Hello Andreas, On Tue, 17 Oct 2006 20:16:21 +0200 Andreas Zwinkau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I'm not sure I understand. What do you mean "variables" in this > > context? > Uh, sorry. I was talking about "arguments". How does your > define-callable-url react on /add, /add/1 and /add/1/2? For summation it > may be ok to have a unspecified number of arguments, but consider > webapps like blogs or wikis. This will mean checking for number of > arguments in every callable-url? Example: "/names/show-some-name/x/y/z" The procedures defined with define-callable-url are actually regular Scheme procedures. So, if they are called with an unexpected number of arguments, an error would be raised. If they are supposed to handle arbitrary number of arguments, they have to be defined accordingly. > I also dislike the hidden state with all this add-resource or > define-callable-url. Maybe this is only me coming from Pythonland, > where "explicit is better than implicit". I can't *see* how start-server > finds things from add-resource or define-callable-url, but rather > assume another global namespace for resources. Passing an > explicit handler (like my dispatch-rules) looks better to me. This is > opinioniated, so what do you think? Actually the http:add-resource is wrapped by the `register-dispatcher' procedure, which adds the resource using a regex as argument. Something like: (register-dispatcher "/callables" ... (http:add-resource "/callables/.*") ...) Thus, requests for paths under "callables" would be treated as procedure calls. Right now I'm working on this namespace thing. I'm using environments to enclose procedures defined with define-callable-url. So, each environment corresponds to something like a namespace. In practice, there's a hash table mapping a name (the path used by `register-dispatcher') to an environment which will enclose the procedures. If I understand correctly, you prefer the idea of having procedures defined to handle specific HTTP method's variables (e.g., POST, GET etc). So, a procedure defined to handle POST variables should not work for GET variables, right? Best wishes, Mario _______________________________________________ Chicken-users mailing list Chicken-users@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-users