Comment format (FORMAT_...) was correctly being processed when the
manual grading happened as the result of a form submission. It was only
when done using the question_usage or question_attempt API method that
there was no way to specify the format. (Although I think the only place
this API as used was in the unit tests.)
Note that question_attempt::manual_grade API had to change, but I don't
think that is a real API change. Calling code should be using
question_usage::question_attempt, which is backwards compatible.
Note that now, if you don't pass format, then no error is generated, but
a developer debugging message is generated.
In the case where either a question_attempt had not steps, or a
question_usage had not question_attempts, the load_from_records methods
could get stuck in an infinite loop.
This fix ensures that does not happen, with unit tests to verify it. At
the same time, I noticed an error in the existing tests, which this
patch fixes.
The code to upgrade attempts from before Moodle 2.0 to 2.1 created
attempt data that was not exactly the same as a new attempt created in
2.1+. This did not matter very much - revew and the quiz reports all
worked OK - but it broke on re-grade.
These changes detect the problem data in the re-grade code, an apply a
work-around so that the re-grade gives the correct result.
The problem was mostly that, in the past, we did not worry if
question_attempt_step.id changed during regrade (because we deleted the
old step row and inserted a new one). However, now that steps can have
associated files, we can't be that slack, becuase the step id is used as
the file itemid.
So, now, we have to update the existing rows during a regrade. We do
this by having the question engine tell the question_engine_unit_of_work
that the step has first been deleted, and then added back. Then we make
the unit-of-work spot that delete + add = update.
This also means that during regrading, we have to pass around some extra
ids so that new steps know the id of the step they are replacing.
Naturally, this requires some quite trickly logic, so I finally got
around to writing unit tests for question_engine_unit_of_work, which is
a good thing.
Along the way I also got around to renaming
question_attempt->set_number_in_usage, which got missed out when
everthing else was renamed to slot ages ago.
Finally, while working on this code, I noticed and fixed some PHPdoc
comments.
The standard themes do not use this for anything, but it makes it easier for themers to do cool stuff.
Also improve the API for getting the question state class.
Tim Hunt