Re: URI plus File::Spec::Unix -- good idea or bad?

Bad idea. Generic methods both set and return ...

#!/usr/bin/perl  -- 

use strict;
use warnings;

use URI;

my $base = 'http://foobert.org/dir/odir';
my $file  = 'foo.html';
my $uri = URI->new($base);

local $\=$/;
print $uri->path_segments( $uri->path_segments, $file );
print $uri;
print $uri->host('I-RTFM.org');
print $uri;

__END__
dirodir
http://foobert.org/dir/odir/foo.html
foobert.org
http://I-RTFM.org/dir/odir/foo.html
[download]

Comment on Re: URI plus File::Spec::Unix -- good idea or bad? Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: URI plus File::Spec::Unix -- good idea or bad? by mreece (Friar) on Aug 25, 2006 at 16:35 UTC
`$uri->path_segments` is interesting and useful, but it doesn't solve the "behave the same whether $base ends with a slash or not" problem. change the code to `my $base = 'http://foobert.org/dir/odir/';` and you get `http://foobert.org/dir/odir//foo.html`, with two slashes!	[reply] [d/l] [select]
Re^3: URI plus File::Spec::Unix -- good idea or bad? by mreece (Friar) on Aug 25, 2006 at 16:55 UTC
however, this will do it :) `print $uri->path_segments( grep { $_ } $uri->path_segments, $file );` [download] uses grep to filter out the empty strings returned by path_segments. updated: fixed typo	[reply] [d/l]