Peter, for what it's worth I encountered exactly the same confusion when I first used spiffy (or rather, I arrived with the same preconceptions?). Perhaps this might be fixed by adding a clearly signposted example to the wiki which demonstrates the recommended way to implement this kind of dynamic content.
On 8 March 2016 at 12:40, Peter Bex <pe...@more-magic.net> wrote: > On Tue, Mar 08, 2016 at 12:02:29PM +0000, Norman Gray wrote: >> It occurred to me that I could/should use the vhost-map to do this >> dispatching, using something like >> >> (vhost-map `((".*" . ,(lambda (continue) ... and ignore (continue))))) >> >> But (a) that would clearly be a hack > > Actually, that's how it was designed to be used. Not a hack at all! > >> and (b) it appears that that's designed to be able to re-parameterise >> a request, rather than handle it itself, > > It's intended to be used like that, and you *may* re-parameterise (but > that's not necessary). The idea is that you can create "components" > which can be chained together, influencing their sub-components by > simply parameterising some options and then passing the flow on to > continue. The last component in the sequence would then actually > serve the request. > >> so (c) that would clearly be a hack. > > Again, that's not a hack but the design. > >> Another possibility is to specify the handle-not-found handler, and >> make sure to start the spiffy server in a context which has no files >> at all, so that the handle-not-found handler will always be called. >> But that also feels like a bit of a hack. > > That's a bit awkward, but it's an equally valid option. > >> The final possibility is to use intarweb directly, but that's >> unappealing, since it would require me cut-and-pasting quite a lot >> of the content of spiffy.scm. > > Now *that* would be a hack ;) > >> Where this is coming from: I'm pretty familiar with the Racket >> servlet framework which requires, in serve/servlet >> <http://docs.racket-lang.org/web-server/run.html>, a >> request->response mapping function. >> >> If I'm missing something really obvious, then apologies, and could >> someone hand me the clue-stick? > > I think you're coming at this from a slightly wrong angle with some > preconceptions that prevent you from using the system as designed, > because you did figure out how to use it (you came up with two valid > solutions to the problem) but rejected them offhand. > > Cheers, > Peter > > _______________________________________________ > Chicken-users mailing list > Chicken-users@nongnu.org > https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-users > _______________________________________________ Chicken-users mailing list Chicken-users@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-users