Ahhh, I am soooo regret that, I once noticed that post title "Python
2.6 Errata" but thought "who cares, I don't use Python2.6 at all", and
did not open and read its body. That causes my hours today. ~~>o<~~

Thank you for the info, Tim. Now I have a better understanding.


On Jan12, 10:55pm, Timothy Farrell <tfarr...@swgen.com> wrote:
> You can read about the bug and patch here:
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/web2py/browse_thread/thread/6d9e0e6eb7...
>
> -tim
>
> On 1/12/2010 8:52 AM, Iceberg wrote:
>
>
>
> > Hi pals,
>
> > When upgrading from web2py 1.73.1 (last svn version) to 1.74.5, I
> > encountered a malfunction of my old app. After some debug, I found out
> > that it is because web2py changes its behaviour when same name params
> > exist in both get_vars and post_vars. I don't know whether web2py 1.73
> > or 1.74 comply to HTTP RFC better, so I just write my observation
> > here.
>
> > My app happens to submit an "id=blah" via both GET and POST parameter,
> > so I will get:
> >      request.get_vars['id'] = '123' # for example
> >      request.post_vars['id'] = '123'
> > and in web2py 1.73.1, I do not need to care it is from GET or POST, I
> > just use:
> >      the_wanted_id = request.vars['id'] # it is '123'
>
> > But in web2py 1.74.x, or more precisely, since Revision: 24c5e2bef1
> > [1], same code about went wrong.
> >      not_the_wanted_id = request.vars['id'] # it is actually ['123',
> > '123']
>
> > I am not requesting to change the behaviour back to web2py 1.73 era,
> > but just hope to hear some comments about such subtle circumstance.
> > Thanks in advance!
>
> > Regards,
> > Iceberg
>
> > [1]:http://code.google.com/p/web2py/source/detail?r=24c5e2bef11cb1dc48eaa...
-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"web2py-users" group.
To post to this group, send email to web...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
web2py+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/web2py?hl=en.


Reply via email to