Runtime: Isolates scope when resolving values to prevent overriding page data

[JohnathonKoster]

This PR closes #5667 by preventing a call to shouldProcessAsTag from overwriting the currently loaded data if it triggers an augmentation (such as when gathering the linked entry details within the bard field).

This PR also closes #5698 by isolating the parser/runtime when evaluating augmented arrays.

[jasonvarga]

In that issue, why would anything change on a subsequent page load?

[JohnathonKoster]

In that issue, why would anything change on a subsequent page load?

That I have not been able to successfully reproduce the subsequent request issue (the Runtime has no interactions with the cache directly), so that is something I'm still scratching my head about. I've tried with half-cache on/off, etc. but not been able to reproduce it on the latest 3.3 branch (before applying the data locking fix).

For the other part of the issue, you can reproduce the issue on the home page. The part that matters is that the entry you link to within the Bard field is not the same as the current entry, since those details have already been loaded internally and do not trigger an additional augmentation at that point in the request life-cycle.

[jasonvarga]

I followed the steps in his issue and it happens reliably for me.

On a non-home page, I can visit it, see the link. Hit refresh, it's gone, hit refresh it's still gone, and so on.

Clear the cache, refresh the page, it's back! Refresh, it's gone, refresh it's gone, and so on again.

Really bizarre.

[jasonvarga]

This PR does resolve it, though.

[JohnathonKoster]

I followed the steps in his issue and it happens reliably for me.

On a non-home page, I can visit it, see the link. Hit refresh, it's gone, hit refresh it's still gone, and so on.

Clear the cache, refresh the page, it's back! Refresh, it's gone, refresh it's gone, and so on again.

Really bizarre.

Interesting --- I will try again on a different machine later!

[jasonvarga]

#5698 was expected behavior and it happened the same way on the regex parser.
When checking out this branch anyway, the behavior never changed. Could you explain the change in more detail?

Edit: Nope, my misunderstanding.