How to disable urlencoding get-params in Refit?

[dmitrydvm]

Please help me with my question
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/40632827/how-to-disable-urlencoding-get-params-in-refit

[dmitrydvm]

@onovotny please help

[ahmedalejo]

@onovotny is quite a busy developer in terms of opensource project he actively contributes to (like everyone else),

So navigating to GitHub and then navigating SO isn´t work that someone paid for,
If you can´t go through the work of duplicating you question, then it´s most like nobody sees the issue as important. If you really needed help here you´d take the time to post here and also include a link to SO

Instead of ignoring you, i opted on giving feedback.

Regarding the issue(link), if you don´t mind me taking a shot at it instead of @onovotny 😃 then i suggest:

First of all was your api server able to parse the follow?
api/item?c%5B%5D=14%26c%5B%5D%3D74

Encoding is great for avoiding code injection to your server.

This is something Refit is a bit opinionated about, i.e uris should be encoded, the server should be upgraded to read encoded uris.

But this clearly should be a opt-in settings in Refit but it´s not.

So you can currently do this by using a DelegatingHandler:

	/// <summary>
	/// Makes sure the query string of an <see cref="System.Uri"/>
	/// </summary>
	public class UriQueryUnescapingHandler : DelegatingHandler
	{	
		public UriQueryUnescapingHandler()
			: base(new HttpClientHandler()) { }
		public UriQueryUnescapingHandler(HttpMessageHandler innerHandler)
			: base(innerHandler)
		{ }
	
		protected override Task<HttpResponseMessage> SendAsync(HttpRequestMessage request, CancellationToken cancellationToken)
		{
			var uri = request.RequestUri;
			//You could also simply unescape the whole uri.OriginalString
			//but i don´t recommend that, i.e only fix what´s broken
			var unescapedQuery = Uri.UnescapeDataString(uri.Query);
			
			var userInfo = string.IsNullOrWhiteSpace(uri.UserInfo) ? "" : $"{uri.UserInfo}@";
			var scheme = string.IsNullOrWhiteSpace(uri.Scheme) ? "" : $"{uri.Scheme}://";
			
			request.RequestUri = new Uri($"{scheme}{userInfo}{uri.Authority}{uri.AbsolutePath}{unescapedQuery}{uri.Fragment}");
			return base.SendAsync(request, cancellationToken);
		}
	}

Then you could use it as follows:

Refit.RestService.For<IYourService>(new HttpClient(new UriQueryUnescapingHandler()))

I recommend posting the question here as well, the suggested answer just don´t make sense without it.

Cheers

[clairernovotny]

There may be valid reasons for disabling the automatic UrlEncoding, but it's not something that's currently available. If someone wants to try a PR to make it optional by parameter (an additional attribute?), I'd certainly entertain it.

[Deilan]

This is a must-have one. :)

[Cheesebaron]

@Deilan go ahead and make a PR for it. It is marked up for grabs ;)

[pieteckhart]

I'm trying to use Refit to download a file from a dynamic (but relative to the base) url.

[Get("/{**url}")]
Task GetDocument(string url);
The url argument itself also contains a querystring. (for example GetDocument(url: "download.php?filename=somefile.pdf");

I notice my url argument gets encoded so I get an 404 error.

Will this be possible after @deesejohn 's pullrequest gets merged?

[ahmedalejo]

@pieteckhart you should write the following instead:

[Get("/download")]
Task<Stream> GetDocument(string filename);

calling the following

[Get("/download")]
var filestream = await client.GetDocument(filename: "somefile.pdf");

would result in

HTTP GET /download?filename=somefile.pdf

hope it makes sense to you. If it doesn´t, please comment on, or let wait for @deesejohn 😊

[pieteckhart]

Thanks for the suggestion, but the thing is that the download url is provided to me as is by another API call. I have no influence on the API so I was looking for a way to just blindly use the url without taking it apart and construct a proper request. For now I've hand rolled a request using the same httpClient so that it has access to a session cookie.

[deesejohn]

I actually closed that PR because I wasn't very happy with the implementation. I've since migrated my project to RestEase as it was already able to satisfy my requirements.

@benjaminhowarth1 I'm actually unable to reply to you on the PR directly, now that is has been locked, but it was never merged. If you and/or others feel the implementation is satisfactory, please feel free to merge it.