The version using regular expresion below is works better. I added a version with comments below for those who want to learn.Note this relies on jQuery ($.each) for its loop, which I recommend instead of forEach. Before you post a new answer, consider there are already 50+ answers for this question. Thanks for pointing that out! I will fix the code to be cross-browser. By using our site, you acknowledge that you have read and understand our Although now everyone will miss it because edi9999 removed the second "Is recursive".On a URL without query parameters this will return Looks clean enough to me. Free 30 Day Trial @Kafoso There is no clear right or wrong here. For a list of browser support It's currently supported in Chrome, Firefox, Safari, Edge, and Here is a recursive solution that has no regex, and has minimal mutation (only the params object is mutated, which I believe is unavoidable in JS).Update 5/26/2017, here is an ES7 implementation (runs with babel preset stage 0, 1, 2, or 3):Update 3/26/2018, here is a Typescript implementation:Update 2/13/2019, here is an updated TypeScript implementation that works with TypeScript 3.Here is my solution. Free 30 Day Trial See the commented-out usage example below. If you are using the GET method, you are limited to a maximum of 2,048 characters, minus the number of characters in the actual path. I'm new to jscript and this will be pretty helpful.Nice. Leaving the function like this What about URL-decoding the parameter names and values? "\\[" should be "\[". Please, make sure that your answer contributes information that is not among existing answers.parse_query_string will fail for values that contain '=', like when passing a base64 encoded value as value. The code may seem clever at first glance, but isn't very well thought out. Since those are regular strings, the [ and ] don't need to be escaped.This is not case insensitive. I find it simpler to ensure cross-browser compatibility using jQuery across the board rather than plugging in individual fixes to support whichever new functions aren't supported in older browsers.Edit: After I wrote this I noticed Eric Elliott's answer, which is almost the same, though it uses forEach, while I'm generally against (for reasons stated above).You can assign the URL tokens to your own variable:You can also simply refer to a a token name from the function directly:Let's create an object containing URL param names as keys, then we can easily extract the parameter by its name:I had the need to read a URL GET variable and complete an action based on the url parameter.

First of all, repeated fields with the same names have no specified standard behavior, and is up to the parser to handle. site design / logo © 2020 Stack Exchange Inc; user contributions licensed under Where developers & technologists share private knowledge with coworkersProgramming & related technical career opportunitiesThanks for a great answer. Featured on Meta

I just add to the regular expression the handling of the situation when the parameter does not appear in the URL. The example code shows you how to get query string from URL using JavaScript.

Stack Overflow works best with JavaScript enabled Cheers chap!This does the job right and only in 2 lines. @Quentin I have checked different special chars and I see you are right. your coworkers to find and share information. The rest of the answers are just too much "magic" without enough explanation.Thanks. Sorry, we no longer support Internet Explorer If not, an example is here: Don't understand... how does this answer the question, which is about getting params from a specific string, 'www.test.com/t.html?a=1&b=3&c=m2-m3-m4-m5'?Loved this answer, +1'ed. @Harvey Case insensitivity is not a concern of query parameters. I agree with you. low level stuff ilke this shouldn't be reinvented over and over, nor left to developers to utilize whatever entropically variant solutions they will whip up.