On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 8:47 AM, Michael Snoyman <span dir="ltr">&lt;<a href="mailto:michael@snoyman.com">michael@snoyman.com</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
Jeremy,<div></div></blockquote><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;"><div>We&#39;d been discussing the PathInfo class previously; I understand now what you&#39;re trying to achieve with it, but I think for a lot of use cases using a parser like that will be unnecesary. For those cases, I&#39;d hate to introduce a parsec dependency, especially given the 2/3 split we&#39;re dealing with right now.</div>
</blockquote><div><br></div><div>Well, parsec is in the haskell platform, so it&#39;s really a question of can be it implemented so that it works with both 2 and 3. </div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
<div></div><div>I know it&#39;s painful to split this up into even more packages, but we do you think of adding web-routes-parser?</div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>I would consider it, but I don&#39;t understand how that would work...</div>
<div><br></div><div>So far you have been pretty unexcited about the parsing having a type similar to:</div><div><br></div><div> [String] -&gt; (Either String a, [String])</div><div><br></div><div>because it is often &#39;unnecessary&#39;. But the problem with, [String] -&gt; (Either String a), is that, as far as I can tell, it won&#39;t work in the cases where it *is* necessary. And you can&#39;t simply switch to, [String] -&gt; (Either String a, [String]), when that happens.. But perhaps I am missing something here..</div>
<div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;"><div>Also, question about the Site datatype: Did we want the formatLink and parseLink functions to work on [String] instead of String? I think I see advantages either way. Also, I&#39;m not sure if I sent this previously, but I think the defaultPage function is redundant; that should probably be specified by &#39;parseLink &quot;&quot;&#39;.</div>
</blockquote><div><br></div><div>I will have to think about [String] vs String more. I don&#39;t want using Site to mean you have to use PathInfo, but switching to [String] wouldn&#39;t have that effect, and would mean that people would not have to worry about those pesky encoding issues. The only real use case I have for not using PathInfo is if you wanted to create a function like: gfromPathSegments :: (Data url) =&gt; PathInfo -&gt; Either String url. And that can be done most easily if PathInfo = [String]. So I think I&#39;ll make that change. In the old code base, where there was no url encoding done by the library, it did not really make a difference. </div>
<div><br></div><div>Regarding defaultPage, not all methods of generating formatLink / parseLink lend themselves to handling &quot;&quot; very easily, so it seemed nice to have a single place that can add that case in, rather than add similar code to all the parsers.. Also, I think that I sometimes changes the landing page of my site. But I think I will make &#39;defaultPage&#39; a Maybe value, and bill it as a way to &#39;override&#39; where &quot;&quot; resolves to.</div>
<div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;"><div>I&#39;ll try to get started on porting the Yesod mkResources code over to web-routes now.</div></blockquote>
<div><br></div><div>awesome!</div><div><br></div><div>- jeremy</div><div> </div></div>