On Jan 30, 2011, at 10:29 AM, villas wrote: > >> I don't think that they'll be any cleaner or shorter either way. The only >> way you'll get trailing slashes (if we end up supporting them) is by asking >> for a URL with empty trailing args. If you don't want trailing slashes, then >> don't add empty args. > > Hi, I was mainly thinking of incoming urls being appended with slashes > externally and that we could ignore them, but as it has been pointed > out, a trailing slash already gives an empty arg, so I suppose we have > to keep that. Anyhow, it sounds like your thought process has covered > all the bases! :)
As it stands right now (in the trunk), we're not keeping the empty arg with a trailing slash, mainly because this appears to be a bug in the current implementation (which generally treats empty args as an error).
