[#3861] super — ts <decoux@...>
[#3862] Marshal.dump'ing OpenStruct objects — Mauricio Fern疣dez <batsman.geo@...>
Hi,
[#3881] mkdir, mkdir_p in FileUtils and mode — Florian Frank <flori@...>
Hello,
[#3907] Obtaining mode information on an IO object — Jos Backus <jos@...>
The attached patch implements IO#mode. This method returns the mode the IO
Hi,
On Tue, Dec 07, 2004 at 09:25:13AM +0900, nobu.nokada@softhome.net wrote:
Jos Backus wrote:
Hi,
On Thu, Dec 09, 2004 at 10:47:48AM +0900, nobu.nokada@softhome.net wrote:
On Thu, Dec 09, 2004 at 02:40:33PM +0900, James Britt wrote:
[#3914] Pathname needs a makeover — "Berger, Daniel" <Daniel.Berger@...>
Hi all,
[#3922] Incorrect escaping in strings produced by String::inspect — noreply@...
Bugs item #1173, was opened at 2004-12-08 17:35
[#3966] unknown node type 0 — Andrew Walrond <andrew@...>
I still get this happening a lot with my Rubyx linux ruby script.
This is a long standing bug in Ruby, and has been reported hundreds of times
Hi,
[#3975] Patches to test/unit — Ryan Davis <ryand-ruby@...>
I believe these are the minimal patches needed to make it possible to
[#3982] Win32: rb_sys_fail() - errno == 0 — Florian Gro<florgro@...>
Moin!
[#4000] 1.8.2 preview4 — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...>
Hello,
[#4009] cgi.rb -- more GET/POST stuff — mde@...26.com
First of all, I think it would be great, as Eustaquio suggests, to
GETs and POSTs are defined to be fairly different actions. I'd read
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Francis Hwang wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
First of all, the entire discussion of when GET is appropriate
mde@state26.com wrote:
[#4027] Allowing custom number literal suffixes? — Florian Gro<florgro@...>
Moin!
Hi,
Mathieu Bouchard wrote:
Mathieu Bouchard wrote:
I'm not sure I would advocate making Ruby's grammar even more
>
Brent Roman wrote:
> Brent Roman wrote:
Brent Roman wrote:
> Florian Gross wrote:
Mathieu Bouchard wrote:
Mathieu Bouchard wrote:
[#4033] Garbage collection trouble — Christian Neukirchen <chneukirchen@...>
Hello,
>>>>> "C" == Christian Neukirchen <chneukirchen@gmail.com> writes:
ts <decoux@moulon.inra.fr> writes:
>>>>> "C" == Christian Neukirchen <chneukirchen@gmail.com> writes:
[#4040] Extensions, Internal — Jgen Mangler <juergen.mangler@...>
Hi,
Re: [PATCH] cgi.rb -- more GET/POST stuff
Some more thoughts / clarification on cgi.rb. This might be a bit long ... While the question of when it's appropriate to use GET versus POST is interesting (BTW, I'm not sure I agree with the idea that you should always expect to be able to bookmark or e-mail URIs -- especially in a Web application environment), it's not really relevant to the problem I was describing with cgi.rb. I guess my poor choice of example (the session ID) is to blame for that. The problem is that cgi.rb does not allow you to use any query string variables at all, if you use the POST method. Take, for example, a URI which is pretty normal for any Front Controller / Page Controller setup for a Web app: /processingpage.rbx?module=account If I try to POST to this page, the initialize_query() function does not pick up the variables from the query string, so cgi['module'] is not there. There are, of course, a couple of workarounds -- e.g., submitting hidden form elements or parsing the data myself off cgi.rb's query_string environment variable. But other mainstream Web programming languages like PHP or ASP don't force me to do this -- query string vars show up properly whether I choose to use GET or POST to request a URI. Unless there is some specific reason that POSTs should ignore what's on the query string, it might be nice for Web programmers moving to Ruby if it were as easy as the other languages they have used -- and as intuitive as the rest of Ruby. Regarding Eustaquio's idea of having two separate hashes for GET and POST, I think it makes good sense too -- PHP and ASP have similar setups (PHP's $_GET and $_POST, and ASP's Request.QueryString and Request.Form), so you can distinguish between the two when you want to. But they also have a unified hash (PHP's $_REQUEST and ASP's Request) with everything in it. However, in practice, the only time I've ever actually needed to specify one or the other was with legacy code where the developer had made the confusing decision to use identically named varibles (with two different values), one on the query string and one in the form. I'm thinking this is probably not a great idea, and likely not something you should do all the time, anyway. If anybody has insight into how other Web programming languages handle GET/POST/Cookies, that might be helpful to know. I'm just using PHP and ASP as examples because it's what I know, and they are really widespread as Web languages. Hope I didn't put you folks to sleep. Thanks. Matthew