-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 32.2k
bpo-29979: Rewrite cgi.parse_multipart to make it consistent with FieldStorage #991
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Merged
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
8 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
f626fff
Rewrite parse_multipart to make it consistent with FieldStorage
77585f7
Update whatsnew and NEWS
7b398f1
Remove mention of FieldStorage in docstring + more explicit comment o…
9a1a0aa
Merge branch 'master' into cgi_parse_multipart
PierreQuentel 38c1af5
Merge branch 'master' into cgi_parse_multipart
PierreQuentel e9d4f3e
Update cgi.rst
PierreQuentel c6818e5
Update 3.7.rst
PierreQuentel 5026392
Merge branch 'master' into cgi_parse_multipart
PierreQuentel File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Now that this is using FieldStorage, a nested multipart parsing example in test would be a great addition. Please see if this can be included.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@orsenthil
Thanks for the comments.
I have very little information about nested multiparts, I don't think they are used very much. Could we postpone this specific point for a later PR ? For the moment I want to add the support of "application/json" requests, which is more important IMO.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I've reviewed the updated changes. Yes, the test for multipart parsing could come next (not in this PR).
I will commit this today. Thanks ! @PierreQuentel .
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Fine, thank you !
I have fixed the issues detected by CI checks.