On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 12:47 PM, Gordon Smith <gosm...@adobe.com> wrote:
> It's more complicated than I thought. > > I tried it in FB 4.6 (i.e., with the old compiler). If you have a one > space inside the <String> tag without a CDATA section around it, then the > value is null. But with CDATA around the space, the value is a string with > one space character. > > In my opinion, this behavior of the old compiler is inconsistent and > should be considered a bug. So we have to decide how bug-compatible we want > Falcon to be with the old compiler. It may be difficult to even achieve > bug-compatibility in cases like this. > This is an obvious case, but I think we should fix bugs/inconsistencies whenever we get a chance. > > Could we live with Falcon compiling it as a string with one space, > regardless of whether there is CDATA or not? > Yes, that would the best approach. Thanks, Om > - Gordon > > -----Original Message----- > From: Gordon Smith > Sent: Monday, October 29, 2012 10:17 AM > To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org > Subject: RE: Does Falcon need to take CDATA sections into account when > parsing <fx:string/>? > > This is a bug. > > The tests in MXMLBooleanNode are more complete that for other primitive > tags. I added a test to MXMLBooleanNode that shows CDATA works inside of > <Boolean>. Each of the primitive tags needs this kind of test. > > - Gordon > > -----Original Message----- > From: Roland Zwaga [mailto:rol...@stackandheap.com] > Sent: Sunday, October 28, 2012 10:12 AM > To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org > Subject: Does Falcon need to take CDATA sections into account when parsing > <fx:string/>? > > Hi there, > > I've been taking my few first uncertain steps into grokking the Falcon > sources. I was looking at the MXMLStringNode tests and wanted to see if the > parser takes into account CDATA sections in them. > So I added a test that set up an <fx:string/> node like this: > > String code = "<fx:String><![CDATA[ ]]></fx:String>"; //The CDATA section > here contains a single space IMXMLStringNode node = > getMXMLStringNode(code); assertThat("getValue", node.getValue(), is(" ")); > > Now, this test fails, because the node.getValue() returns null. IMHO, this > is incorrect behaviour, since CDATA sections should be parsed literally > without any assumptions or postprocessing. > > Does everyone agree on this? Thoughts please ;) > > -- > regards, > Roland > > -- > Roland Zwaga > Senior Consultant | Stack & Heap BVBA > > +32 (0)486 16 12 62 | rol...@stackandheap.com | > +http://www.stackandheap.com > > http://zwaga.blogspot.com > http://www.springactionscript.org > http://www.as3commons.org >
