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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
