Re: [Chicken-users] bug update-uri in uri-common

[Kristian Lein-Mathisen]

If we go for (b), we could also provide a normalize-uri-port which sets it to #f if it's already equal to the default port of its scheme. And perhaps an optional "normalize?" argument to the uri->string procedure?

K.

On Sun, Jun 8, 2014 at 8:16 PM, Evan Hanson <address@hidden> wrote:

On 2014-06-08 11:14, Peter Bex wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 07, 2014 at 09:01:01PM -0400, John Cowan wrote:
> > Peter Bex scripsit:
> >
> > > c) The port should not be reset, but the uri should be printed without
> > >     port if it's the default for this scheme.
> >
> > +1 for (c).
>
> hm, but if you really want to print http://foo:80/blabla, how
> should that work?

In that case I don't think it's unreasonable to expect the user to
define their own function to build a string from the URI's composite
parts. We have to pick a default behavior one way or the other, and
"without the port" seems like the better one to me.

Regards,

Evan

_______________________________________________
Chicken-users mailing list
address@hidden
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-users