Mark modX::parseChunk as deprecated (#12433) #15978
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or 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
alroniks
approved these changes
Jan 19, 2022
| @@ -1954,8 +1954,10 @@ public function getChunk($chunkName, array $properties= []) { | |||
| * @param string $prefix The placeholder prefix, defaults to [[+. | |||
| * @param string $suffix The placeholder suffix, defaults to ]]. | |||
| * @return string The processed chunk with the placeholders replaced. | |||
| * @deprecated Prefer using $modx->getChunk, to be removed in MODX 4.0. | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Shouldn't this mention the "deprecated since release"?
JoshuaLuckers
approved these changes
Jan 23, 2022
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
What does it do?
Marks modX::parseChunk as deprecated to discourage its use, targeting removal with the next batch of breaking changes, in 4.0.
Why is it needed?
As discussed in #12433, parseChunk doesn't behave how one would expect it to, and is a lesser alternative to getChunk. That means we're better off without it, however we can't just remove it out-right.
How to test
Not applicable.
Related issue(s)/PR(s)
Fixes #12433