Re: Possible bug in nevow.testutil.FakeRequest setHeaders and getHeaders

On 12:48 pm, [email protected] wrote:
>
>
>On Tue, 28 Sep 2010 17:52 +0000, [email protected] wrote:
>...
>>It's correct that setHeader and getHeader operate on different data
>>sets.  Less confusing names for what the two methods do would have 
>>been
>>setResponseHeader and getRequestHeader respectively.
>>
>>In newer versions of Twisted, the requests have two new attributes,
>>requestHeaders and responseHeaders, with various methods for 
>>inspection
>>and modification.  Nevow's Request class should inherit these. 
>>However
>>Nevow's FakeRequest probably doesn't.
>>
>>The right way to test for headers is probably to fix the FakeRequest
>>class so that it is more inspectable, and to verify that it actually
>>behaves in the same way as a real request object.
>
>Thanks for the explanation! I've done this for now:
>
>  class FakeRequest(nevow.testutil.FakeRequest):
>      def getResponseHeader(self, key):
>          return self.headers.get(key.lower())
>
>Should I put in a ticket requesting something like this?

Certainly.  Things are a little mixed up here though, let's see...

Twisted Web provides a base Request class.  Nevow subclasses it to 
create the request class all Nevow applications get.  Then Twisted Web 
also provides a FakeRequest, which isn't very good, and I think there is 
a ticket (in the Twisted tracker) for improving.  Then Nevow provides 
its own FakeRequest, not a subclass of Twisted's FakeRequest.  There 
probably needs to be a Nevow ticket for doing something about Nevow's 
FakeRequest class - in the short term, fixing these minor issues; but in 
the longer term, getting rid of it, and hopefully NevowRequest as well, 
makes a lot of sense.

Jean-Paul