On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 1:55 PM, Glenn Linderman <v+pyt...@g.nevcal.com> wrote:
>
> On 8/18/2012 11:47 AM, MRAB wrote:
>
> I vote -0. The issue can also be addressed with a small and simple
> helper function that wraps urlparse and compares the query parameter. Or
> you cann urlencode() with `sorted(qs.items)` instead of `qs` in the
> application.
>
>
> Hm. That's actually a good point.
>
>
> Seems adequate to me. Most programs wouldn't care about the order, because 
> most web frameworks grab whatever is there in whatever order, and present it 
> to the web app in their own order.
>
> Programs that care, or which talk to web apps that care, are unlikely to want 
> the order from a non-randomized dict, and so have already taken care of 
> ordering issues, so undoing the randomization seems like a solution in search 
> of a problem (other than for poorly written test cases).
>


I am of the same thought too. Changing a behavior based on the test
case expectation, no matter if the behavior is a harmless change is
still a change. Coming to the point testing query string could be
useful in some cases and then giving weightage to the change seems
interesting use case, but does not seem to warrant a change. I think,
I like Christian Heimes suggestion that a wrapper to compare query
strings would be useful and in Guido's original test case, a tittle
test code change would have been good.

Looks like Guido has withdrawn the bug report too.

-- 
Senthil
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Reply via email to