Skip to content

http.client.HTTPMessage.getallmatchingheaders() always returns [] #49303

Closed as not planned

Description

@mwatkins
mannequin
BPO 5053
Nosy @orsenthil, @ezio-melotti, @bitdancer, @akheron, @berkerpeksag, @vadmium, @demianbrecht
Dependencies
  • bpo-5054: CGIHTTPRequestHandler.run_cgi() HTTP_ACCEPT improperly parsed
  • Files
  • http.client.py.patch: http.client.py.patch
  • remove-HTTPMessage.patch
  • Note: these values reflect the state of the issue at the time it was migrated and might not reflect the current state.

    Show more details

    GitHub fields:

    assignee = None
    closed_at = None
    created_at = <Date 2009-01-25.15:24:32.479>
    labels = ['type-bug', 'library']
    title = 'http.client.HTTPMessage.getallmatchingheaders() always returns []'
    updated_at = <Date 2017-03-19.05:40:00.847>
    user = 'https://bugs.python.org/mwatkins'

    bugs.python.org fields:

    activity = <Date 2017-03-19.05:40:00.847>
    actor = 'v+python'
    assignee = 'none'
    closed = False
    closed_date = None
    closer = None
    components = ['Library (Lib)']
    creation = <Date 2009-01-25.15:24:32.479>
    creator = 'mwatkins'
    dependencies = ['5054']
    files = ['12858', '38143']
    hgrepos = []
    issue_num = 5053
    keywords = ['patch']
    message_count = 12.0
    messages = ['80509', '80529', '80603', '80606', '80634', '148202', '164790', '164815', '164826', '235798', '236021', '289839']
    nosy_count = 11.0
    nosy_names = ['ggenellina', 'orsenthil', 'ezio.melotti', 'mwatkins', 'v+python', 'r.david.murray', 'catalin.iacob', 'petri.lehtinen', 'berker.peksag', 'martin.panter', 'demian.brecht']
    pr_nums = []
    priority = 'normal'
    resolution = None
    stage = 'patch review'
    status = 'open'
    superseder = None
    type = 'behavior'
    url = 'https://bugs.python.org/issue5053'
    versions = ['Python 3.4', 'Python 3.5']

    Activity

    1. mwatkins commented on Jan 25, 2009

      mwatkinsmannequin
      MannequinAuthor

      HTTPMessage.getallmatchingheaders() stopped working sometime after
      Python 3.0 release. In a recent (1 day ago) svn update the
      implementation says the method was copied from rfc822.message; the
      Python 3.x implementation is broken (iterates through self.keys instead
      of header values). I've not looked back to see where the change was
      introduced but I do know that it broke post 3.0 release.

      But more importantly than the flaw in this method, the functionality is
      duplicated elsewhere in Python 3.x.

      I propose either deprecating getallmatchingheaders() or if it is to be
      kept for compatibility, the fix can be simply replacing the method body
      with:

      self.get_all(name)

      The docstring for get_all (defined in email.message) affirms that its
      output is indeed compatible with that which was intended for
      getallmatchingheaders().

      get_all(self, name, failobj=None) method of client.HTTPMessage instance
      Return a list of all the values for the named field.

      These will be sorted in the order they appeared in the original
      message, and may contain duplicates.  Any fields deleted and
      re-inserted are always appended to the header list.
      
      If no such fields exist, failobj is returned (defaults to None).
      

      I've tested the use of get_all against one web server (QP) which runs on
      both Python 2.x and 3.x.

      As a result of the broken getallmatchingheaders() the QP web server now
      uses for the same purpose as getallmatchingheaders() instead:
      get_all(name) (defined in email.message.Message in Py3k and
      getheaders(name) (defined in rfc822.Message).

      See also issues on documentation and changed API in bpo-4773, bpo-3428

    2. added
      stdlibStandard Library Python modules in the Lib/ directory
      type-bugAn unexpected behavior, bug, or error
      on Jan 25, 2009
    3. mwatkins commented on Jan 25, 2009

      mwatkinsmannequin
      MannequinAuthor

      Trivial patch for http.client attached.

    4. changed the title [-]http.client.HTTPMessage.getallmatchingheaders()[/-] [+]http.client.HTTPMessage.getallmatchingheaders() always returns [][/+] on Jan 26, 2009
    5. ggenellina commented on Jan 27, 2009

      ggenellinamannequin
      Mannequin

      I think unified diffs are preferred.
      Isn't there an existing test for this method?

    6. mwatkins commented on Jan 27, 2009

      mwatkinsmannequin
      MannequinAuthor

      Re diffs, noted for the future.
      Re tests:

      # py3k-devel/Lib/test % grep -r getallmatchingheaders *

      ... Returns nothing, so not only does the email package need a test for
      this but so does http.client.

      Incidentally test_mailbox.py has a test for the proposed alternative -
      get_all(), which I noted above. That's another good reason for ridding
      the world of getallmatchingheaders() or at least simply calling
      get_all() from within getallmatchingheaders() if compatibility is a
      legitimate concern.

    7. mwatkins commented on Jan 27, 2009

      mwatkinsmannequin
      MannequinAuthor

      Further investigation ( grep -r getallmatchingheaders Lib/* ) reveals
      that in addition to having no tests, and being implemented incorrectly
      in http.client, getallmatchingheaders() is called only once, in
      http.server; that code is also broken (I reported this yesterday in
      bpo-5053).

      Maybe Python 3 is where getallmatchingheaders can make a graceful
      goodbye (and a 2to3 conversion added?).

    8. akheron commented on Nov 23, 2011

      @akheron
      Member

      bpo-13425 was marked as duplicate of this issue.

    9. cataliniacob commented on Jul 7, 2012

      cataliniacobmannequin
      Mannequin

      So, how to move this further?

      In bpo-13425 Petri proposes 4 alternatives, copying them here:

      1. Document the function to make it officially part of the public API
      2. Rename and move the function to http.server
      3. Leave it undocumented and just fix it
      4. Deprecate the function to be removed in 3.4 or 3.5 and "fix" it to always return [].

      I assume 4) meant:
      4) Deprecate the function to be removed in 3.4 or 3.5 and fix to do what its docstring specifies.

      My proposal is a more explicitly spelled out version 2):
      5) Remove the function, replace its usage in http.server.CGIHTTPRequestHandler and add a test for http.server.CGIHTTPRequestHandler that exercises the part that currently uses getallmatchingheaders since that's obviously broken now.

      The rationale for removal without deprecation is:

      • the function duplicates get_all so there's no reason to have it
      • it's probably not used by any (working) code because it just doesn't work

      Mike can you tell us how you found out about this breakage? Were you using the function? Did you use something else to workaround it since it's broken now?

      Senthil, Petri do you agree with option 5)? If so I can provide a patch.

    10. akheron commented on Jul 7, 2012

      @akheron
      Member

      My 4) actually meant that it should always return []. This is what it currently does, so it could be spelled out clearly in the code.

      IIRC, getallmatchingheaders() cannot be emulated one-to-one using get_all(), because it handles continuation lines differently. That's why I thought removing or deprecating without fixing it would be the best.

      rfc822.Message.getallmatchingheaders() is documented in Python 2, so removing it could make it harder to port code from Python 2 to Python 3. On the other hand, it's broken, so having it removed could actually make things better by not introducing hard-to-find bugs.

      All in all, I'm not sure what's the best thing to do.

    11. akheron commented on Jul 7, 2012

      @akheron
      Member

      The CGIHTTPRequestHandler fix and test would be the best thing to start with, though, as it's not related to the eventual fate of getallmatchingheaders().

    12. vadmium commented on Feb 12, 2015

      @vadmium
      Member

      I agree with Catalin’s proposal to remove it straight away. It just causes confusion, and to me the intended behaviour is not equivalent to Message.get_all(). I would remove the entire HTTPMessage class and replace it as an alias of email.message.Message.

    13. vadmium commented on Feb 15, 2015

      @vadmium
      Member

      Posting a patch to remove the entire HTTPMessage class. This assumes my patch for bpo-5054 is accepted, which will remove the only existing reference to getallmatchingheaders().

    14. vpython commented on Mar 19, 2017

      vpythonmannequin
      Mannequin

      It is certainly true that getallmatchingheaders is broken... because the data it is looking at has changed format.

      Here is a replacement that is as compatible as can be, based on the changed format.

              name = name.lower()
              n = len(name)
              lst = []
              for line, data in self.items():
                  if line.lower() == name:
                      lst.append(line + ': ' + data)
              return lst

      The changed format has merged continuation lines, and separated keys and values into a list of duplet tuples. Iterators keys, values, and items exist, keys are not necessarily unique.

    15. transferred this issue fromon Apr 10, 2022
    16. serhiy-storchaka commented on Jan 27, 2024

      @serhiy-storchaka
      Member

      @vadmium, do you mind to create a PR based on your patch? It needs a NEWS and What's New entries, and perhaps some updates in the stdlib documentation.

    17. vadmium commented on May 11, 2025

      @vadmium
      Member

      Sorry Serhiy I’m not likely to create a pull request. I still think removing the class is the way forward, and I don’t mind if someone else makes a pull request though.

    18. picnixz commented on May 11, 2025

      @picnixz
      Member

      Note that getallmatchingheaders could be removed because it was only used by the CGI handler which I removed in #133811. I kept it in my PR for legacy reasons but maybe we could deprecate it eagerly and remove it?

    19. picnixz commented on May 16, 2025

      @picnixz
      Member

      cc @hugovk Maybe we can use this issue to schedule the deprecation and removal of this function?

    20. hugovk commented on May 16, 2025

      @hugovk
      Member

      I think it'll be clearer to open a new one and close this.

    21. hugovk commented on Jul 13, 2026

      @hugovk
      Member

      Closing in favour #153648.

    Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

    Metadata

    Metadata

    Assignees

    No one assigned

      Labels

      stdlibStandard Library Python modules in the Lib/ directorytype-bugAn unexpected behavior, bug, or error

      Projects

      Milestone

      No milestone

      Relationships

      None yet

      Development

      No branches or pull requests

      Issue actions