urllib.parse can't handle URIs with empty #fragments. The fragment is removed and not reconsituted.

http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3986#section-3.5 permits empty fragment strings:

  URI-reference = [ absoluteURI | relativeURI ] [ "#" fragment ]
  fragment    = *( pchar / "/" / "?" )

And even specifies component recomposition to distinguish from not being defined and being an empty string:

http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3986#section-5.3

Note that we are careful to preserve the distinction between a
component that is undefined, meaning that its separator was not
present in the reference, and a component that is empty, meaning that
the separator was present and was immediately followed by the next
component separator or the end of the reference.

This seems to be caused by missing components being represented as '' instead of None.

>>> import urllib.parse
>>> urllib.parse.urlparse("http://example.com/file#")
ParseResult(scheme='http', netloc='example.com', path='/file', params='', query='', fragment='')
>>> urllib.parse.urlunparse(urllib.parse.urlparse("http://example.com/file#"))
'http://example.com/file'

>>> urllib.parse.urlparse("http://example.com/file#").geturl()
'http://example.com/file'

>>> urllib.parse.urlparse("http://example.com/file# ").geturl()
'http://example.com/file# '

>>> urllib.parse.urlparse("http://example.com/file#nonempty").geturl()
'http://example.com/file#nonempty'

>>> urllib.parse.urlparse("http://example.com/file#").fragment
''

The suggested fix is to use None instead of '' to represent missing components, and to check with "if fragment is not None" instead of "if not fragment".

The same issue applies to query and authority. E.g.

http://example.com/file? != http://example.com/file

... but be careful about the implications of

file:///file != file:/file

I tried to make a patch for this, but I found it quite hard as the urllib/parse.py is fairly low-level, e.g. it is constantly encoding/decoding bytes and strings within each URI component. Basically the code assumes there are tuples of strings, with support for both bytes and strings baked in later.

As you see in

https://github.com/stain/cpython/compare/issue-2285-urllib-empty-fragment?expand=1

the patch in parse.py is small - but the effect of that in test_urlparse.py is a bit bigger, as lots of test are testing for the result of urlsplit to have '' instead of None. It is uncertain how much real-life client code also check for '' directly. ("if not p.fragment" would of course still work - but "if p.fragment == ''" would not work anymore.

I therefore suggest an alternative to my patch above - to add some boolean fields like has_fragment, thus the existing component fields can keep their backwards compatible '' and b'' values even when a component is actually missing, and yet allowing geturl() to reconstitute the URI according to the RFC.

I also liked the idea of returning None to distinguish a missing URL component from an empty-but-present component, and it would make them more consistent with the “username” and “password” fields. But I agree it would break backwards compabitility too much. The idea of “has_fragment” etc flags might work. The ParseResult etc class signatures could be expanded like this:

SplitResult(scheme, netloc, path, query, fragment, *, has_netloc=None, has_query=None, has_fragment=None)

>>> url1 = SplitResult("http", "localhost", "/path", query="", fragment="")
>>> url1.has_netloc
True
>>> url1.has_fragment
False
>>> url2 = SplitResult("http", "localhost", "/path", query="", fragment="", has_fragment=True)
>>> url2.has_fragment
True
>>> url2.has_query
False
>>> url2.geturl()
"http://localhost/path#"

Is it also worth adding “has_params” for urlparse()?

There have been a few recent bug reports (bpo-23505, bpo-23636) that may be solved by the has_netloc proposal. So I am posting a patch implementing it. The changes were a bit more involved than I anticipated, but should still be usable.

I reused some of Stian’s tests, however the results are slightly different in my patch, matching the existing behaviour:

• Never sets netloc, query, fragment to None
• Always leaves hostname as None rather than ""
• Retains username, password and port components in netloc
• Converts hostname to lowercase

Unfortunately I discovered that you cannot add __slots__ to namedtuple() subclasses; see bpo-17295 and bpo-1173475. Therefore in my patch I have removed __slots__ from the SplitResult etc classes, so that those classes can gain the has_netloc etc attributes.

I chose to make the default has_netloc value based on existing urlunsplit() behaviour:

>>> empty_netloc = ""
>>> SplitResult("mailto", empty_netloc, "chris@example.com", "", "").has_netloc
False
>>> SplitResult("file", empty_netloc, "/path", "", "").has_netloc
True

I found out that the “urllib.robotparser” module uses a urlunparse(urlparse()) combination to normalize URLs, so had to be changed. This is a backwards incompatibility of this proposal.

I've done an initial pass in Rietveld and left some comments, mostly around docs. Here are some additional questions though:

Given has_* flags can be inferred during instantiation of *Result classes, is there a reason to have them writable, meaning is there a reason to add them to the __init__ methods?

I'd also like to see this logic moved out of _NetlocResultMixinBase. I'm assuming it was put there for backwards compatibility which is understandable, but I don't think it makes sense to add such logic to a mixin who's purpose is additional functionality around the netloc attribute. This one's a little more subjective though, but here's a rough idea of what I'm thinking:

SplitResult = namedtuple('SplitResult', 'scheme netloc path query fragment')
class _SplitResultBase(SplitResult):
    def __new__(cls, scheme, netloc, path, query, fragment):
        inst = super().__new__(cls, scheme, netloc, path, query, fragment)
        inst.has_netloc = bool(netloc)
        return inst

>>> s = urlsplit('http://example.com/foo/bar/')
>>> s.has_netloc
True

This keeps backwards compatibility, but also adds the additional logic to the bases rather than in the mixins. I might also split out the logic into helper functions in order to avoid duplication between _SplitResultBase and _ParseResultBase.

This method also avoids the dependency on ordering of base classes as well as the addition of a variadic signature to (Split|Parse)Result.__init__.

Thoughts?

## Inferring flags ##

The whole reason for the has_netloc etc flags is that I don’t think we can always infer their values, so we have to explicitly remember them. Consider the following two URLs, which I think should both have empty “netloc” strings for backwards compatibility, but should be handled differently by urlunsplit():

>>> urlsplit("////evil.com").netloc
''
>>> urlsplit("////evil.com").has_netloc
True
>>> urlunsplit(urlsplit("////evil.com"))  # Adds “//” back
'////evil.com'
>>> urlsplit("/normal/path").netloc
''
>>> urlsplit("/normal/path").has_netloc
False
>>> urlunsplit(urlsplit("/normal/path"))  # Does not add “//”
'/normal/path'

## _NetlocResultMixinBase abuse ##

The _NetlocResultMixinBase class is a common class used by the four result classes I’m interested in. I probably should rename it to something like _SplitParseMixinBase, since it is the common base to both urlsplit() and urlparse() results.

>>> urlsplit("////evil.com").netloc
''
>>> urlsplit("////evil.com").has_netloc
True
>>> urlunsplit(urlsplit("////evil.com")) # Adds “//” back
'////evil.com'

RFC 3986, section 3.3:

If a URI contains an authority component, then the path component
must either be empty or begin with a slash ("/") character. If a URI
does not contain an authority component, then the path cannot begin
with two slash characters ("//").

Because this is a backwards incompatible behavioural change and is just as invalid as far as the RFC goes, I think that the current behaviour should be preserved. Even though it's still incorrect, it won't break existing code if left unchanged.

_NetlocResultMixinBase abuse

The _NetlocResultMixinBase class is a common class used by the four result classes I’m interested in. I probably should rename it to something like _SplitParseMixinBase, since it is the common base to both urlsplit() and urlparse() results.

I think I'm coming around to this and realizing that it's actually quite close to my proposal, the major difference being the additional level of hierarchy in mine. My issue was mostly due to the addition of the variadic signature in the docs (i.e. line 407 here: http://bugs.python.org/review/22852/diff/14176/Doc/library/urllib.parse.rst) which led me to believe a nonsensical signature would be valid. After looking at it again, __new__ is still bound to the tuple's signature, so you still get the following:

>>> SplitResult('scheme','authority','path','query','fragment','foo','bar','baz')
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "<stdin>", line 1, in <module>
  File "/Volumes/src/p/cpython/Lib/urllib/parse.py", line 137, in __new__
    self = super().__new__(type, *pos, **kw)
TypeError: __new__() takes 6 positional arguments but 9 were given

So I'm less opposed to this as-is. I would like to see the "*" removed from the docs though as it's misleading in the context of each of (Split|Parse)Result. I do agree that renaming _NetlocResultMixinBase would be helpful, but it might also be nice (from a pedant's point of view) to remove "mixin" altogether if the __new__ implementation stays as-is.

Regarding unparsing of "////evil.com", see bpo-23505, where the invalid behaviour is pointed out as a security issue. This was one of the bugs that motivated me to make this patch. I cannot imagine some existing code (other than an exploit) that would be broken by restoring the empty “//” component; do you have an example?

Why do you think the asterisks (*) in the Split/ParseResult signatures are misleading? I am trying to document that the has_ flags are keyword-only parameters. I avoided making them positional parameters, as they are not part of the underlying tuple object.

I avoided making them positional parameters, as they are not part of the underlying tuple object.

Ignore me, I was off my face and you're absolutely correct.

I cannot imagine some existing code (other than an exploit) that would be broken by restoring the empty “//” component; do you have an example?

You're likely right about the usage (I can't think of a plausible use case at any rate).

At first read of bpo-23505, I think I agree with the changes you've made to allow for successful round-tripping, but I'd think it'll have to be vetted by at least more than one core dev.

Posting patch v2 with these changes:

• Split out scheme documentation fixes to bpo-23684.
• Renamed _NetlocResultMixinBase → _SplitParseBase
• Explained the default values of the flags better, and what None means
• Changed to Demian’s forward-looking “version changed” notices. I decided it is okay because the same information can be inferred.
• Tweaked urlunsplit() and urlunparse() descriptions

Anyone want to review my new patch? This is a perennial issue; see all the duplicates I just linked.

See also bpo-6631

I just learned of this issue. Rather than adding has_netloc, etc. attributes, why not use None to distinguish missing values as is preferred above, but add a new boolean keyword argument to urlparse(), etc. to get the new behavior (e.g. "allow_none" to parallel "allow_fragments")?

It seems like this would be more elegant, IMO, because it would lead to the API we really want. For example, the ParseResult(), etc. signatures and repr() values would be simpler. Changing the default value of the new keyword arguments would also provide a clean and simple deprecation pathway in the future, if desired.

I like this option. I suppose choosing which option to take is a compromise between compatiblity and simplicity. In the short term, the “allows_none” option requires user code to be updated. In the long term it may break compatibility. But the “has_netloc” etc option is more complex.

I found another related issue (bpo-37969).

I also filed one myself (bpo-40938).

---

One thing against the 'has_netloc' etc. solution is that
while it guarantees round-trips (urlunsplit(urlsplit('...')) etc.),
it is conditional on 'urlunsplit' getting 'SplitResult' object.
When 'urlunsplit' gets a normal tuple, it is helpless.

See also bpo-46337

I opened issue #99962 discussing alternative solutions based on a new representation (instead of the empty string) for undefined components.

But after learning about this issue, I think that @cjerdonek’s solution using a None representation for undefined components with a new flag parameter (allow_none) in the parsing functions (urldefrag(), urlparse(), and urlsplit()) is the best solution, as it is the simplest representation for undefined components, it is backward compatible with the flag parameter defaulting to the legacy behaviour, and it does not create yet another parsing function.

@cjerdonek’s solution is not unprecedented in the standard library. For instance @erlend-aasland has recently chosen a similar approach in PR #93823 for implementing the new PEP-249 manual commit mode in the sqlite3 module, by introducing a new autocommit parameter in the connect() function which changes the behaviour of the Connection.__init__(), Connection.execute(), Connection.executemany(), Connection.executescript(), Connection.commit(), Connection.rollback(), and Connection.close() methods.