John J Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:
urllib2.Request.headers is, in practice, an undocumented public
interface. Did you run the tests? There is room for improvement here,
but not in the way you suggest.
python[1]$ python2.6
iPython 2.6a1+ (trunk:62045M, Mar 30 2008, 03:07:23)
[GCC 4.1.3 20070929 (prerelease) (Ubuntu 4.1.2-16ubuntu2)] on linux2
Type "help", "copyright", "credits" or "license" for more information.
>>> import test.test_urllib2
>>> print test.test_urllib2.test_request_headers_dict.__doc__
The Request.headers dictionary is not a documented interface. It should
stay that way, because the complete set of headers are only accessible
through the .get_header(), .has_header(), .header_items() interface.
However, .headers pre-dates those methods, and so real code will be
using
the dictionary.
The introduction in 2.4 of those methods was a mistake for the same
reason:
code that previously saw all (urllib2 user)-provided headers in .headers
now sees only a subset (and the function interface is ugly and
incomplete).
A better change would have been to replace .headers dict with a dict
subclass (or UserDict.DictMixin instance?) that preserved the .headers
interface and also provided access to the "unredirected" headers. It's
probably too late to fix that, though.
Check .capitalize() case normalization:
>>> url = "http://example.com";
>>> Request(url, headers={"Spam-eggs": "blah"}).headers["Spam-eggs"]
'blah'
>>> Request(url, headers={"spam-EggS": "blah"}).headers["Spam-eggs"]
'blah'
Currently, Request(url, "Spam-eggs").headers["Spam-Eggs"] raises
KeyError,
but that could be changed in future.
>>>
----------
nosy: +jjlee
__________________________________
Tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<http://bugs.python.org/issue2275>
__________________________________
_______________________________________________
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
