nandi/frq · e8f0b5f

nandi/frqpublic⑂ Fork 0

⑂ e8f0b5f

Read an empty tag value as no value

IRCv3 says a tag written `key=` and a tag written `key` say the same thing:
nothing. This disagreed. The bare form fell out of `some` as nil and the
empty one came back as "", which is a string, which is truthy — so a
`+reply=` on a line that answered nothing put a reply chip above it, and the
chip pointed at a message no id could ever find. What the reader saw was
"↩ replying to an earlier message" over lines that were replying to nothing,
on every one of freeq's frontends at once, and the way back to the quoted
line went with it: the fallback is a dim label, and a label is not a link.

Both halves read tags through here, so both were wrong the same way and are
right again together. It also stops an empty `+freeq.at/unreact` from taking
a reaction off and an empty `+react` from putting one on.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>

nandi committed 2026-09-13T11:17:03-07:00 Browse files

e8f0b5f parent: c6ce105

modified common/frq/irc/parse.cljc +9 -2 Viewed

@@ -81,12 +81,19 @@
81	81	(str/replace "\n" "\\n")))
82	82
83	83	(defn tag-value
84		- "One IRCv3 tag's value, unescaped, or nil."
	84	+ "One IRCv3 tag's value, unescaped, or nil.
	85	+
	86	+ A tag written with no value at all and one written `key=` say the same
	87	+ thing, which IRCv3 spells out and which this used to disagree with: the
	88	+ bare form fell through as nil and the empty one came back as `\"\"`. A
	89	+ caller asks `tag-value` whether a fact is there, and an empty string is a
	90	+ fact that is there — which is how a `+reply=` on a line answering nothing
	91	+ put a reply chip above it, pointing at a message no id could find."
85	92	[tags key]
86	93	(when tags
87	94	(some (fn [pair]
88	95	(let [[k v] (str/split pair #"=" 2)]
89		- (when (= k key) (unescape-tag v))))
	96	+ (when (= k key) (not-empty (unescape-tag v)))))
90	97	(str/split tags #";"))))
91	98
92	99	(defn nick-of

        (str/replace "\n" "\\n")))
  (defn tag-value
--  "One IRCv3 tag's value, unescaped, or nil."
++  "One IRCv3 tag's value, unescaped, or nil.
++
++  A tag written with no value at all and one written `key=` say the same
++  thing, which IRCv3 spells out and which this used to disagree with: the
++  bare form fell through as nil and the empty one came back as `\"\"`. A
++  caller asks `tag-value` whether a fact is there, and an empty string is a
++  fact that is there — which is how a `+reply=` on a line answering nothing
++  put a reply chip above it, pointing at a message no id could find."
    [tags key]
    (when tags
      (some (fn [pair]
              (let [[k v] (str/split pair #"=" 2)]
--              (when (= k key) (unescape-tag v))))
++              (when (= k key) (not-empty (unescape-tag v)))))
            (str/split tags #";"))))
  (defn nick-of