Summary:
Ref T11473. If you write a method like `get_stuff(ids)` and then call it with an empty list of IDs, you can end up passing an empty constraint to Conduit.
If you run a `*.search` method with such a constraint, like this one:
```
{
"ids": []
}
```
...we have three possible beahviors:
# Treat it like the user passed no constraint (basically, ignore the constraint).
# Respect the constraint (return no results).
# Error.
Currently, we do (1). However, this is pretty confusing and I think clearly the worst option, since it means `get_stuff(array())` in client code will often tend to return a ton of results.
We could do (2) instead, but this is also sort of confusing (it may not be obvious why nothing matched, even though it's an application bug) and I think most reasonable client code should be doing an `if ($ids)` test: this test makes clients a little more complicated, but they can save a network call, and I think they often need to do this test anyway (for example, to show the user a different message).
This implements (3), and just considers these to be errors: this is the least tricky behavior, it's consistent with what we do in PHP, makes fairly good sense, and the only cost for this is that client code may need to be slightly more complex, but this slightly more complex code is usually better code.
Test Plan: Ran Conduit `*.search` queries with `"ids":[]` and `"phids":[]`, got sensible errors instead of runaway result sets.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T11473
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D16396
Summary:
Ref T9964. I added several hacks to get these working. Clean them up and pull this into a proper extension.
The behavior in the web UI is:
- they work in all applications; but
- they only show up in the UI if a value is specified.
So if you visit `/view/?ids=1,2` you get the field, but normally it's not present. We could refine this later. I'm going to add documentation about how to prefill these forms regardless, which should make this discoverable by reading the documentation.
There's one teensey weensey hack: in the API, I push these fields to the top of the table. That one feels OK, since it's purely a convenience/display adjustment.
Test Plan: Queried by IDs, reviewed docs.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T9964
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14769
