On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 04:00:16PM -0600, Sasha Pachev wrote: > > For replace-header, I'm seeing multiple usages. The term "replace" makes > > me think it will remove all instances and put one instead. But then, how > > to define what the input is ? > > > > Maybe we could have two actions with different effects : > > - replace-header : iterate over all header *lines* matching the same > > name and apply the rule to the whole line. That will work for > > set-cookie for example ; This means that '^' and '$' match the > > beginning and end of the line. > > > > - modify-header : iterate over all header *values* of all header > > lines, and apply the rule to the value. That will work for all > > other ones. This means that '^' and '$' match the beginning and > > end of a value, possibly delimited by commas. > > > > That could also make it easier to manipulate attributes present with > > certain headers. > > > > Do you think that would be OK ? > > > > Willy > > > > Sounds like a good idea. To clarify, if we have > > replace-header Foo-Header (.*) $1bar > > Input: > > Foo-Header: a > Foo-Header: b > > Output: > > Foo-Header: abbar
No, it would not concatenate the headers, otherwise it breaks set-cookie. For simple headers like above, you'd get the same result with modify-header and replace-header. The difference is visible when the header contains a comma : Set-Cookie: A=B; expires=Wed, 21 May 2014 05:11:16 GMT Set-Cookie: C=D; expires=Wed, 21 May 2014 05:11:16 GMT replace-header Set-Cookie (.*) \1;bar would give : Set-Cookie: A=B; expires=Wed, 21 May 2014 05:11:16 GMT; bar Set-Cookie: C=D; expires=Wed, 21 May 2014 05:11:16 GMT; bar modify-header Set-Cookie (.*) \1;bar would give : Set-Cookie: A=B; expires=Wed; bar, 21 May 2014 05:11:16 GMT; bar Set-Cookie: C=D; expires=Wed; bar, 21 May 2014 05:11:16 GMT; bar Maybe the names are not the best choices, I don't know. At least I tend to remember which one does what this way. Willy
