闭社主体 forked from https://github.com/tootsuite/mastodon
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.

140 lines
3.2 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 :pinned, if: :pinnable?
  11. belongs_to :reblog, serializer: REST::StatusSerializer
  12. belongs_to :application
  13. belongs_to :account, serializer: REST::AccountSerializer
  14. has_many :media_attachments, serializer: REST::MediaAttachmentSerializer
  15. has_many :ordered_mentions, key: :mentions
  16. has_many :tags
  17. has_many :emojis, serializer: REST::CustomEmojiSerializer
  18. has_one :preview_card, key: :card, serializer: REST::PreviewCardSerializer
  19. def id
  20. object.id.to_s
  21. end
  22. def in_reply_to_id
  23. object.in_reply_to_id&.to_s
  24. end
  25. def in_reply_to_account_id
  26. object.in_reply_to_account_id&.to_s
  27. end
  28. def current_user?
  29. !current_user.nil?
  30. end
  31. def visibility
  32. # This visibility is masked behind "private"
  33. # to avoid API changes because there are no
  34. # UX differences
  35. if object.limited_visibility?
  36. 'private'
  37. else
  38. object.visibility
  39. end
  40. end
  41. def uri
  42. OStatus::TagManager.instance.uri_for(object)
  43. end
  44. def content
  45. Formatter.instance.format(object)
  46. end
  47. def url
  48. TagManager.instance.url_for(object)
  49. end
  50. def favourited
  51. if instance_options && instance_options[:relationships]
  52. instance_options[:relationships].favourites_map[object.id] || false
  53. else
  54. current_user.account.favourited?(object)
  55. end
  56. end
  57. def reblogged
  58. if instance_options && instance_options[:relationships]
  59. instance_options[:relationships].reblogs_map[object.id] || false
  60. else
  61. current_user.account.reblogged?(object)
  62. end
  63. end
  64. def muted
  65. if instance_options && instance_options[:relationships]
  66. instance_options[:relationships].mutes_map[object.conversation_id] || false
  67. else
  68. current_user.account.muting_conversation?(object.conversation)
  69. end
  70. end
  71. def pinned
  72. if instance_options && instance_options[:relationships]
  73. instance_options[:relationships].pins_map[object.id] || false
  74. else
  75. current_user.account.pinned?(object)
  76. end
  77. end
  78. def pinnable?
  79. current_user? &&
  80. current_user.account_id == object.account_id &&
  81. !object.reblog? &&
  82. %w(public unlisted).include?(object.visibility)
  83. end
  84. def ordered_mentions
  85. object.active_mentions.to_a.sort_by(&:id)
  86. end
  87. class ApplicationSerializer < ActiveModel::Serializer
  88. attributes :name, :website
  89. end
  90. class MentionSerializer < ActiveModel::Serializer
  91. attributes :id, :username, :url, :acct
  92. def id
  93. object.account_id.to_s
  94. end
  95. def username
  96. object.account_username
  97. end
  98. def url
  99. TagManager.instance.url_for(object.account)
  100. end
  101. def acct
  102. object.account_acct
  103. end
  104. end
  105. class TagSerializer < ActiveModel::Serializer
  106. include RoutingHelper
  107. attributes :name, :url
  108. def url
  109. tag_url(object)
  110. end
  111. end
  112. end