freemarker-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Daniel Dekany <ddek...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Please test/review FreeMarker 2.3.28
Date Mon, 26 Mar 2018 19:31:59 GMT
Monday, March 26, 2018, 5:26:01 PM, Woonsan Ko wrote:

> Hi Daniel,
>
> I've tested it again after building/installing locally for both "2.3"
> and "2.3-gae".
> The problem of splitting with empty string doesn't happy any more. That's good.
> But, I still need to check the nullability of the return of
> .get_optional_template('some_non_existing.ftl') like the following:
>
>   <#assign optTemp = .get_optional_template('some.ftl')>
>   <#if optTemp?? && optTemp.exists>

I guess you misread the results here. #assign won't assign
null/missing to a variable. So `optTemp??` is useless, as the template
fails earlier than you could check if `optTemp` is missing. (Also, it
doesn't help if .exsists is null, which looks impossible from the
source code anyway.)

> I got an exception message starting with "Error when trying to include
> template ...", which seems to come from this code:
> -
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-freemarker/blob/2.3-gae/src/main/java/freemarker/core/GetOptionalTemplateMethod.java#L140-L145

OK, so that's maybe where the confusion comes from. That's about
handling IOException exceptions. So your template fails before
reaching that #if, because of an IOException, not because some
variable is null or such. What was the reason given in the exception
message? (BTW, I have noticed a bug there... the thrown exception
doesn't pack the original exception as cause. Will fix that in the
moment.)

> I suppose it shouldn't have returned a null value nor thrown an
> exception as the .exists seems useful in that use case.
>
> Regards,
>
> Woonsan
>
>
> On Sat, Mar 24, 2018 at 11:05 AM, Woonsan Ko <woonsan@apache.org> wrote:
>> On Sat, Mar 24, 2018 at 10:41 AM, Daniel Dekany <ddekany@apache.org> wrote:
>>> Saturday, March 24, 2018, 2:44:17 PM, Woonsan Ko wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Sat, Mar 24, 2018 at 3:21 AM, Daniel Dekany <ddekany@apache.org>
wrote:
>>>>> Saturday, March 24, 2018, 3:13:06 AM, Woonsan Ko wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> When I tested with freemarker-2.3.28-incubating-SNAPSHOT.jar, which
I
>>>>>> built and install it to my local maven repo from the latest "2.3"
>>>>>> branch myself, in my applications, I haven't found any regressions.
>>>>>> My applications are rather simpler probably than others as they simply
>>>>>> render model objects passed from request attributes through
>>>>>> FreeMarkerServlet.
>>>>>> But when I tried the new features and bug fixes [1], I think I found
>>>>>> somethings (perhaps there could be my misunderstandings):
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1. The template example in
>>>>>> https://freemarker.apache.org/builds/fm2.3.28/ref_specvar.html#ref_specvar_get_optional_template
>>>>>>
>>>>>>   <#assign optTemp = .get_optional_template('some.ftl')>
>>>>>>   <#if optTemp.exists>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>   But if the 'some.ftl' doesn't exist, optTemp.exists fails as it's
>>>>>> null. So I ended up changing it to this:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>   <#assign optTemp = .get_optional_template('some.ftl')>
>>>>>>   <#if optTemp?? && optTemp.exists>
>>>>>
>>>>> That's bizarre. It works for me. Also for the test suite... that
>>>>> passes there, right? (It can't even be explained by accidentally using
>>>>> 2.3.27, as there .get_optional_template is parsing (syntax) error.)
>>>>
>>>> Perhaps my build might be wrong. I did the following locally to build
>>>> fresh and install it to my local maven repo. (Yesterday, I used my
>>>> forked/forked GitHub branch, which could have caused the issue.)
>>>
>>> OK, I see the problem. I haven't pushed the last merge commit in the
>>> 2.3 branch... sorry! So only the 2.3-gae branch was up to date on Git.
>>> (The linked binaries were fine though.)
>>>
>>>> (move to a temp folder)
>>>> $ git clone
>>>> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator-freemarker.git
>>>> $ cd incubator-freemarker/
>>>> $ git checkout 2.3
>>>> (edit build.properties)
>>>> $ git log --oneline | head -n 2
>>>> edefaa2f Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/2.3-gae' into 2.3
>>>> 01294537 Cleaned up more lexer/parser logic ...
>>>> $ ant clean maven-install
>>>> (confirm the log installing the jar and pom files to my maven repo to
>>>> compare with deployed jar later)
>>>>
>>>> When I tested with this today, ${.version} printed: "version:
>>>> 2.3.28-nightly_20180324T130919Z-incubating".
>>>>
>>>> Could this local build cause a problem? (I saw differences between
>>>> "2.3" and "2.3-gae". See below. So I probably should have built
>>>> "2.3-gae" branch?)
>>>
>>> But should work, except if I screw up and forgot to push one of them,
>>> like now...
>>>
>>>> Anyway, in my testing with "2.3" build, I needed optTemp?? additionally.
>>>>
>>>>>> 2. Square bracket syntax through ftl directive
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It reads, "This directive also determines if the template uses angle
>>>>>> bracket syntax (e.g. <#include 'foo.ftl'>) or square bracket
syntax
>>>>>> (e.g. [#include 'foo.ftl']). Simply, the syntax used for this
>>>>>> directive will be the syntax used for the whole template, regardless
>>>>>> of the FreeMarker configuration settings." [2]
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I applied it to an included .ftl template like this:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [#ftl output_format="HTML"]
>>>>>> [="Hello"]
>>>>>> ${"Hello"}
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It prints: [="Hello"] Hello,
>>>>>> not: Hello ${"Hello"}
>>>>>
>>>>> There are two independent settings here: tag syntax and interpolation
>>>>> syntax. It's mere coincidence that both has "square bracket" in their
>>>>> names. [#ftl] only sets the first. I will clarify that in the
>>>>
>>>> I see. When I tried this now,
>>>>
>>>> [#ftl output_format="HTML"]
>>>> [#assign a=[1,2,3]]
>>>> [#list a as i]${i}[#sep],[/#list]
>>>> [="Hello"]
>>>> ${"Hello"}
>>>>
>>>> I got: 1,2,3 [="Hello"] Hello
>>>> Thanks for clarification!
>>>
>>> Note that the square bracket *tag* syntax and that it can be activated
>>> with [#ftl] exists for a very long time.
>>>
>>> I will update the related Manual page in a minute...
>>>
>>>>> documentation. Or, it's a warning sign that we should rather use
>>>>> {{exp}}, as that doesn't have "square brackets" in it.
>>>>
>>>> Perhaps. ;-)
>>>> I recently had a chance to look around other templating libraries
>>>> using the mustache as I have seen people loving it.
>>>> I didn't like the usages there in directives. For example, {{#if
>>>> user}} {{user.name}} {{/if}}. It's hard for me complete the if, ending
>>>> with {{/if}}, which is too much. ;-)
>>>> But the interpolation part (e.g, {{user.name}}) seems okay to me.
>>>> So, yes, I'm fine with mustache expression for interpolation and it
>>>> might be less confusing in this specific case.
>>>>
>>>> What do others think?
>>>
>>> Let's not forget digging up the thread where it was decided. I mean,
>>> there are some pro/cons mentioned there.
>>>
>>>>>> 3. split with an empty string
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It says, "Bug fixed: When string?split(separator) is called with
"" as
>>>>>> the argument, the string will be split to characters now. Earlier
it
>>>>>> has thrown an IllegalArgumentException (unless the r flag was
>>>>>> specified)."
>>>>>> But when I tried it, it throws an IllegalArgumentException:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> <#assign a="hello"?split("l")>
>>>>> ==>>
>>>>>> java.lang.IllegalArgumentException: The separator string has 0 length
>>>>>> at freemarker.template.utility.StringUtil.split(StringUtil.java:752)
>>>>>
>>>>> Huh? "l" isn't even 0 long! Or you meant to copy-paste `?split("")`
>>>>> there? And yet again, it works for me here. Though this at least can
>>>>> be that you are accidentally using 2.3.27 (try ${.version}).
>>>>
>>>> It was a copy-paste error.
>>>> Still I got the error: "java.lang.IllegalArgumentException: The
>>>> separator string has 0 length at
>>>> freemarker.template.utility.StringUtil.split(StringUtil.java:752)"
>>>>
>>>> Now I realize that "2.3" branch is different from "2.3-gae" branch:
>>>> -
>>>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-freemarker/blob/2.3/src/main/java/freemarker/template/utility/StringUtil.java#L752
>>>> -
>>>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-freemarker/blob/2.3-gae/src/main/java/freemarker/template/utility/StringUtil.java#L753
>>>>
>>>> Perhaps, should I have built/test from "2.3-gae"?
>>>
>>> In theory you should test both, but the differences are so tiny (GAE
>>> has a little change so that it can run on Google App Engine), it
>>> shouldn't mater. (See also:
>>> https://freemarker.apache.org/sourcecode.html)
>>
>> Right. Will do.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Woonsan
>>
>>>
>>>> Thanks in advance!
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>>
>>>> Woonsan
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Please let me know if I miss or misinterpret somethings.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Woonsan
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [1] https://freemarker.apache.org/builds/fm2.3.28/versions_2_3_28.html
>>>>>> [2]
>>>>>> https://freemarker.apache.org/builds/fm2.3.28/ref_directive_ftl.html
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 4:08 AM, Daniel Dekany <ddekany@apache.org>
wrote:
>>>>>>> Friday, March 23, 2018, 3:33:39 AM, Woonsan Ko wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Great to see the real release without "incubating" mark soon!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In theory it was decided 2 days ago, but I saw nothing about
the board
>>>>>>> meeting so far. I guess they are overburdened with the May elections
>>>>>>> and all that.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Also ! I've just read the Change log and everything is awesome!
>>>>>>>> I'll just try out the snapshot binary tomorrow in our applications
to
>>>>>>>> see if there's any regression just in case.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Great, thanks!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Woonsan
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 6:39 PM, Daniel Dekany <ddekany@apache.org>
wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Before we start a VOTE on releasing 2.3.28, it would
be good if more
>>>>>>>>> of you can test it, or otherwise review the upcoming
2.3.28! The main
>>>>>>>>> point in this phase is to catch technical issues.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> If you intend to help, but won't have time for it in
the coming few
>>>>>>>>> days, please indicate that, so that I know that I should
wait!
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Change log (so far, but I don't plan to add more):
>>>>>>>>> https://freemarker.apache.org/builds/fm2.3.28/versions_2_3_28.html
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Binary release artifacts:
>>>>>>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/freemarker/engine/2.3.28-incubating-SNAPSHOT/binaries/
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Source release artifacts:
>>>>>>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/freemarker/engine/2.3.28-incubating-SNAPSHOT/source/
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The Maven artifacts are available from the Apache snaphsot
repository:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>   <repository>
>>>>>>>>>     <id>apache-snapshot-repository</id>
>>>>>>>>>     <url>https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/snapshots/</url>
>>>>>>>>>     <releases><enabled>false</enabled></releases>
>>>>>>>>>     <snapshots><enabled>true</enabled></snapshots>
>>>>>>>>>   </repository>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> under the coordinates:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>   <groupId>org.freemarker</groupId>
>>>>>>>>>   <artifactId>freemarker</artifactId>
>>>>>>>>>   <version>2.3.28-incubating-SNAPSHOT</version>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> and for the Google App Engine compatible (GAE) version:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>   <groupId>org.freemarker</groupId>
>>>>>>>>>   <artifactId>freemarker-gae</artifactId>
>>>>>>>>>   <version>2.3.28-incubating-SNAPSHOT</version>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The ASF Board will decide tomorrow (21th) if FreeMarker
can graduate.
>>>>>>>>> If everything goes well, this release won't have "incubating"
in its
>>>>>>>>> version number. This will be the first such release since
mid 2015
>>>>>>>>> (2.3.23).
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>>  Daniel Dekany
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>  Daniel Dekany
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>  Daniel Dekany
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Thanks,
>>>  Daniel Dekany
>>>
>

-- 
Thanks,
 Daniel Dekany


Mime
View raw message