[Routing] Handling of space characters in the dumpers #3858
Conversation
| @@ -39,6 +41,8 @@ public function dump(array $options = array()) | |||
| 'base_uri' => '', | |||
| ), $options); | |||
|
|
|||
| $options['script_name'] = static::escape($options['script_name'], ' ', '\\'); | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Use self instead of static. The method is declared as private. :)
|
@Baachi fixed now. Thanks. |
- The route compiler does not add extra space or line-feed, - The generated regex does not use the 'x' modified any more, - The PHP and apache matchers do not need to strip any chars (vs space and line feed before), - The space characters are escaped according to the apache format
|
+1, I saw no reason for pretty printing the regex in the first place (just for debugging I guess). |
|
@Tobion could you make a PR to this branch for the named parameters ? |
|
I can include it in #3754 because I'm about the add 2 more fixes to it anyway. |
|
May be the best is to put it on hold while I am reviewing your PRs. There are already enough changes, we'll make an other PR after all have been sorted out. What's the difference between 3754 and 3810 ? (3810 + 3763 = 3754 ?) |
|
I didn't link on purpose... the question is if '=' means strictly or loosely equal (any diffs - beside master vs 2.0) ? |
|
It just applies my changes to 2.0. Nothing more. So master still differs from 2.0 by the addional features that were already implemented (e.g. |
|
@Tobion only bug fixes mean "only bug fixes". You should re-open a PR for 2.0 with "only bug fixes", you might want to wait for me to review 3754. |
|
Without #3763 it's much harder to apply the bug fixes. And now that I found 2 more bugs which requiresome rewriting of the PhpMatcherDumper, I don't want to apply all the commits by hand again for 2.0... |
| @@ -31,6 +31,8 @@ class ApacheMatcherDumper extends MatcherDumper | |||
| * @param array $options An array of options | |||
| * | |||
| * @return string A string to be used as Apache rewrite rules | |||
| * | |||
| * @throws \LogicException When the route regex is invalid | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This would be a BC break in 2.0 and doesn't comply with the MatcherDumperInterface
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@Tobion it is not really a BC as it would not have work without a valid regexp even before
Commits ------- 77185e0 [Routing] Allow spaces in the script name for the apache dumper 6465a69 [Routing] Fixes to handle spaces in route pattern Discussion ---------- [Routing] Handling of space characters in the dumpers The compiler was using the 'x' modifier in order to ignore extra spaces and line feeds but the code was flawed: - it was actually ignoring all the spaces, not only the extra ones added by the compiler, - all the spaces were stripped in the php and apache matchers. The proposed fix: - do not use the 'x' modifier any more (and then do no add extra spaces / line feeds), - do not strip the spaces in the matchers, - escapes the spaces (both in regexs and script name) for the apache matcher. It also include [a small optimization](https://github.com/vicb/symfony/pull/new#L9L89) when the only token of a route is an optional variable token - the idea is to make the regex easier to read. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- by vicb at 2012-04-10T13:59:45Z @Baachi fixed now. Thanks. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- by Tobion at 2012-04-10T16:01:31Z +1, I saw no reason for pretty printing the regex in the first place (just for debugging I guess). @vicb since you want to make the regex easier to read, I propose the remove the `P` from the variable regex `?P<bar>`, which is not needed anymore in PHP 5.3 (and we only support PHP 5.3+ anyway). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- by vicb at 2012-04-10T16:08:36Z @Tobion could you make a PR to this branch for the named parameters ? --------------------------------------------------------------------------- by Tobion at 2012-04-10T16:12:34Z I can include it in #3754 because I'm about the add 2 more fixes to it anyway. But when I proposed to apply these fixes to 2.0 Fabien rejected it. So not sure what branch you want me to apply this. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- by vicb at 2012-04-10T16:25:38Z May be the best is to put it on hold while I am reviewing your PRs. There are already enough changes, we'll make an other PR after all have been sorted out. What's the difference between 3754 and 3810 ? (3810 + 3763 = 3754 ?) --------------------------------------------------------------------------- by Tobion at 2012-04-10T16:39:32Z Lol you forget to link the PR numbers. At first sight I thought it's some sort of mathematical riddle. Haha #3810 is for 2.0 = #3763 (already merged) + #3754 for master --------------------------------------------------------------------------- by vicb at 2012-04-10T16:52:18Z I didn't link on purpose... the question is if '=' means strictly or loosely equal (any diffs - beside master vs 2.0) ? --------------------------------------------------------------------------- by Tobion at 2012-04-10T17:06:04Z It just applies my changes to 2.0. Nothing more. So master still differs from 2.0 by the addional features that were already implemented (e.g. `RouteCollection->addCollection` with optional requirements and options). But since my changes are bug fixes (except the performance improvement in #3763 but that doesn't break anything and makes 2.0 easier to maintain) I thought they should go into 2.0 as well. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- by vicb at 2012-04-10T17:14:27Z @Tobion only bug fixes mean "only bug fixes". You should re-open a PR for 2.0 with "only bug fixes", you might want to wait for me to review 3754. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- by Tobion at 2012-04-10T17:21:00Z Without #3763 it's much harder to apply the bug fixes. And now that I found 2 more bugs which requiresome rewriting of the PhpMatcherDumper, I don't want to apply all the commits by hand again for 2.0...
| $regex = '^'.preg_quote($options['base_uri']).substr($regex, 1); | ||
| $regex = $compiledRoute->getRegex(); | ||
| $delimiter = $regex[0]; | ||
| $regexPatternEnd = strrpos($regex, $delimiter); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What if the last delimiter-character is escaped? That would mean the regex is still invalid.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It doesn't really validate the regex anyway. It just makes sure there the delimiters are there.
The compiler was using the 'x' modifier in order to ignore extra spaces and line feeds but the code was flawed:
The proposed fix:
It also include a small optimization when the only token of a route is an optional variable token - the idea is to make the regex easier to read.