Unfiltered 0.8.1 released

[Nathan Hamblen]

Server builders finally refactored for a Scala 2.8+ world!

http://notes.implicit.ly/post/94356562949/unfiltered-0-8-1

In other news, the Unfiltered github repository is now using release
branches. The current default branch is 0.8.2, so most pull requests
should go into that branch. Release version tags will be prefixed with a
v from now on, as is a more common convention. The last release is
tagged both ways, 0.8.1 and v0.8.1 .

We'll also be tagging PRs with milestones so that it's easier to report
on them at release time.

[Crazy Frog]

Does Directives work with netty ?

[Erlend Hamnaberg]

yes, but only the synchronous version.

-E

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Unfiltered" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to unfiltered-sca...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Doug Tangren]

On Aug 22, 2014 6:58 AM, "Erlend Hamnaberg" <nga...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> yes, but only the synchronous version.

Since an async intent's return type is unit it's up to the request responder to complete the request which doesn't fit well with a directive s type signature. Pull requests are welcome!

[Jon-Anders Teigen]

async type signature could also be expressed as Request => Future[Response], which would be suitable for directives if they were rewritten to work with any monad.

I did a proof of concept a while back https://github.com/teigen/unfiltered/commit/69f070116d3fc4c5aa97c8a4f28b81e5dd29b3e1

which demonstrates this.

Not really sure I like it in its current form, but atleast it proves that its possible

/j

[Doug Tangren]

On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 9:15 AM, Jon-Anders Teigen <jte...@gmail.com> wrote:

async type signature could also be expressed as Request => Future[Response], which would be suitable for directives if they were rewritten to work with any monad.

I did a proof of concept a while back https://github.com/teigen/unfiltered/commit/69f070116d3fc4c5aa97c8a4f28b81e5dd29b3e1

which demonstrates this.

Not really sure I like it in its current form, but atleast it proves that its possible

If you can, can you try to sync that up with the latest release branch. I'd like to move that forward. @chrslws and I were actually just talking about this yesterday. I can help out too.

[Crazy Frog]

I quickly hacked up this which seems to work:

      .plan(Planify {

        case req  =>

          (AsyncDirective{

              x[ReceivedMessage, Any](req) orElse y[ReceivedMessage, Any](req)

            })(req)

      })

  }

  object AsyncDirective {

    def apply[A,B](intent: PartialFunction[HttpRequest[A] with Async.Responder[B],

      Directive[A, ResponseFunction[B], Unit]]): PartialFunction[HttpRequest[A] with Async.Responder[B], Unit] = {

      case req =>

        if (intent.isDefinedAt(req)) intent(req)(req)

        else req.respond(NotFound)

    }

  }

  def x[A,B](req: HttpRequest[A] with Async.Responder[B]): PartialFunction[HttpRequest[A] with Async.Responder[B], Directive[A, ResponseFunction[B], Unit]] = {

    case Path("/x/") =>

      for {

        _ <- GET

      } yield for {

        x <- future { scala.concurrent.blocking { scala.math.pow(100, 110) } }

      } yield {

        val out = s"""x=$x"""

        req.respond(Ok ~> ResponseString(out))

      }

  }

  def y[A,B](req: HttpRequest[A] with Async.Responder[B]): PartialFunction[HttpRequest[A] with Async.Responder[B], Directive[A, ResponseFunction[B], Unit]] = {

    case Path("/y/") =>

      for {

        _ <- GET

      } yield {

        req.respond(Ok ~> Html5(<h1> hello y</h1>))

      }

  }

On Monday, 11 August 2014 05:00:48 UTC+10, n8han wrote:

[Nathan Hamblen]

On 08/22/2014 09:15 AM, Jon-Anders Teigen wrote:
> async type signature could also be expressed as Request =>
> Future[Response], which would be suitable for directives if they were
> rewritten to work with any monad.

We did this a while back, just decided to put it in a new `future`
package rather than replace the existing `async` plans.

https://github.com/unfiltered/unfiltered/blob/0.8.2/netty/src/main/scala/future/plans.scala#L14-L17

Nathan