aio-libs / yarl / 38211353930

98%

push

github

Apply RFC 9110 to an empty http host in RFC 3986 mode (#1971)

<!-- Thank you for your contribution! -->

## What do these changes do?

Follows aio-libs/yarl#1970.

RFC 9110 section 4.2.1 makes a recipient reject an http URI with an
empty host, and section 4.2.2 does the same for https. yarl's RFC 3986
mode applied that only to an authority with userinfo or a port
(`http://user@/`), and accepted `http://`, `http:///path` and
`http://?q`. RFC mode now rejects an empty authority for `http`,
`https`, `ws`, `wss` and `ftp`, the schemes `_check_missing_host()`
already treats as needing a host, which is what WHATWG mode does after
#1970.

The RFC 3986 oracle in `tools/conformance/rfc3986_oracle.py` followed
only the generic RFC 3986 syntax, although the report lists RFC 9110
among its standards. It now gives no result for an http or https URI
with an authority and an empty host. A URI without an authority
(`http:/p`) is still left to the generic syntax; requiring an authority
for http as the full RFC 9110 grammar does would put 12 rows into "yarl
differs, RFC 3986+3987 and WHATWG agree" and is not done here.

The guard #1970 added in `_moved_parts()` for an RFC mode `http://`
moved into WHATWG mode is removed: RFC mode can no longer hold such a
URL, other than with `encoded=True`, which is not validated in either
mode.

Conformance report: six rows moved to "RFC 3986+3987, WHATWG and yarl in
both modes agree": `http://user:pass@/`, `http://user@/www.example.com`,
`http://@/www.example.com`, `http://a:b@/www.example.com` (from "RFC
mode differs from RFC 3986+3987, WHATWG mode follows WHATWG"), and
`http://?`, `http://#` (from "yarl follows each standard in its mode").
In six rows with base `http://example.org/` only the oracle's answer
changed, from `http:///…` to a failure: `///example.org/../path`,
`///example.org/../../`, `///example.org/../path/../../`,
`///example.org/../path/../../path` (still "RFC mode differs") and
`///test`, `///example.org/path` (s... (continued)

97 of 194 branches covered (50.0%)

Branch coverage included in aggregate %.

15 of 15 new or added lines in 3 files covered. (100.0%)

11198 of 11348 relevant lines covered (98.68%)

0.99 hits per line