I seem to recall that this has been on Eli's mind more some time and that he has something rearing to go.
I think that is probably a good idea and that this breakage here is a bit too dangerous. I'll revert the commit and put a new HTTP library on my list to code and discuss with Eli. Jay On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 11:08 AM, Robby Findler <[email protected] > wrote: > Oh, right. Pattern matching on url structs. If we want to keep that > working (which I think we do), then that ties our hands much more. > > I believe there are some other crufty things in net/url (having to do > with encodings?). > > Does it make sense to have a new library that does all of this right > from the start and then announce that we're going to stop supporting > net/url in a year or so, in favor of the new library? > > I see there is no net/http. so we could also do a better job with the > whole simple-script-for-downloading-a-file-over-http and perhaps other > things along those lines? > > Robby > > On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 12:05 PM, Jay McCarthy <[email protected]> > wrote: > > I thought about that too since there are few instances where people > pattern > > match on the URL struct. What would be a good name for the new field... > > url-maybe-query? > > > > On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 11:02 AM, Robby Findler > > <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> I don't think we want to change how the current url struct selectors > >> work when applied to url structs. > >> > >> You could probably get away with changing the url struct if you could > >> provide functions that act the way the old selectors used to work -- > >> does that help? > >> > >> Robby > >> > >> On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 12:00 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > jay has updated `master' from 6a99c93ebb to 9d8d36e568. > >> > http://git.racket-lang.org/plt/6a99c93ebb..9d8d36e568 > >> > > >> > >> > > >> > 7f9818b Jay McCarthy <[email protected]> 2011-11-23 10:35 > >> > : > >> > | This fixes 10497 and potentially breaks programs that assume the > query > >> > of a URL is always a list. I have fixed uses in the Web Server, which > I > >> > expect is the major thing affected, but much more could be. Therefore > I am > >> > skeptical this is a good idea just for the representation of ?. So, > I'd like > >> > other people to review the change and let me know if they think I > should > >> > revert it. > >> > : > > > > >
_________________________________________________ For list-related administrative tasks: http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/dev
