j: Next unread message
k: Previous unread message
j a: Jump to all threads
j l: Jump to MailingList overview
On 12Apr2009 16:15, Mart S?mermaa email@example.com wrote: | On Sun, Apr 12, 2009 at 3:23 PM, Jacob Holm firstname.lastname@example.org wrote: | > Hi Mart | > >>> add_query_params('http://example.com/a/b/c?a=b', b='d', foo='/bar') | >> 'http://example.com/a/b/c?a=b&b=d&foo=%2Fbar < | >> http://example.com/a/b/c?a=b&b=d&foo=%2Fbar>' | >> | >> Duplicates are discarded: | > | > Why discard duplicates? They are valid and have a well-defined meaning. | | The bad thing about reasoning about query strings is that there is no | comprehensive documentation about their meaning. Both RFC 1738 and RFC 3986 | are rather vague in that matter. But I agree that duplicates actually have a | meaning (an ordered list of identical values), so I'll remove the bits that | prune them unless anyone opposes (which I doubt).
+1 from me, with the following suggestion: it's probably worth adding the to doco that people working with dict-style query_string params should probably go make a dict or OrderedDict and use:
just to make the other use case obvious.
An alternative would be to have add_ and append_ methods with set and list behaviour. Feels a little like API bloat, though the convenience function can be nice.
The wonderous pulp and fibre of the brain had been substituted by brass and iron; he had taught wheelwork to think. - Harry Wilmot Buxton 1832, referring to Charles Babbage and his difference engine.