David Faure dfaure at
Wed Feb 12 11:25:59 GMT 2003

Hash: SHA1

On Wednesday 12 February 2003 01:27, Dawit A. wrote:
> > Those are tests for broken urls, but the tests actually passed, so it is a
> > regression if such urls are not handled the same anymore.....
> Ehh... I take an issue with this.  If something behaved incorrectly and 
> returned one set of results and when it gets fixed it returns another, should 
> that be considered a regression ?? Even if it is, is it acceptable to support 
> wrong behavior in the name of previous compatibility ?
> I see no valid reason why KURL returns "a" as the path when the url specified 
> is "file:a"!  This is not only inappropriate, but completely wrong. The 
> reason we had filters in the first place is to fix such typos or add 
> workarounds if necessary and leave KURL unencumbered.

Not everything is about konqueror (which has such filters indeed).
I have seen apps which abuse KURL, e.g. if you want to pass "foo" in a method
that was meant to take urls (e.g. KRun methods). You want that KURL("foo").path()=="foo".
I'm sure there's code that does "file:"+path, even when path is relative.
Yes, this is all wrong usage of KURL, but what worked in 3.0 and 3.1... 
shouldn't be broken by 3.2.
Of course my point would be better made if I could remember where I saw such 
code... but my memory being what it is, that's not the case :)

KURL is such a central piece of KDE - you surely don't want to read all the code
that uses it, to check it won't be broken by this change. And IMHO no new bugs
is more important than rfc-conformant-kurl (we do kde for users, not for rfc writers :).

- -- 
David Faure -- faure at, dfaure at
Klarälvdalens Datakonsult AB, Platform-independent software solutions
Contributing to:,
KOffice-1.2.1 is available -
Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux)


More information about the kde-core-devel mailing list