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.

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