On Apr 9, 2010, at 8:25 AM, Thadeus Burgess wrote:
> Just as long as its a variable we have to flag on, and web2py
> continues to work like it always has :)
That's the plan.
>
> -Thadeus
>
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 10:17 AM, Jonathan Lundell wrote:
>> On Apr 9, 2010, at 6:16 AM, De
Just as long as its a variable we have to flag on, and web2py
continues to work like it always has :)
-Thadeus
On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 10:17 AM, Jonathan Lundell wrote:
> On Apr 9, 2010, at 6:16 AM, DenesL wrote:
>
>> I like the semicolon idea.
>> But doesn't it imply changing web2py, anywher
On Apr 9, 2010, at 8:09 AM, mdipierro wrote:
> Right not if there is a ; the URL does not pass validation so ; is
> simply not allowed. We can write this so that if ; is present the new
> method for parsing is used and urls generated by URL would always
> follow the new convention. Old convention
On Apr 9, 2010, at 6:16 AM, DenesL wrote:
> I like the semicolon idea.
> But doesn't it imply changing web2py, anywhere where args and vars are
> used, like the URL function?.
The URL function, yes, because it's basically the rewrite-out handler. Nobody
else should care, because the fields have
Right not if there is a ; the URL does not pass validation so ; is
simply not allowed. We can write this so that if ; is present the new
method for parsing is used and urls generated by URL would always
follow the new convention. Old convention would still work. I do not
see any ambiguity.
On Apr
I like the semicolon idea.
But doesn't it imply changing web2py, anywhere where args and vars are
used, like the URL function?.
On Apr 8, 2:22 pm, mdipierro wrote:
> I think if ; is present it be used by default to delimit the args
> since there cannot be confusion there
>
> /a/c/f.ext;a0/a1/a2
I think if ; is present it be used by default to delimit the args
since there cannot be confusion there
/a/c/f.ext;a0/a1/a2
/a/c/f/a0/a1/a2.ext
should be parsed in the same way.
routes_in and routes_out should not be affected since they only
rewrite the URL before web2py interprets it.
On Apr 8
I just want it to be able to routes_in on both with ; and without ;.
This is because my blog is indexed on google, and I want my old links
to still work If I moved over to the ; method.
-Thadeus
On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 11:56 AM, Jonathan Lundell wrote:
> On Apr 8, 2010, at 9:37 AM, Thadeus B
On Apr 8, 2010, at 9:37 AM, Thadeus Burgess wrote:
> How will we be able to configure to use one or the other?
I'm thinking an alternative variable in routes.py.
Also, there would be (I think) a provision for application-specific routes.py
files, so once the application is resolved at the top l
How will we be able to configure to use one or the other?
Will it be able to do "Both" at the same time (for routes_in of
course). I ask since certain web2py sites are scanned in google, you
don't want the old links to dis-appear.
-Thadeus
On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 11:30 AM, mdipierro wrote:
>
+1
On Apr 8, 11:25 am, Jonathan Lundell wrote:
> (Context: I've been working on URL parsing.)
>
> One of the difficulties that parsing web2py URLs presents is that the
> boundary between /a/c/f and args isn't explicit, along with the fact that
> pieces of /a/c/f can be implied (in particular wh
11 matches
Mail list logo
