API page: http://api.drupal.org/api/drupal/includes--common.inc/function/drupal_go...
Describe the problem you have found:
However you may override that behavior by setting a destination in either the $_REQUEST-array (i.e. by using the query string of an URI) This is used to direct the user back to the proper page after completing a form. For example, after editing a post...
The sentence says "in either", and then goes on to give one place to set the destination. Two problems:
1. I think an explanation of the $_REQUEST-array is warranted, or at least a pointer to further documentation about $_REQUEST.
2. What is the other alternative?
Comments
Comment #1
jhodgdonHm. No idea here... someone will need to investigate. Thanks for reporting!
Comment #2
drewish commentedComment #3
jhodgdonTemporarily setting back to 7.x so the test bot will hopefully kick off. It looks like we aren't testing d8 yet.
Comment #4
jhodgdonThat aside... a few issues with this patch:
a)
1. in current ==> in the current
2. URI, i.e. ==> URI, i.e., (punctuate i.e. as if it was "that is", which is what it means -- must be followed by a comma)
b) The code example doesn't seem to use $destination after setting it, so I'm not getting what it does at first glance?
Comment #5
drewish commentedHow's this look?
Comment #6
jhodgdonThanks, looks good! Please commit to 7 and 8.
Comment #7
jhodgdonNeeds to go to d8 and then d7
Comment #8
dries commentedCommitted to 8.x. Moving back to 7.x.
Comment #9
bfroehle commentedThis was already committed to 8.x-dev, but it needs some work. The sample code is not valid:
Do you mean?
Or perhaps even better
Comment #10
jhodgdongood idea. Sorry for missing that in my previous review.
Comment #11
drewish commenteddrupal_get_destination() has some odd behaviors that distracted from the explanation so I chose not to use it. It also obscures the data format, I suppose as my "example" demonstrates.
Comment #12
jhodgdonI agree, let's not use that function, but the example is still wrong I think?
Comment #13
bfroehle commentedSo, shall we use:
Comment #14
jhodgdonThat example looks fine to me. Since we're trying to stay mostly within 80 character lines in docblocks, having it be two lines like that is probably good; if it was just code, I'd probably say to just put it all in one line.
Needs a patch...
Comment #15
pillarsdotnet commentedFollow-up patch for 8.x.
Comment #16
jhodgdonOK, looks good! Let's get this into 8.x. Then we need to make a patch like #5, but with the example in #15, for 7.x. So please mark "patch / to be ported / 7.x". Thanks!
Comment #17
pillarsdotnet commentedTag.
Comment #18
webchickCommitted to 8.x.
Marking 7.x/to be ported.
(Btw, Jennifer, I always really appreciate those helpful instructions at the end of all your sign-offs! :))
Comment #19
pillarsdotnet commentedPatch for 7.x
Comment #20
jhodgdonLooks good - let's get this into D7. Thanks!
Originally reported problem does not exist in D6, so this should be good.
Comment #21
pillarsdotnet commentedCommitted by Webchick: