[Python-Dev] Path object design
Andrew Dalke
dalke at dalkescientific.com
Mon Nov 6 00:43:42 CET 2006
Me [Andrew]:
> > As this is not a bug, I have added the feature request 1591035 to SF
> > titled "update urlparse to RFC 3986". Nothing else appeared to exist
> > on that specific topic.
Martin:
> Thanks. It always helps to be more specific; being less specific often
> hurts.
So does being more specific. I wasn't trying to report a bug in
urlparse. I figured everyone knew the problems existed. The code
comments say so and various back discussions on this list say so.
All I wanted to do what point out that two seemingly similar problems -
path traversal of hierarchical structures - had two different expected
behaviors. Now I've spent entirely too much time on specifics I didn't
care about and didn't think were important.
I've also been known to do the full report and have people ignore what
I wrote because it was too long.
> I find there is a difference between "urllib behaves
> non-intuitively" and "urllib gives result A for parameters B and C,
> but should give result D instead". Can you please add specific examples
> to your report that demonstrate the difference between implemented
> and expected behavior?
No.
I consider the "../" cases to be unimportant edge cases and
I would rather people fixed the other problems highlighted in the
text I copied from 4Suite's Uri.py -- like improperly allowing a
relative URL as the base url, which I incorrectly assumed was
legit - and that others have reported on python-dev, easily found
with Google.
If I only add test cases for "../" then I believe that that's all that
will be fixed.
Given the back history of this problem and lack of followup I
also believe it won't be fixed unless someone develops a brand
new module, from scratch, which will be added to some future
Python version. There's probably a compliance suite out there
to use for this sort of task. I hadn't bothered to look as I am
no more proficient than others here at Google.
Finally, I see that my report is a dup. SF search is poor. As
Nick Coghlan reported, Paul Jimenez has a replacement for urlparse.
Summarized in
http://www.python.org/dev/summary/2006-04-01_2006-04-15/
It was submitted in spring as a patch - SF# 1462525 at
http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=1462525&group_id=5470&atid=305470
which I didn't find in my earlier searching.
Andrew
dalke at dalkescientific.com
More information about the Python-Dev
mailing list