-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 412
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Refactor NoContentVerb into NoContentVerbWithStatus (#1532) #1550
Open
nbacquey
wants to merge
3
commits into
haskell-servant:master
Choose a base branch
from
nbacquey:noContentVerbWithStatus
base: master
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
@@ -0,0 +1,13 @@ | ||
synopsis: Refactor NoContentVerb into NoContentVerbWithStatus | ||
prs: #1550 | ||
issues: #1532 | ||
|
||
description: { | ||
|
||
There are several HTTP status codes that correspond to a response body with `NoContent`. This PR introduces `NoContentVerbWithStatus` which generalizes `NoContentVerb` to cases when the return status may be | ||
different from `204`. The former replaces the latter anywhere possible. | ||
`NoContentVerb` is kept as a special case of `NoContentVerbWithStatus` for backwards compatibility. | ||
|
||
This PR also adds a test case for `NoContentVerbWithStatus` in `ServerSpec.hs` | ||
|
||
} |
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I do have a philosophical question here: when using 30X status codes, the
Location
header must be set. We are not enforcing this here — and in fact, your test does not do that either.Wouldn't it be better to provide redirect combinators that do enforce this constraint ?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think we have two different problems here:
NoContent
response can correspond to other status codes than 204 (as stated in VerbNoContent should allow status codes to be set not hardcode to 204 #1532)I think those issues should be addressed separately, unless maybe if the only other way to return
NoContent
is to have a 3xx status code, in which case we could kill two birds with one stone.I may be mistaken, but I think
NoContent
could be returned in a number of other cases, for instance on endpoints that would be hardcoded to return 4xx errors.I suggest we proceed with the PR as it is, then tackle the issue of
Location
headers separately.