| Dir : /proc/self/root/opt/alt/ruby21/lib64/ruby/gems/2.1.0/doc/rack-1.6.4/ri/ |
| Server: Linux ngx353.inmotionhosting.com 4.18.0-553.22.1.lve.1.el8.x86_64 #1 SMP Tue Oct 8 15:52:54 UTC 2024 x86_64 IP: 209.182.202.254 |
| Dir : //proc/self/root/opt/alt/ruby21/lib64/ruby/gems/2.1.0/doc/rack-1.6.4/ri/page-KNOWN-ISSUES.ri |
U:RDoc::TopLevel[ i I"KNOWN-ISSUES:ETcRDoc::Parser::Simpleo:RDoc::Markup::Document: @parts[S:RDoc::Markup::Heading: leveli: textI"(Known issues with Rack and ECMA-262;To: RDoc::Markup::BlankLine o:RDoc::Markup::List: @type: BULLET: @items[o:RDoc::Markup::ListItem: @label0;[o: RDoc::Markup::Paragraph;[ I"RMany users expect the escape() function defined in ECMA-262 to be compatible ;TI"Pwith URI. Confusion is especially strong because the documentation for the ;TI"Nescape function includes a reference to the URI specifications. ECMA-262 ;TI"Lescape is not however a URI escape function, it is a javascript escape ;TI"Tfunction, and is not fully compatible. Most notably, for characters outside of ;TI"Dthe BMP. Users should use the more correct encodeURI functions.;T@ S; ; i; I"+Known issues with Rack and Web servers;T@ o; ;;;[o;;0;[ o;;[I"ELighttpd sets wrong SCRIPT_NAME and PATH_INFO if you mount your ;TI"EFastCGI app at "/". This can be fixed by using this middleware:;T@ o:RDoc::Markup::Verbatim;[I"!class LighttpdScriptNameFix ;TI" def initialize(app) ;TI" @app = app ;TI" end ;TI" ;TI" def call(env) ;TI"L env["PATH_INFO"] = env["SCRIPT_NAME"].to_s + env["PATH_INFO"].to_s ;TI"! env["SCRIPT_NAME"] = "" ;TI" @app.call(env) ;TI" end ;TI" end ;T: @format0o;;[I"8Of course, use this only when your app runs at "/".;T@ o;;[I"LSince lighttpd 1.4.23, you also can use the "fix-root-scriptname" flag ;TI"in fastcgi.server.;T@ S; ; i; I"0Known conflicts regarding parameter parsing;T@ o;;[I"O* Many users have differing opinions about parameter parsing. The current ;TI"P parameter parsers in Rack are based on a combination of the HTTP and CGI ;TI"S specs, and are intended to round-trip encoding and decoding. There are some ;TI"A choices that may be viewed as deficiencies, specifically: ;TI"U - Rack does not create implicit arrays for multiple instances of a parameter ;TI"5 - Rack returns nil when a value is not given ;TI"> - Rack does not support multi-type keys in parameters ;TI"R These issues or choices, will not be fixed before 2.0, if at all. They are ;TI"R very major breaking changes. Users are free to write alternative parameter ;TI"Q parsers, and their own Request and Response wrappers. Moreover, users are ;TI" encouraged to do so.;T;0: @file@:0@omit_headings_from_table_of_contents_below0