Javascript unescape（）vs. Python urllib.unquote（） [英] Javascript unescape() vs. Python urllib.unquote()

问题描述

从阅读各种帖子，似乎JavaScript的 unescape（）相当于Pythons urllib.unquote（） ，但是当我测试时，我会得到不同的结果：

From reading various posts, it seems like JavaScript's unescape() is equivalent to Pythons urllib.unquote(), however when I test both I get different results:

unescape('%u003c%u0062%u0072%u003e');

输出： < br>

import urllib
urllib.unquote('%u003c%u0062%u0072%u003e')

输出： ％u003c％u0062％u0072％u003e

我希望Python也能返回<峰; br> 。任何关于我在这里失踪的想法？

I would expect Python to also return <br>. Any ideas as to what I'm missing here?

谢谢！

推荐答案

％uxxxx 是一个 urllib.unquote（）不支持的非标准URL编码方案

%uxxxx is a non standard URL encoding scheme that is not supported by urllib.unquote().

它只是ECMAScript ECMA-262第3版的一部分;该格式被W3C拒绝，从来不是RFC的一部分。

It was only ever part of ECMAScript ECMA-262 3rd edition; the format was rejected by the W3C and was never a part of an RFC.

您可以使用正则表达式转换这样的代码点：

You could use a regular expression to convert such codepoints:

re.sub(r'%u([a-fA-F0-9]{4}|[a-fA-F0-9]{2})', lambda m: unichr(int(m.group(1), 16)), quoted)

这将解码％uxxxx 和％uxx 表单ECMAScript 3rd ed可以解码。

This decodes both the %uxxxx and the %uxx form ECMAScript 3rd ed can decode.

演示：

>>> import re
>>> quoted = '%u003c%u0062%u0072%u003e'
>>> re.sub(r'%u([a-fA-F0-9]{4}|[a-fA-F0-9]{2})', lambda m: unichr(int(m.group(1), 16)), quoted)
u'<br>'
>>> altquoted = '%u3c%u0062%u0072%u3e'
>>> re.sub(r'%u([a-fA-F0-9]{4}|[a-fA-F0-9]{2})', lambda m: unichr(int(m.group(1), 16)), altquoted)
u'<br>'

但你应该尽可能避免使用编码。

but you should avoid using the encoding altogether if possible.

这篇关于Javascript unescape（）vs. Python urllib.unquote（）的文章就介绍到这了，希望我们推荐的答案对大家有所帮助，也希望大家多多支持IT屋！