Jason R. Coombs added the comment:
Thanks Vajraski for the patch (especially the tests).
A colleague reminded me of an aphorism by Raymond Hettinger from the recent
PyCon paraphrased: duck typing is superior to isinstance.
Maybe instead consider something like this:
diff -r 7f13d5ecf71f Lib/urllib/parse.py
--- a/Lib/urllib/parse.py Sun Sep 22 09:33:45 2013 -0400
+++ b/Lib/urllib/parse.py Thu Sep 26 18:52:18 2013 -0400
@@ -405,10 +405,9 @@
def urljoin(base, url, allow_fragments=True):
"""Join a base URL and a possibly relative URL to form an absolute
interpretation of the latter."""
- if not base:
- return url
- if not url:
- return base
+ if not base or not url:
+ # one of the inputs is empty, so simply concatenate
+ return base + url
base, url, _coerce_result = _coerce_args(base, url)
bscheme, bnetloc, bpath, bparams, bquery, bfragment = \
urlparse(base, '', allow_fragments)
This implementation is not only shorter and raises TypeErrors if the types
aren't compatible, but those errors are triggered by the underlying
implementation. Furthermore, if either the url or base were to be a duck-type
that met the necessary interface, it need not be a string subclass.
I don't feel strongly either way, but I'm slightly more inclined to accept the
simpler implementation. I'm interested in the everyone's thoughts on either
approach.
----------
_______________________________________
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.python.org/issue19094>
_______________________________________
_______________________________________________
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe:
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
