[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MODPYTHON-256?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Anders Blomdell updated MODPYTHON-256:
--------------------------------------
Attachment: modpython.patch
Add new method to delete a named field from FieldList and use it in
__setitem__/__delitem__
> util.FieldStorage __setitem__/__delitem__ might affect wrong field
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: MODPYTHON-256
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MODPYTHON-256
> Project: mod_python
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: core
> Affects Versions: 3.3.1
> Environment: Any
> Reporter: Anders Blomdell
> Attachments: modpython.patch
>
>
> When a FieldStorage has two (or more) Filed instances with the same value but
> different names, the behaviour of programs like this is (more or less)
> undefined:
> fs = util.FieldStorage(req)
> fs['id1'] = 'New value'
> del fs['id2']
> The reason for the undefinedness, is this code in __delitem__ (and the similar
> in __setitem__):
> table = self.list.table()
> values = table[key]
> for value in values:
> self.list.remove(value)
> What happens is that the self.list.remove(value) will remove the first field
> with a matching value, regardless of that fields name. Here is an example from
> real life:
> form.clear()
> form['id1'] = 'x'
> form['id2'] = 'x'
> form['id3'] = 'x'
> # Form now contains {'id2': [Field('id2', 'x')],
> # 'id3': [Field('id3', 'x')],
> # 'id1': [Field('id1', 'x')]}
> form['id2'] = 'y'
> # Form now contains {'id2': [Field('id2', 'x'), Field('id2', 'y')],
> # 'id3': [Field('id3', 'x')]}
> # which is not what I would have expected
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
