A critique of cgi.escape

[Georg Brandl]

Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
> In message <4517e10e$0$13929$edfadb0f at dread15.news.tele.dk>, Max M wrote:
> 
>> Lawrence is right that the escape method doesn't work the way he expects
>> it to.
>> 
>> Rewriting a library module simply because a developer is surprised is a
>> *very* bad idea.
> 
> I'm not surprised. Disappointed, yes. Verging on disgust at some comments in
> this thread, yes. But "surprised" is what a lot of users of the existing
> cgi.escape function are going to be when they discover their code isn't
> doing what they thought it was.

Why should they be surprised? The documentation states clearly what cgi.escape()
does (as does the docstring).

Georg