakey, but has nothing to do with this branch. * Change internal streaming payloads to stringified IDs as well Per https://github.com/tootsuite/mastodon/pull/5019#issuecomment-330736452 we need these changes to send deleted status IDs as strings, not integers.
7 years ago
  1. # frozen_string_literal: true
  2. class REST::StatusSerializer < ActiveModel::Serializer
  3. attributes :id, :created_at, :in_reply_to_id, :in_reply_to_account_id,
  4. :sensitive, :spoiler_text, :visibility, :language,
  5. :uri, :content, :url, :replies_count, :reblogs_count,
  6. :favourites_count
  7. attribute :favourited, if: :current_user?
  8. attribute :reblogged, if: :current_user?
  9. attribute :muted, if: :current_user?
  10. attribute :bookmarked, if: :current_user?
  11. attribute :pinned, if: :pinnable?
  12. attribute :local_only if :local?
  13. belongs_to :reblog, serializer: REST::StatusSerializer
  14. belongs_to :application
  15. belongs_to :account, serializer: REST::AccountSerializer
  16. has_many :media_attachments, serializer: REST::MediaAttachmentSerializer
  17. has_many :ordered_mentions, key: :mentions
  18. has_many :tags
  19. has_many :emojis, serializer: REST::CustomEmojiSerializer
  20. has_one :preview_card, key: :card, serializer: REST::PreviewCardSerializer
  21. def id
  22. object.id.to_s
  23. end
  24. def in_reply_to_id
  25. object.in_reply_to_id&.to_s
  26. end
  27. def in_reply_to_account_id
  28. object.in_reply_to_account_id&.to_s
  29. end
  30. def current_user?
  31. !current_user.nil?
  32. end
  33. def visibility
  34. # This visibility is masked behind "private"
  35. # to avoid API changes because there are no
  36. # UX differences
  37. if object.limited_visibility?
  38. 'private'
  39. else
  40. object.visibility
  41. end
  42. end
  43. def uri
  44. OStatus::TagManager.instance.uri_for(object)
  45. end
  46. def content
  47. Formatter.instance.format(object)
  48. end
  49. def url
  50. TagManager.instance.url_for(object)
  51. end
  52. def favourited
  53. if instance_options && instance_options[:relationships]
  54. instance_options[:relationships].favourites_map[object.id] || false
  55. else
  56. current_user.account.favourited?(object)
  57. end
  58. end
  59. def reblogged
  60. if instance_options && instance_options[:relationships]
  61. instance_options[:relationships].reblogs_map[object.id] || false
  62. else
  63. current_user.account.reblogged?(object)
  64. end
  65. end
  66. def muted
  67. if instance_options && instance_options[:relationships]
  68. instance_options[:relationships].mutes_map[object.conversation_id] || false
  69. else
  70. current_user.account.muting_conversation?(object.conversation)
  71. end
  72. end
  73. def bookmarked
  74. if instance_options && instance_options[:bookmarks]
  75. instance_options[:bookmarks].bookmarks_map[object.id] || false
  76. else
  77. current_user.account.bookmarked?(object)
  78. end
  79. end
  80. def pinned
  81. if instance_options && instance_options[:relationships]
  82. instance_options[:relationships].pins_map[object.id] || false
  83. else
  84. current_user.account.pinned?(object)
  85. end
  86. end
  87. def pinnable?
  88. current_user? &&
  89. current_user.account_id == object.account_id &&
  90. !object.reblog? &&
  91. %w(public unlisted).include?(object.visibility)
  92. end
  93. def ordered_mentions
  94. object.active_mentions.to_a.sort_by(&:id)
  95. end
  96. class ApplicationSerializer < ActiveModel::Serializer
  97. attributes :name, :website
  98. end
  99. class MentionSerializer < ActiveModel::Serializer
  100. attributes :id, :username, :url, :acct
  101. def id
  102. object.account_id.to_s
  103. end
  104. def username
  105. object.account_username
  106. end
  107. def url
  108. TagManager.instance.url_for(object.account)
  109. end
  110. def acct
  111. object.account_acct
  112. end
  113. end
  114. class TagSerializer < ActiveModel::Serializer
  115. include RoutingHelper
  116. attributes :name, :url
  117. def url
  118. tag_url(object)
  119. end
  120. end
  121. end