Re: Re: Re: Re: incorrect use of URI::Escape?

The code I offered is exactly the same as uri_escape() simply because if you are going to suggest an alternative it seems logical to KISS. I agree with you that URI:Escape is not optimal and always roll my own. Like you I do not exclude ; & + and = (also ?)

I think a good working knowledge of URI encodings is an important thing for anyone who works with CGI

cheers

tachyon

s&&rsenoyhcatreve&&&s&n.+t&"$'$`$\"$\&"&ee&&y&srve&&d&&print

Comment on Re: Re: Re: Re: incorrect use of URI::Escape?

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: incorrect use of URI::Escape? by Juerd (Abbot) on Apr 13, 2002 at 19:02 UTC
The code I offered is exactly the same as uri_escape() An old version, apparently. I advise you to upgrade URI::Escape to version 1.16 or later, and update all of your scripts that do not encode reserved characters, or at least your post ;) Just FYI: I peeked at URI::Escape's source too, but I already have the new version... Update s/advice/advise/ per crazyinsomniac's advice to wear a hat. - Yes, I reinvent wheels. - Spam: Visit eurotraQ.	[reply]

Replies are listed 'Best First'.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: incorrect use of URI::Escape?
by Juerd (Abbot) on Apr 13, 2002 at 19:02 UTC

The code I offered is exactly the same as uri_escape()

An old version, apparently. I advise you to upgrade URI::Escape to version 1.16 or later, and update all of your scripts that do not encode reserved characters, or at least your post ;)

Just FYI: I peeked at URI::Escape's source too, but I already have the new version...

Update s/advice/advise/ per crazyinsomniac's advice to wear a hat.

- Yes, I reinvent wheels.
- Spam: Visit eurotraQ.

[reply]