Re: URL library?

From: Vinnie Falco (vinnie.falco_at_[hidden])
Date: 2020-01-21 15:51:08

On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 2:13 AM Andrey Semashev via Boost
<boost_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> I'd be more interested in a more generic URI library.
> Along with a few associated algorithms, e.g. those described in:
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3986

Yes, this library does that. I do not use the term "URI" because it is
confusing and pointless. They are all URLs now. My library follows the
RFC, except that I have renamed the top level production rules to
reflect this preference:

   URL           = scheme ":" hier-part [ "?" query ] [ "#" fragment ]
   URL-reference = URL / relative-ref
   absolute-URL  = scheme ":" hier-part [ "?" query ]

I didn't invent this idea, deprecating the word "URI" and using "URL"
consistently in its place is recommended by WhatWG.

> Why not uri and uri_view.

First, I don't use the term "uri" ever. But i think you're asking, why
not "url" and "url_view?" Because `url::url` and `url::url_view` look
bad, they repeat a word. Thus we have `url::view` and `url::value`,
which are sensible.

Thanks