Closed GoogleCodeExporter closed 9 years ago
Original comment by aso...@gmail.com
on 12 May 2010 at 3:58
The patch from
http://groups.google.com/group/snakeyaml-core/browse_thread/thread/326d92c16987f
5ab
is taken.
To avoid encoding problems with the file name on different operating systems
the test
is using static inner class.
(http://code.google.com/p/snakeyaml/source/browse/src/test/java/org/yaml/snakeya
ml/issues/issue67/NonAsciiCharsInClassNameTest.java)
The fix will be delivered in version 1.7
Original comment by aso...@gmail.com
on 14 May 2010 at 6:14
http://code.google.com/p/snakeyaml/source/detail?r=90131e8e002a9f168cb8368c5885d
1938f1a1440
fixes Windows and OSX builds failed because of this patch ;)
Original comment by alexande...@gmail.com
on 16 May 2010 at 8:59
Still incomplete.
According to http://yaml.org/spec/1.1/#escaping%20in%20URI/ '[' and ']' should
be
added to escaper.
Tests shall be added.
Exceptions must be tested (invalid escape etc)
Error messages must be tested (line number etc)
A tag with a non-ASCII character shall fail while dumping.
Original comment by aso...@gmail.com
on 18 May 2010 at 12:46
Unfortunately it is not possible to escape characters when a Tag instance is
created.
The reason is that it is not clear when to escape. For instance '/' may or may
not be
escaped depending on the context.
Original comment by aso...@gmail.com
on 27 May 2010 at 10:04
I think that escaping is a better behaviour, providing another constructor that
takes
an URI object for precise URI specification, that way each constructor does the
correct thing, the former creates a proper Tag no matter which String (notice
String
not URI) the client passes, as its signature suggests. If escaping is not an
option
for whatever reason then, IMHO, throwing an exception at construction time
rather than
in an unrelated place would make the code better and easier to debug.
Attached is the patch to avoid the escape of [].
Original comment by manuel.s...@gmail.com
on 27 May 2010 at 11:25
Attachments:
The patch is taken.
I am afraid I did not quite catch your proposal. Can you may be contribute a
patch
with the API change and the corresponding tests? The tests do not have to
succeed, I
just wish to see the expectation.
If you do not want to change anything now may I close the issue ?
Original comment by aso...@gmail.com
on 28 May 2010 at 9:36
Never mind, both paths seems to broke some many things that indeed will create
a
backwards compatibility headache. I'm not sure is worth the hassle. Please,
close the
issue.
Just for the record attached is the patch that will use two constructors for
Tag, one
using an String that is escaped and other that takes a URI.
Original comment by manuel.s...@gmail.com
on 28 May 2010 at 3:45
Attachments:
the last patch is taken.
I must say I do not have a clear vision on how to escape characters in a Tag.
If no one
objects the change it will go to release 1.7
Once we have more usecases from the community we can see how we can manage
non-trivial
tags.
Original comment by py4fun@gmail.com
on 31 May 2010 at 9:37
Original issue reported on code.google.com by
manuel.s...@gmail.com
on 12 May 2010 at 3:30