README @@ -4,17 +4,19 @@ response_for (see Ardes::ResponseFor::ClassMethods) allows you to decorate the r == Current Version 0.2-stable -Version 0.2-stable of response_for has BC-breaking API changes, has vastly simplified internals, and is supported only for Rails >= 2.1.x. - -Version 0.2.0 was released on Sept 14th 2008. - As of version 0.2.0, response_for's functionality can be summed up in one sentence: "response_for allows you to specify default responses for any action (or before filter) that doesn't render or redirect" -Actions typically do two things - interact with models, and provide a repsonse. The above simple idea allows you to decouple these +Actions typically do two things - interact with models, and render a response. The above simple idea allows you to decouple these two functions (where appropriate), which means abstraction of common patterns becomes possible. +NOTE: 0.2-stable has BC-breaking API changes, and is supported only for Rails >= 2.1.x. Version 0.2.0 was released on Sept 14th 2008. +You should use 0.1-stable in your existing projects until you have runs your specs and whatnot. + +If you want to know more about why I changed the API in 0.2 look at the bottom of this README + + === Example class FooController < ApplicationController @@ -45,6 +47,26 @@ RSpec is used for testing, so the tests are in <tt>spec/</tt> rather than garlic (at http://github.com/ianwhite/garlic) is used for CI. To run the CI suite have a look at garlic_example.rb +=== Why change the API in 0.2? + +repsonse_for <= v0.1 intercepted respond_to calls to allow overriding of these by class level declarations. This turns out to have some +headaches, such as: + +* If you have some bail-out code in before_filters which uses respond_to, then response_for tries to overwrite this. This meant that I had + to write response_for to only kick in once before_filters had run. This made for some funky smelling code. +* Sometimes your bail out code runs after the before_filters, in a superclass action for example, or just as part of your action (perhaps in + another method). The above hack doesn't work for this case (the before_filters have run). The solution in this case was to use + respond_to_without_response_for in any bail out code. +* Conceptually, overriding code declared in methods, with code declared at the class level, is weird. Here's an example + + class FooController < SuperclassController + response_for :index # override Superclass's index respond_to + + def index + respond_to # one might expect this to override the above, as its declared later - but it wont! + end + end + == Previous Versions: 0.1 There is a branch for rails 2.0 users on this release. If you are using rails 2.0, then you want the 0.1-stable-rails2.0 branch. If you are README.rdoc 8ac908ade87b73d18340fccb10e607123806a879 Ian White ian.w.white@gmail.com http://github.com/ianwhite/response_for/commit/7700d0813bc19faf0e2d8834f3c83c29379b4988 7700d0813bc19faf0e2d8834f3c83c29379b4988 2008-09-17T14:03:36-07:00 2008-09-17T14:03:36-07:00 Updated README with more notes about the API change 191bd2de0434fc6e18e9434c40b238493f61d0c1 Ian White ian.w.white@gmail.com