Propagate ParserMacroCapture undefineds into the calls (#1424) #1425
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Fix an issue when users attempt to use the results of missing macro calls Add a test
drewbanin
approved these changes
Apr 30, 2019
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think I made the return value True here to try to reduce the incidence of avoidable userspace errors.
I think the return True predates some of the parsing/adapter work that we've done in the not-so-recent-anymore past. Macros will be present in the context at parse-time (this wasn't the case previously?). This is really slick, ship it!
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Fixes #1424
Just return
selffromParserMacroCapture.__call__instead of returningTrue. That lets jinja handle the case and return the nice error message we intended to return.I'm sure that at some point the
return Truewas necessary, but all the tests I've run locally (the postgres suite) seem to be totally happy with this change. And the error is much nicer.This is happily completely orthogonal to #1416 since it's an issue in the part of jinja undefined handling that I very explicitly didn't change in that PR, so hooray for that!