Bug #61965
closed
f:if viewhelper always returns <f:else> element content if no <f:then> element is specified
0%
Description
This will incorrectly return "Foo" in TYPO3 CMS 4.5.
<f:if condition="1">
<f:else>
Foo
</f:else>
</f:if>
Tested with TYPO3 CMS 4.5.34 and 4.5.37-dev.
TYPO3 CMS 6.2 will correctly return nothing here.
Updated by Frank Nägler about 10 years ago
Thanks for your reporting, I have found the problem or differences.
The method AbstractCondtionViewHelper::renderThenChild is different and renders in 4.5 the other children nodes if no "then"-node is available.
Updated by Gerrit Code Review about 10 years ago
- Status changed from New to Under Review
Patch set 1 for branch TYPO3_4-5 of project Packages/TYPO3.CMS has been pushed to the review server.
It is available at http://review.typo3.org/33082
Updated by Frank Nägler about 10 years ago
Test cases:
<f:if condition="1">
<p>should be visible, because no f:then or f:else here </p>
</f:if>
<f:if condition="1">
<f:then>
<p>should be visible, because only one f:then here </p>
</f:then>
</f:if>
<f:if condition="1">
<f:else>
<p>should NOT be visible, because no f:then and only one f:else here </p>
</f:else>
</f:if>
<f:if condition="1">
<f:then>
<p>should be visible, because f:then and f:else here </p>
</f:then>
<f:else>
<p>should NOT be visible, because f:then and f:else here </p>
</f:else>
</f:if>
<f:if condition="0">
<p>should NOT be visible, because no f:then or f:else here </p>
</f:if>
<f:if condition="0">
<f:then>
<p>should NOT be visible, because only one f:then here </p>
</f:then>
</f:if>
<f:if condition="0">
<f:else>
<p>should be visible, because no f:then and only one f:else here </p>
</f:else>
</f:if>
<f:if condition="0">
<f:then>
<p>should NOT be visible, because f:then and f:else here </p>
</f:then>
<f:else>
<p>should be visible, because f:then and f:else here </p>
</f:else>
</f:if>
Updated by Frank Nägler about 10 years ago
- Status changed from Under Review to Rejected
The patch is rejected, for the following reason:
Ernesto Baschny:
Although a good idea and a nice bug fix. But we are in the last phase of the 4.5 LTS life-cycle where we only include fixes for security or browser-compatibility. This does not qualify as an "important fix" by this definition, so please upgrade your projects to 6.2 to get the benefit of this improvement. Thanks for understanding!