HTTP.jl VS OffsetArrays.jl

The req.url field contains the URL of the received request, the req.method field contains request method, like GET or POST, the req.body field contains the POST body of the request in binary format. HTTP request object contains much other information. All this you can find in HTTP.jl documentation. Our web application will only check the request method. If the received request is a POST request, it will parse req.body to JSON object and send the data from this object to the isSurvived function to make a prediction and return it to the client browser. For all other request types, it will just return the content of the index.html file, to display the web interface. This is how the whole source of titanic.jl web service looks:

If you want to just get the html of a website whose url you already have you can make requests from the http.jl package. https://juliaweb.github.io/HTTP.jl/stable/

HTTP.jl and Gumbo.jl for web-scraping

I haven't seen that tutorial, but I agree that HTTP.jl, Gumbo.jl, and Cascadia.jl are the way. I used them to export public wishlists from bookdepository, which has no API nor a built in exporting tool.

I find some of the library documentation hard to understand. Compare http.jl with python's requests, for example. Something as core as HTTP requests should have clear docs with tonnes of examples. Part of this is also a personal dislike of documenter.jl styling. Idk why the contrast is so low – would prefer a standard readthedocs theme.

Well, there is OffsetArrays in Julia, but it has acquired a reputation as a poison pill because most code assumes the 1-based indexing and it's easy to forget to convert the indexing and screw up the code.

Similar correctness issues are a big part of the reason that, several years ago, I submitted a series of pull requests to Julia so that its entire test suite would run without memory errors under Valgrind, save for a few that either (i) we understood and wrote suppressions for, or (ii) we did not understand and had open issues for. Unfortunately, no one ever integrated Valgrind into the CI system, so the test suite no longer fully runs under it, last time I checked. (The test suite took nearly a day to run under Valgrind on a fast desktop machine when it worked, so is infeasible for every pull request, but could be done periodically, e.g. once every few days.)

Even a revived effort on getting core Julia tests to pass under Valgrind would not do much to help catch correctness bugs due to composing different packages in the ecosystem. For that, running in testing with `--check-bounds=yes` is probably a better solution, and much quicker to execute as well. (see e.g. https://github.com/JuliaArrays/OffsetArrays.jl/issues/282)

You might be interested in OffsetArrays.jl.

Counting starts at one, as do most vector/matrix/tensor indices. If it bothers you too much, see OffsetArrays.jl and Arrays with custom indices.

No need for another version, Julia supports custom indices by default. Check out https://docs.julialang.org/en/v1/devdocs/offset-arrays/ and https://github.com/JuliaArrays/OffsetArrays.jl