CommandSearcher: treat invalid wildcard path as literal #7399

kwkam · 2018-07-29T04:19:38Z

PR Summary

Do not glob path with invalid wildcard pattern (eg. "./[.ps1").

PR Motivation

Merge the Qualified Path Search and Relative Path Search into a single function (GetNextFromPath into ResolvePSPath).

Add an internal method ContainsValidWildcardPattern to the WildcardPattern API to make the checking be more sensitive to invalid bracket patterns, to allow faster fallback from wildcard search for fully qualified path to a literal search.

PR Checklist

iSazonov

Leave a comment

src/System.Management.Automation/engine/CommandSearcher.cs

src/System.Management.Automation/engine/GetCommandCommand.cs

src/System.Management.Automation/engine/regex.cs

stale · 2018-09-30T23:44:29Z

This PR has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had activity in the last 30 days. It will be closed if no further activity occurs within 10 days.
Thank you for your contributions.
Community members are welcome to grab these works.

iSazonov · 2018-10-02T09:54:16Z

@SteveL-MSFT do we have interest in the change?

SteveL-MSFT · 2018-10-05T00:04:53Z

@iSazonov yes, I think this change is something we want

iSazonov · 2018-10-05T06:15:04Z

@kwkam Please rebase to pass CIs.

kwkam · 2018-10-06T08:04:06Z

@iSazonov OK, rebased to latest master.

daxian-dbw

ContainsWildcardCharacters is a public method in WildcardPattern. Changing to the behavior is a breaking change. The method name clearly indicates that it only checks if the string contains any wildcard characters, but not if it contains valid wildcard characters. If we need to check for valid wildcard characters, a new method should be introduced.

src/System.Management.Automation/engine/regex.cs

iSazonov · 2018-10-10T03:52:26Z

but not if it contains valid wildcard characters.

Does the comment only refer to this method or its use too?

daxian-dbw · 2018-10-10T04:58:39Z

Does the comment only refer to this method or its use too?

The comment only applies to the method, not to its uses. If a caller assumes differently, then another method should be added for checking if a path contains valid wildcard characters.

iSazonov · 2018-10-10T09:53:44Z

I think the breaking change is in gray area because using of the method implies that we want exactly working wildcards and not something similar ']['. Also I'd said that passing '][' in the method is a bug.

daxian-dbw · 2018-10-10T21:10:48Z

@iSazonov This is more of a unacceptable changes in public contract. Quoted from the breaking-chagne-doc:

A code change that results in a change to the existing behavior observed for a given input with an API, protocol or the PowerShell language.

That being said, I do like the refactoring changes in CommandSearcher.cs and inclined to keep it.

daxian-dbw · 2018-10-10T21:18:20Z

Add the "Review-Committee" label.
To @PowerShell/powershell-committee: This PR proposes a behavior change to the public method WildcardPattern.ContainsWildcardCharacters(string pattern). Currently, ContainsWildcardCharacters(string pattern) only checks if the string contains any wildcard characters. The proposed change is to make it check for valid wildcard patterns. That means, for the string [abc or ][abc, currently the method returns true and it would return false with the change.

The proposed change is a breaking change that falls in bucket 1, so we need committee to review.

SteveL-MSFT · 2018-10-10T22:54:03Z

@PowerShell/powershell-committee reviewed this. Recommendation is to deprecate this api and introduce ContainsValidWildcardPattern() API and fix all callsites to use the new method (separate PR).

kwkam · 2018-10-11T13:37:02Z

Should the new method be a strict checking (e.g. try/catch with the WildcardPatternParser::Parse)?

iSazonov · 2018-10-11T14:30:31Z

At first glance it should be TryParse(). Although we should review all callsites (131) - huge work!

daxian-dbw · 2018-10-11T23:06:16Z

The method ContainsWildcardCharacters is called at many places in powershell, and I believe at least some of the callers only need a hint about whether a string might contains wildcard pattern, instead of an accurate answer, so for those caller, a perf penalty will be charged as [WildcardPatternParser]::Parse is relatively expensive.

Even for the callers that do want the accurate answer, another call to Parse will be made when creating/using the WildcardPattern from the string, so we will be paying the tax twice.

We can still add the new method ContainsValidWildcardPattern wrapping a call to WildcardPatternParser.Parse, so we can accurately know if a string contains valid wildcard patterns. But it's probably not right to blindly change all callers of ContainsWildcardCharacters to the new method.

daxian-dbw · 2018-10-11T23:17:18Z

@kwkam Changes regarding ContainsValidWildcardPattern and ContainsWildcardCharacters would be a bit tricky and likely involve many changes in other places. How about we revert the changes to ContainsValidWildcardPattern in this PR and make it only about the refactoring changes in CommandSearcher.cs? We can merge the refactoring changes, and open a separate issue/PR to discuss the right fix for ContainsValidWildcardPattern.

iSazonov · 2018-10-12T05:30:54Z

I full agree with @daxian-dbw.

iSazonov · 2018-10-12T14:13:51Z

@kwkam Do you agree with @daxian-dbw suggestion to split the PR?

Do not glob path with invalid wildcard pattern (eg. "./[.ps1"). Merge the path resolving code from GetNextFromPath into ResolvePSPath. Add test for previous change engine/regex: add MayBeWildcardPattern CommandSearcher: use MayBeWildcardPattern [Feature] Fix FunctionProvider test [Feature] Revert "[Feature] Fix FunctionProvider test" This reverts commit d7ab0d7d538df8943bf156f098866cbf7b38bc64. [Feature] Remove 'resolvedPath != null' [Feature] Redo efe93252c5 and b300130e59 [Feature] fixup Revert "[Feature] fixup" Revert "[Feature] Redo Rename MayBeWildcardPattern Fix ContainsValidWildcardPattern

TravisEz13 · 2019-06-24T17:38:24Z

rebased PR

TravisEz13 · 2019-06-24T17:38:42Z

@PoshChan Please remind me in 1 hour

PoshChan · 2019-06-24T18:39:01Z

@TravisEz13, this is the reminder you requested 1 hour ago

ghost · 2020-05-27T02:04:17Z

This pull request has been automatically marked as Review Needed because it has been there has not been any activity for 7 days.
Mainainer, Please provide feedback and/or mark it as Waiting on Author

TravisEz13 · 2020-05-28T18:09:44Z

@daxian-dbw Please update your review

ghost · 2020-06-05T02:00:18Z

This pull request has been automatically marked as Review Needed because it has been there has not been any activity for 7 days.
Mainainer, Please provide feedback and/or mark it as Waiting on Author

TravisEz13 · 2020-06-09T17:48:52Z

@daxian-dbw Please update your review

ghost · 2020-06-17T02:00:22Z

This pull request has been automatically marked as Review Needed because it has been there has not been any activity for 7 days.
Mainainer, Please provide feedback and/or mark it as Waiting on Author

pull-request-quantifier-deprecated · 2023-05-08T18:42:54Z

This PR has 36 quantified lines of changes. In general, a change size of upto 200 lines is ideal for the best PR experience!

Quantification details

Label      : Extra Small
Size       : +33 -3
Percentile : 14.4%

Total files changed: 4

Change summary by file extension:
.cs : +27 -3
.ps1 : +6 -0

Change counts above are quantified counts, based on the PullRequestQuantifier customizations.

Why proper sizing of changes matters

Optimal pull request sizes drive a better predictable PR flow as they strike a
balance between between PR complexity and PR review overhead. PRs within the
optimal size (typical small, or medium sized PRs) mean:

Fast and predictable releases to production:
- Optimal size changes are more likely to be reviewed faster with fewer
  iterations.
- Similarity in low PR complexity drives similar review times.
Review quality is likely higher as complexity is lower:
- Bugs are more likely to be detected.
- Code inconsistencies are more likely to be detected.
Knowledge sharing is improved within the participants:
- Small portions can be assimilated better.
Better engineering practices are exercised:
- Solving big problems by dividing them in well contained, smaller problems.
- Exercising separation of concerns within the code changes.

What can I do to optimize my changes

Use the PullRequestQuantifier to quantify your PR accurately
- Create a context profile for your repo using the context generator
- Exclude files that are not necessary to be reviewed or do not increase the review complexity. Example: Autogenerated code, docs, project IDE setting files, binaries, etc. Check out the Excluded section from your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
- Understand your typical change complexity, drive towards the desired complexity by adjusting the label mapping in your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
- Only use the labels that matter to you, see context specification to customize your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
Change your engineering behaviors
- For PRs that fall outside of the desired spectrum, review the details and check if:
  - Your PR could be split in smaller, self-contained PRs instead
  - Your PR only solves one particular issue. (For example, don't refactor and code new features in the same PR).

How to interpret the change counts in git diff output

One line was added: +1 -0
One line was deleted: +0 -1
One line was modified: +1 -1 (git diff doesn't know about modified, it will
interpret that line like one addition plus one deletion)
Change percentiles: Change characteristics (addition, deletion, modification)
of this PR in relation to all other PRs within the repository.

Was this comment helpful? 👍 :ok_hand: :thumbsdown: (Email)
Customize PullRequestQuantifier for this repository.

ghost · 2023-05-23T20:00:58Z

This pull request has been automatically marked as stale because it has been marked as requiring author feedback but has not had any activity for 15 days. It will be closed if no further activity occurs within 10 days of this comment.

kwkam requested review from BrucePay and daxian-dbw as code owners July 29, 2018 04:19

kwkam mentioned this pull request Jul 29, 2018

Fix handling of -Path when it literally contains wildcard char #5896

Closed

9 tasks

iSazonov reviewed Jul 30, 2018

View reviewed changes

iSazonov assigned daxian-dbw Jul 30, 2018

kwkam changed the title ~~[Feature] CommandSearcher: treat invalid wildcard path as literal~~ CommandSearcher: treat invalid wildcard path as literal Jul 31, 2018

stale bot added the Stale label Sep 30, 2018

stale bot removed the Stale label Oct 2, 2018

daxian-dbw requested changes Oct 9, 2018

View reviewed changes

src/System.Management.Automation/engine/regex.cs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

daxian-dbw added the Review - Committee The PR/Issue needs a review from the PowerShell Committee label Oct 10, 2018

SteveL-MSFT added Committee-Reviewed PS-Committee has reviewed this and made a decision and removed Review - Committee The PR/Issue needs a review from the PowerShell Committee labels Oct 10, 2018

iSazonov mentioned this pull request Oct 12, 2018

Backtick escaping inconsistent #7999

Open

stale bot removed the Stale label May 17, 2019

TravisEz13 force-pushed the wc-cmdsearch branch from a416077 to 41e20d7 Compare June 24, 2019 17:38

TravisEz13 closed this Nov 14, 2019

TravisEz13 reopened this Nov 14, 2019

kwkam mentioned this pull request Mar 21, 2020

"Path is not parsed correctly if '[' is present in the path" #12170

Closed

14 tasks

ghost added the Review - Needed The PR is being reviewed label May 27, 2020

TravisEz13 removed the Review - Needed The PR is being reviewed label May 28, 2020

ghost added the Review - Needed The PR is being reviewed label Jun 5, 2020

ghost removed the Review - Needed The PR is being reviewed label Jun 9, 2020

TravisEz13 closed this Jun 9, 2020

TravisEz13 reopened this Jun 9, 2020

ghost added the Review - Needed The PR is being reviewed label Jun 17, 2020

vexx32 mentioned this pull request Sep 3, 2021

Native globbing doesn't respect bypassing via the escape character (backtick) in unquoted arguments #15959

Closed

5 tasks

Merge branch 'master' into wc-cmdsearch

f915ade

TravisEz13 added Waiting on Author The PR was reviewed and requires changes or comments from the author before being accept and removed Review - Needed The PR is being reviewed labels May 8, 2023

pull-request-quantifier-deprecated bot added the Extra Small label May 8, 2023

ghost added the Stale label May 23, 2023

ghost closed this Jun 3, 2023

This pull request was closed.

CommandSearcher: treat invalid wildcard path as literal #7399

CommandSearcher: treat invalid wildcard path as literal #7399

Uh oh!

Conversation

kwkam commented Jul 29, 2018 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

PR Summary

PR Motivation

PR Checklist

Uh oh!

iSazonov left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

stale bot commented Sep 30, 2018

Uh oh!

iSazonov commented Oct 2, 2018

Uh oh!

SteveL-MSFT commented Oct 5, 2018

Uh oh!

iSazonov commented Oct 5, 2018

Uh oh!

kwkam commented Oct 6, 2018

Uh oh!

daxian-dbw left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

iSazonov commented Oct 10, 2018 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

daxian-dbw commented Oct 10, 2018 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

iSazonov commented Oct 10, 2018

Uh oh!

daxian-dbw commented Oct 10, 2018 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

daxian-dbw commented Oct 10, 2018

Uh oh!

SteveL-MSFT commented Oct 10, 2018

Uh oh!

kwkam commented Oct 11, 2018

Uh oh!

iSazonov commented Oct 11, 2018

Uh oh!

daxian-dbw commented Oct 11, 2018

Uh oh!

daxian-dbw commented Oct 11, 2018 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

iSazonov commented Oct 12, 2018

Uh oh!

iSazonov commented Oct 12, 2018

Uh oh!

TravisEz13 commented Jun 24, 2019

Uh oh!

TravisEz13 commented Jun 24, 2019

Uh oh!

PoshChan commented Jun 24, 2019

Uh oh!

ghost commented May 27, 2020

Uh oh!

TravisEz13 commented May 28, 2020

Uh oh!

ghost commented Jun 5, 2020

Uh oh!

TravisEz13 commented Jun 9, 2020

Uh oh!

ghost commented Jun 17, 2020

Uh oh!

pull-request-quantifier-deprecated bot commented May 8, 2023

What can I do to optimize my changes

How to interpret the change counts in git diff output

Uh oh!

ghost commented May 23, 2023

kwkam commented Jul 29, 2018 •

edited

Loading

iSazonov commented Oct 10, 2018 •

edited

Loading

daxian-dbw commented Oct 10, 2018 •

edited

Loading

daxian-dbw commented Oct 10, 2018 •

edited

Loading

daxian-dbw commented Oct 11, 2018 •

edited

Loading