Caught the rewrite one too, leaving: LiftRules.prependTemplate(User.templates)
LiftRules.appendStatelessDispatch { case r @ Req("api" :: "send_msg" :: Nil, "", PostRequest) if r.param("token").isDefined => () => RestAPI.sendMsgWithToken(r) } LiftRules.appendViewDispatch { case "user_view" :: _ => UserView } LiftRules.appendEarly(makeUtf8) appendView -> viewDispatch.append almost worked, except that the case line failed to compile. - Darren On Dec 18, 10:39 pm, Darren Hague <dha...@fortybeans.com> wrote: > A bit better, thanks - that fixed the *Dispatch calls. Now it's just > the following lines causing a problem: > > LiftRules.prependTemplate(User.templates) > > LiftRules.appendStatelessDispatch { > case r @ Req("api" :: "send_msg" :: Nil, "", PostRequest) > if r.param("token").isDefined => > () => RestAPI.sendMsgWithToken(r) > } > > LiftRules.prependRewrite { > case RewriteRequest(ParsePath("user" :: user :: Nil,"", _,_), _, > _) => > RewriteResponse( List("user_view", "index"), Map("uid" -> > user)) > case RewriteRequest(ParsePath("tag" :: tag :: Nil,"", _,_), _, > _) => > RewriteResponse( List("user_view", "tag"), Map("tag" -> tag)) > > case RewriteRequest(ParsePath("conversation" :: cid :: Nil, "", > _, _), > _, _) => > RewriteResponse(List("user_view", "conversation"), Map("cid" - > > > cid)) > > case RewriteRequest(ParsePath("search" :: term :: Nil,"", _,_), > _, _) => > RewriteResponse( List("user_view", "search"), Map("term" -> > term)) > } > > LiftRules.appendViewDispatch { > case "user_view" :: _ => UserView > } > > LiftRules.appendEarly(makeUtf8) > > Cheers, > Darren > > On Dec 18, 9:52 pm, TylerWeir <tyler.w...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Hey Darren, > > > Something like this: > > > // Old and busted > > LiftRules.prependDispatch(RestAPI.dispatch) > > > // New hotness > > LiftRules.dispatch.prepend(RestAPI.dispatch) > > > Lather, rinse and repeat for dispatch, rewrite, etc > > > Better, or worse? > > > Ty > > > On Dec 18, 4:47 pm, Darren Hague <dha...@fortybeans.com> wrote: > > > > Dano (or David), > > > > Care to share what your changes were? I'm facing the same problem > > > right now with ESME - lots of LiftRules.append* and LiftRules.prepend* > > > in Boot.scala which will not compile any more - even Googling > > > "LiftRules RulesSeq" returns no results at all... :-( > > > > Cheers, > > > Darren > > > > On Dec 15, 7:08 pm, Dano <dan_ole...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > Marius, > > > > > David was able to help me out. In the future, I will have to dig > > > > myself out of the situation. For those Lift developers that are not > > > > 'committers' it is harder to know how to proceed. Perhaps in the > > > > future, the breaking changes should include a little more detail on > > > > which signatures have been changed and how they can be transformed. > > > > > In any case, I am happy there is this group to ask for help! > > > > > Thanks. > > > > > Dan > > > > > On Dec 15, 12:08 am, Marius <marius.dan...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > Sorry Dan ... There were too many changes in LiftRules. You should be > > > > > able to determine real quick what changed in LiftRules since the > > > > > variables naming is more or less the same. > > > > > > If you can not fix your code can you please copy-paste it here ? ... > > > > > in this way I may be able to help. > > > > > > Br's, > > > > > Marius > > > > > > On Dec 15, 1:55 am, Dano <dan_ole...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > Marius, > > > > > > > Is there someway you can communicate what the 'from' and 'to' > > > > > > changes > > > > > > are so that I can have a chance at being able to fix my now broken > > > > > > code? > > > > > > > Dan > > > > > > > On Dec 13, 12:31 pm, Marius <marius.dan...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > All, > > > > > > > > I committed a bunch of changes inLiftRules. In a previous thread > > > > > > > Jorge suggested the abstraction ofLiftRulesvariables. Lists of > > > > > > > functions are now abstracted by RulesSeq trait, which contains > > > > > > > prepend > > > > > > > and append functions. Note that if you're calling prepend/append > > > > > > > functions after boot they will throw an exception. If there are > > > > > > > compelling reasons not to do this please let us know. This is > > > > > > > just a > > > > > > > mechanism to enforce the use of these functions on startup. > > > > > > > > Br's, > > > > > > > Marius --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lift" group. To post to this group, send email to liftweb@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to liftweb+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---