[5.4] Fix deprecated direct property access of model state

[heelc29]

Summary of Changes

Remove direct property access of model state
Change API model state also to State|Registery (missed in #39663)

Testing Instructions

Enable Log Deprecated API in Global Configuration

Visit different views

• open existing banner for editing in backend
• open existing banner for editing in backend (EDIT: banner client)
• open existing contact for editing in backend
• open existing article for editing in backend
• open saved versions of banner/contact/article
• open search terms (smart search) in backend
• open existing newsfeed for editing in backend
• open existing tag for editing in backend
• open existing user note for editing in backend
• open user contact form in frontend
• open content archive view in frontend
• open content category/categories view in frontend
• open featured articles view in frontend
• open archived articles view in frontend
• open create article view in frontend
• open privacy request/remind/confirm view in frontend
• open tag/tags view in frontend
• open user remind/reset view in frontend

Check log file logs/deprecated.php

Actual result BEFORE applying this Pull Request

direct property access of model state
deprecated Direct property access will not be supported in 7.0 in Joomla\CMS\MVC\Model\State::__get::Joomla\CMS\MVC\Model\State. - [ROOT]\libraries\src\MVC\Model\State.php - Line 94

Expected result AFTER applying this Pull Request

no direct property access of model state

Link to documentations

Please select:

• No documentation changes for docs.joomla.org needed
• Pull Request link for manual.joomla.org: TBD

[exlemor]

I have tested this item ✅ successfully on cdeadcf

I have successfully tested this PR. Thanks @heelc29 for the hard work.

1 comment/inquiry (I apologize in advance if my inquiry is stupid: while the messages Direct property access will not be supported in 7.0 in Joomla\CMS\MVC\Model\State:: etc are no longer in the deprecated.php log :D, I am noticing one quite similar (I understand it is different) and out of doubt, I prefer mentioning it in case it mattered:

deprecated Instead of an empty value, the default value will be returned in 7.0 in Joomla\CMS\MVC\Model\State::get::Joomla\CMS\MVC\Model\State. - [ROOT]/libraries/src/MVC/Model/State.php - Line 56

(I am seeing a LOT of those as well)

Is that a side-effect of this PR, or completely irrelevant/unrelated? Sorry, again for the dumb question.

---

_{This comment was created with the J!Tracker Application at issues.joomla.org/tracker/joomla-cms/45704.}

[heelc29]

deprecated Instead of an empty value, the default value will be returned in 7.0 in Joomla\CMS\MVC\Model\State::get::Joomla\CMS\MVC\Model\State. - [ROOT]/libraries/src/MVC/Model/State.php - Line 56

(I am seeing a LOT of those as well)

Is that a side-effect of this PR, or completely irrelevant/unrelated? Sorry, again for the dumb question.

@exlemor No worries at all - it's a valid question! In this case, it's not relevant to this PR, so no need to worry about it here.

But it looks like the code does not match the registry class. It compares against null and an empty string, while the deprecation message uses PHP’s empty() function, which also returns true for 0 (int/float) and empty arrays. @laoneo, should a PR be created?

joomla-cms/libraries/src/MVC/Model/State.php

Lines 53 to 64 in 36516f6

	public function get($path, $default = null)
	{
	if (isset($this->data->$path) && empty($this->data->$path)) {
	@trigger_error(
	\sprintf('Instead of an empty value, the default value will be returned in 7.0 in %s::%s.', __METHOD__, __CLASS__),
	E_USER_DEPRECATED
	);
	return $this->data->$path;
	}
	return parent::get($path, $default);
	}

https://github.com/joomla-framework/registry/blob/4452de9c66abfec59b535e27c62af3528a539311/src/Registry.php#L207-L209

[laoneo]

If I 'm not wrong, then made it like that because of bc reasons.

[richard67]

@heelc29 In your testing instructions you wrote:

• open existing banner for editing in backend
• open existing banner for editing in backend

I assume the 2nd one should be "banner client", is that right?

If so, could you update the instructions?

@exlemor Have you tested banner client, too?

[exlemor]

@heelc29 In your testing instructions you wrote:

• open existing banner for editing in backend
• open existing banner for editing in backend

I assume the 2nd one should be "banner client", is that right?

If so, could you update the instructions?

@exlemor Have you tested banner client, too?

Hello @richard67, I had followed instruction and stupid me I assumed it was a mistake (the double line) and I had not but I JUST did a second ago and validate that the message goes away with this PR which I just redownloaded as a Download Package so all good :).

[heelc29]

I assume the 2nd one should be "banner client", is that right?

Yes your right

[richard67]

I have tested this item ✅ successfully on 9aa1341

---

_{This comment was created with the J!Tracker Application at issues.joomla.org/tracker/joomla-cms/45704.}

[richard67]

RTC

---

_{This comment was created with the J!Tracker Application at issues.joomla.org/tracker/joomla-cms/45704.}