Sign Up

Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.

Have an account? Sign In

Have an account? Sign In Now

Sign In

Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.

Sign Up Here

Forgot Password?

Don't have account, Sign Up Here

Forgot Password

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.

Have an account? Sign In Now

You must login to ask a question.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.

Sign InSign Up

The Archive Base

The Archive Base Logo The Archive Base Logo

The Archive Base Navigation

  • SEARCH
  • Home
  • About Us
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
Search
Ask A Question

Mobile menu

Close
Ask a Question
  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Feed
  • User Profile
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Buy Points
  • Users
  • Help
  • Buy Theme
  • SEARCH
Home/ Questions/Q 4056758
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: May 20, 20262026-05-20T14:52:03+00:00 2026-05-20T14:52:03+00:00

What is a better way to do this? Ideally using a URI parsing class

  • 0

What is a better way to do this?

Ideally using a URI parsing class of some sort, rather than relying on my own regex

  url = "http://example.com"  //or "http://example.com?after=111"

  next_url = url.gsub(/after=\d+/,"666")
  if !next_url.eql?(url)
    if (new2.include?('?') == false)
      next_url = url + "?after=666"
    else
      next_url = url + "&after=666"
    end                                                                                                                                                                                        
  end                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     
  puts next_url    
  • 1 1 Answer
  • 0 Views
  • 0 Followers
  • 0
Share
  • Facebook
  • Report

Leave an answer
Cancel reply

You must login to add an answer.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

1 Answer

  • Voted
  • Oldest
  • Recent
  • Random
  1. Editorial Team
    Editorial Team
    2026-05-20T14:52:04+00:00Added an answer on May 20, 2026 at 2:52 pm

    I recommend using the Addressable gem when you are taking URLs apart or putting them together. It’s very comprehensive, and has query_values(options = {}) and query_values=(new_query_values) to extract all the query components into a hash, or to rebuild it from a hash. It will also handle decoding and encoding the parameters as needed, things that URI will not do for you.

    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

Related Questions

Is there a better way than this to splice an array into another array
Is there a better way than this to determine the row a user double-clicked
Is there better way to enumerate all photos on the device than this one?
any better way to write this ? $(this).parent().parent().find( dd ul).toggle(); update.. I am trying
Is there a better way to do this jquery code? Currently I have to
Is there any better way to make this query work? I'm looking for a
is there any way to write this foreach in linq or another better way,
Fairly simple; I'm just curious if there's a better way to accomplish this. Given
Is there a better way to do something like this? This is fine but
Is there a better way to use the sound channel is AS3? This works,

Explore

  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Users
  • Help
  • SEARCH

Footer

© 2021 The Archive Base. All Rights Reserved
With Love by The Archive Base

Insert/edit link

Enter the destination URL

Or link to existing content

    No search term specified. Showing recent items. Search or use up and down arrow keys to select an item.