A more-useful uri_to_assoc

[eluser]Benjamin Midget[/eluser]
A GET simulation is worthless in my opinion if it cannot be trusted to fetch appropriate data.

A common example:

User searches for category and tags.

If the user searches for category: "tags" (which they should be able to do--they can search for anything they want), then you have just what jazzfanatic illustrated: site.com/products/search/category/tags/tags/something.

The most common use for GET is giving a search a hard-coded URL that can be shared and revisited. Thus, I'd argue that jazzfanatic's situation is actually a fairly common problem someone would run into with a GET simulation.

An app that cannot hold up to possible user searches, I'd argue, is broken. This is the exact reason why my implementation doesn't break upon searches. Thus if CI were to include this functionality (which I believe they should because they don't allow actual GET data), they'd have to use the version that accurately mimics GET.

The later version looks great, no doubt, but realistically operates as nothing more than a hack.