Last modified: 2014-04-24 11:55:59 UTC

Wikimedia Bugzilla is closed!

Wikimedia migrated from Bugzilla to Phabricator. Bug reports are handled in Wikimedia Phabricator.
This static website is read-only and for historical purposes. It is not possible to log in and except for displaying bug reports and their history, links might be broken. See T65897, the corresponding Phabricator task for complete and up-to-date bug report information.
First Last Prev Next    This bug is not in your last search results.
Bug 63897 - Message: Really support an array of keys
Message: Really support an array of keys
Status: PATCH_TO_REVIEW
Product: MediaWiki
Classification: Unclassified
Internationalization (Other open bugs)
1.23.0
All All
: Unprioritized normal (vote)
: ---
Assigned To: Nobody - You can work on this!
:
Depends on:
Blocks:
  Show dependency tree / graph
 
Reported: 2014-04-14 09:40 UTC by Adrian Lang
Modified: 2014-04-24 11:55 UTC (History)
9 users (show)

See Also:
Web browser: ---
Mobile Platform: ---
Assignee Huggle Beta Tester: ---

Attachments
Add an attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.)

Description Adrian Lang 2014-04-14 09:40:46 UTC 
Several methods of Message don't yet support an array as $this->key:

* getKey just returns the first key
* inContentLanguage ignores $wgForceUIMsgAsContentMsg
* toString uses only first key if no message found (probably minor issue)
* __toString returns '<Array>' if toString() threw an exception (probably very minor issue)

RawMessage does not support an array as key, either:

* fetchMessage returns the original array, instead of a string representation
Comment 1 Niklas Laxström 2014-04-14 12:50:10 UTC 
Alternative solution: deprecate/drop the array support altogether. If needed, it can be reimplemented on a layer top of Message class.

RawMessage supporting an array of keys does not make any sense.
Comment 2 Adrian Lang 2014-04-14 12:53:01 UTC 
Agree, to both.
Comment 3 Adrian Lang 2014-04-23 07:58:43 UTC 
See https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/126936.
Comment 4 Daniel Kinzler 2014-04-23 08:06:53 UTC 
I suggest to either drop support for fallback on this level asap, or merge my patch to make it work consistently. I'm actually in favor of dropping the functionality, but I'm not sure how to best find all relevant places in the source, of for how long this feature would need to be deprecated.
Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
First Last Prev Next    This bug is not in your last search results.

Navigation
Links