A critique of cgi.escape
g.brandl-nospam at gmx.net
Tue Sep 26 09:20:12 CEST 2006
Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
> In message <mailman.559.1159188171.10491.python-list at python.org>, Fredrik
> Lundh wrote:
>> Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>>> Georg Brandl wrote:
>>>>> A function is broken if its implementation doesn't match the
>>>> or if it doesn't match the designer's intent. cgi.escape is old enough
>>>> that we would have noticed that, by now...
>>> _We_ certainly have noticed it.
>> you're not the designer...
> I don't have to be. Whoever the designer was, they had not properly thought
> through the uses of this function. That's quite obvious already, to anybody
> who works with HTML a lot. So the function is broken and needs to be fixed.
> If you're worried about changing the semantics of a function that keeps the
> same "cgi.escape" name, then fine. We delete the existing function and add
> a new, properly-designed one. _That_ will be a wake-up call to all the
> users of the existing function to fix their code.
What about the users who don't need to "fix" their code since it's working fine
and flawlessly with the current cgi.escape?
More information about the Python-list