> So we aren't trying to define a client API that is generic enough for
> extension methods? Anymore?
+1
> Well, then suggest something.
+ HttpResponse response =
client.request("
http://www.google.com/").with(webdav()).propfind();
Here is the implementation:
::::
https://github.com/guilhermesilveira/jaxrs2-caelum/commit/924ae87adc30625ba284e409723524ead1763e2b#L0L-1
What has been done:
:::: Just wrapping around, but already providing the delegator and the
wrapping mechanism:
Currently anyone can do typos:
::: request.method("PROP_FINDY")
Using the solution I mentioned we can provide ".propFind" without the
need to change the specification. So it's type safe and it allows
evolution. Does it make sense to force the user to use type safe and
avoid "string-based" programming? Its just a matter of removing the
.method(String) from the Invocation interface (= a few move and
extracts).
Regards
Guilherme Silveira
Caelum | Ensino e Inovação
http://www.caelum.com.br/
On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 10:19 AM, Bill Burke <bburke_at_redhat.com> wrote:
>
>
> On 7/6/11 8:16 AM, Julian Reschke wrote:
>>
>> On 2011-07-06 13:50, Bill Burke wrote:
>>>
>>> Or, instead, simply
>>>
>>> WebDav dav = new WebDav(client);
>>>
>>> or
>>>
>>> WebDavRequest request = new WebDavRequest(client.request);
>>>
>>> Or, if you are a JAX-RS implementor, just have your request
>>> implementations implement a custom interface then typecast the request:
>>>
>>> WebDavRequest req = (WebDavRequest)client.request();
>>>
>>> No need to get fancy-nancy.
>>> ...
>>
>> So we aren't trying to define a client API that is generic enough for
>> extension methods? Anymore?
>
>
> Well, then suggest something.
>
> --
> Bill Burke
> JBoss, a division of Red Hat
> http://bill.burkecentral.com
>