[thelist] query string manipulation

Joe Crawford jcrawford at avencom.com
Fri Sep 7 13:40:24 CDT 2001

".jeff" wrote:
> > My employer uses fuse
> i'm sorry -- seriously.  if you're using fusebox as it's described in the
> white papers then you're making your system needlessly complex.  you're also
> invoking unnecessary performance issues as well.
> however, if you've taken the principles outlined in that white paper and
> have applied them to create your own methodology, then you're probably
> better off.

We'll leave that issue alone.

> this custom tag really only facilitates pulling the values from the url and
> creating name/value pairs.  it does some other unholy stuff as well, but
> that's the main gist of it.
> if you're going to use this tag, *please* rewrite it for your own use.  the
> one provided by fusebox (at least at my last inspection) is pathetically
> slow.  it also does nasty things like return variables in the attributes
> scope of the calling template.  attributes isn't even a valid scope outside
> of a custom tag.  it also rescopes form and url variables to the attributes
> scope as well.  this may be handy for some, but is more than likely going to
> cause you serious headaches.

Hrm. Interesting. I'm not close enough to the guts to know which
versions we have used, but I know that our Fuse evangelist has modified
what we use. I don't know how much, or if he's addressed the issues you
bring up.

Know anyone who has, and has released it?

> > Jeff, your experience is interesting, but perplexing.
> > There may be other issues impacting the behavior you
> > saw, again perplexing.
> why perplexing?  is it because my experience suggests that maybe what most
> have thought all along about masking urls with slashes isn't exactly true?
> perplexed because if you believe me you'll feel a need to fix this in your
> applications which means alot of work?

I'm saying you have one data point, and some vague description of how
"some" search engines are working. In other words, I don't find your
anecdote compelling enough to make an action item. No need to impugn our
applications. :-) The apps we have working are, well, working. :-\ Most
of the things we have built using fuse type architecture are intranet
type applications - and for them we don't go to the trouble of munging
the URL.

> > I have to say, Apache's mod_rewrite kicks ass, and if
> > someone provided functionality comparable for IIS I'd
> > be a very happy man. All this mucking about in the
> > programming seems lost time given the power of
> > mod_rewrite. I find it frustrating that there's nothing
> > comparable for IIS side.
> i agree.  mod_rewrite kicks ass.  comparable functionality directly in iis
> would be fantastic.  however, it's not that big a deal to do it yourself.
> we just roll our own here.  create the logic once and use it from then on.
> it doesn't take us any longer to develop a site with directory style urls
> than it does to develop one that uses conventional querystrings.

I hear you.

	- Joe <http://artlung.com/>
...................  Joe Crawford \\ Web Design & Development
.....  mailto:jcrawford at avencom.com \\ http://www.avencom.com
.... San Diego \\ CA \\ USA \\ AVENCOM: Set Your Sites Higher

More information about the thelist mailing list