Bob Aman

Oh, wait, nevermind, I forget that only expansion is formally specified. Yeah, I could definitely see the argument for a `:strict` option that requires all variables to match.

Worth noting that this code is wrong: `uri.path

This issue probably requires a check-in with the IETF URI mailing list before deciding one way or the other.

Could you elaborate on the issue you're hitting? A test case would be awesome.

It's doing the right thing actually. IRIs (unicode-friendly URIs) use unicode normalization form KC to limit phishing. NFKC tends to do perceptual codepoint conversions, like converting '？' to '?'. The...

My feeling would be that the encoding should always be UTF-8 after normalization. Obviously, that's not the case here, but this issue makes it sound like you're expecting the encoding...

This is unfortunately, not an easy thing to do, and certainly not a good idea to do the way you've given above. Take this URI for example: ``` ruby str...

I'm also having similar issues. Trying to do a non-counting bloom filter of RockYou and other compromised passwords. 14 million items. If I set buckets > 1, I get both...

Ah, OK. I was assuming a counting filter would be the result of buckets > 1.

Right but you're not calculating the ETag for the previous response (at least, I hope not) so I'm not sure I understand why it's necessary to wait until the second...