RejectedSoftware Forums

On Thu, 14 May 2015 20:01:29 GMT, Suliman wrote:

I am trying to strip REST example to get it's minimal version to better understand how it's work.

import vibe.d;
import std.stdio;
import std.file;

class Example1
{
	string getSomeInfo()
	{
		return "Some Info!";
	}
}

shared static this()
{

	auto router = new URLRouter;
	registerRestInterface(router, new Example1());
	auto routes = router.getAllRoutes();

	auto settings = new HTTPServerSettings;
	settings.port = 8080;

	assert (routes[0].method == HTTPMethod.GET && routes[0].pattern == "/example1_api/some_info");

}

The problem that I can't compile it.

The problem is that you didn't specify the API interface.
If you take a look at the examples ( https://github.com/rejectedsoftware/vibe.d/blob/master/examples/rest/source/app.d#L50 ), you'll see that every class inherit from an interface.
In your case, a simple "interface IAPI { string getSomeInfo(); }" will do.
I'll add a check for this error.

Am 16.05.2015 um 14:21 schrieb Suliman:

The problem is that you didn't specify the API interface.

Why I should to specify API interface? It's element of good design, but why I can't create simple class without it?

This restriction has been chosen to ensure a working REST server/client
duality. By always working on an interface, both are guaranteed to work
and to result in exactly the same REST protocol. For cases where only
the server is planned to be used, the restriction could in theory be
lifted...

Am 17.05.2015 um 09:37 schrieb Suliman:

Thanks, but what mean:

@rootPathFromName in example?

It will define a URL prefix that is generated from the interface name:

@rootPathFromName
interface Test {
   string getFoo();
}

is equivalent to:

@path("/test")
interface Test {
   string getFoo();
}

Both will result in a route "GET /test/foo" to be added.

This restriction has been chosen to ensure a working REST server/client
duality. By always working on an interface, both are guaranteed to work
and to result in exactly the same REST protocol. For cases where only
the server is planned to be used, the restriction could in theory be
lifted...

Could you add mention about it in docs? It's very important part.