On 6 April 2010 21:38, Michael Snoyman
It's like you read my mind... I very consciously designed this in such a way that it would be possible to do this. More to the point: I think it would be possible to use web-routes-quasi to create a RESTful API and then auto-generate the basic API documentation. I'd like to eventually figure out a way to support GET and POST parameters as well for this. Anyway, for the basic [String] methods, I can add support for it in the future; I'd rather wait until we have the rest of web-routes settled down first. (Of course, a patch is always welcome.)
Here are some more thoughts on the above point: The handler functions take the user supplied type, a function (MyRoute -> String), and the fields of the corresponding MyRoute constructors as parameters. - Wouldn't it be simpler to automatically derive an instance of Show for the MyRoute type? (Since MyRoute is created on the fly anyway, I don't see why anyone would want to derive a different Show instance.) - About the possibility of querying the supported methods: The use case scenario I have in mind is having a default handler for handling OPTIONS that returns the available methods. Currently this won't work since that part of the resource information is unavailable inside the handler. Do you have any thoughts on how to change the design to make this possible? Peter