* Clarify pathname docs, follow spec with fragments
- Valid URLs must not contain a `#` within its fragment.
https://github.com/MithrilJS/mithril.js/issues/2445
- Our docs were a little confusing and misleading - `m.pathname` isn't
aware of URLs, just path names.
- Removed the relevant extension to `m.parseQueryString` required to
support the hash parsing extension. Now we just shave it off and
ignore it.
- Fix support for arbitrary prefixes, so prefixes like `?#` are
handled correctly.
- Add a bunch of tests to cover various areas of confusion and unusual
edge cases.
* Update with PR [skip ci]
Fixes#2360Fixes#1138Fixes#1788 a little less hackishly
Probably fixes a few other issues I'm not aware of.
This more or less goes with @lhorie's comment here, just with a minor name
change from `query` to `params`:
https://github.com/MithrilJS/mithril.js/issues/1138#issuecomment-231363395
Specifically, here's what this patch entails:
- I changed `data` and `useBody` to `params` and `body` in `m.request`.
Migration is trivial: just use `params` or `body` depending on which you
intend to send. Most servers do actually care where the data goes, so you can
generally pretty easily translate this accordingly. If you *really* need the
old behavior, pass the old value in `params` and if `method === "GET"` or
`method === "TRACE"`, also in `body`.
- I opened up all methods to have request bodies.
- I fixed `m.parseQueryString` to prefer later values over earlier values and
to ensure that objects and arrays are persisted across both hash and query
param parsing. That method also accepts an existing key/value map to append
to, to simplify deduplication.
- I normalized path interpolation to be identical between routes and requests.
- I no longer include interpolated values in query strings. If you need to
duplicate values again, rename the interpolation to be a distinct property
and pass the value you want to duplicate as it.
- I converted `m.route` to use pre-compiled routes instead of its existing
system of dynamic runtime checking. This shouldn't have a major effect on
performance short-term, but it'll ease the migration to built-in userland
components and make it a little easier to reconcile. It'll also come handy
for large numbers of routes.
- I added support for matching routes like `"/:file.:ext"` or
`"/:lang-:region"`, giving each defined semantics.
- I added support for matching against routes with static query strings, such
as `"/edit?type=image": { ... }`.
- I'm throwing a few new informative errors.
- And I've updated the docs accordingly.
I also made a few drive-by edits:
- I fixed a bug in the `Stream.HALT` warning where it warned all but the first
usage when the intent was to warn only on first use.
- Some of the tests were erroneously using `Stream.HALT` when they should've
been using `Stream.SKIP`. I've fixed the tests to only test that
`Stream.HALT === Stream.SKIP` and that it only warns on first use.
- The `m.request` and `m.jsonp` docs signatures were improved to more clearly
explain how `m.request(url, options?)` and `m.jsonp(url, options?)` translate
to `m.request(options)` and `m.jsonp(options)` respectively.
-----
There is some justification to these changes:
- In general, it matters surprisingly more than you would expect how things
translate to HTTP requests. So the comment there suggesting a thing that
papers over the difference has led to plenty of confusion in both Gitter and
in GitHub issues.
- A lot of servers expect a GET with a body and no parameters, and leaving
`m.request` open to working with that makes it much more flexible.
- Sometimes, servers expect a POST with query parameters *instead* of a JSON
object. I've seen this quite a bit, even with more popular REST APIs like
Stack Overflow's.
- I've encountered a few servers that expect both parameters and a body, each
with distinct semantic meaning, so the separation makes it much easier to
translate into a request.
- Most of the time, path segments are treated individually, and URL-escaping
the contents is much less error-prone. It also avoids being potentially
lossy, and when the variable in question isn't trusted, escaping the path
segment enables you to pass it through the URL and not risk being redirected
to unexpected locations, avoiding some risks of vulnerabilities and client
side crashes.
If you really don't care how the template and parameters translate to an
eventual URL, just pass the same object for the `params` and `body` and use
`:param...` for each segment. Either way, the more explicit nature should help
a lot in making the intent clearer, whether you care or not.
