Skip to content
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

Reintroduce the option for fallthrough for authenticated services #1670

Merged
merged 4 commits into from Feb 26, 2018

Conversation

@jmcardon
Copy link
Member

@jmcardon jmcardon commented Feb 18, 2018

Reopening for the fallen comerade #1665

val service = middleware(authedService)

//Unauthenticated
(service <+> regularService).orNotFound(Request[IO](method = Method.POST)) must returnStatus(

This comment has been minimized.

@jcranky

jcranky Feb 18, 2018
Contributor

I guess I'm the only one that prefers combineK instead of <+>?

This comment has been minimized.

@rossabaker

rossabaker Feb 24, 2018
Member

I don't have strong feelings. Do you similarly prefer combine to |+|?.

This comment has been minimized.

@jcranky

jcranky Feb 26, 2018
Contributor

Yes, I usually prefer to avoid symbolic operators - it makes the life of beginners easier.

This comment has been minimized.

@aeons

aeons Feb 26, 2018
Member

When you have only two arguments, I guess the non-symbolic names can be better. If you have more than two I definitely prefer the symbolic version. And since I like consistency, I prefer the symbolic version for two arguments as well.

This comment has been minimized.

@jmcardon

jmcardon Feb 26, 2018
Author Member

The discussion but this feels sort of like a funny tangent given the scope of this pr (authentication). <+> is in more than just my tests and has been for months.

I'm just hoping that the combineK vs <+> syntax isn't the blocker for a relatively simple PR here.

It's pretty prevalent in our docs as well to combine stuff. Also it looks like a Tie fighter so it gets a bonus nerd thumbs up from me.

This comment has been minimized.

@jcranky

jcranky Feb 26, 2018
Contributor

lol - it is totally a tangent, sorry for that, my bad :)

This comment has been minimized.

@rossabaker

rossabaker Feb 26, 2018
Member

Well, I already approved it. Don't blame me! 😆

@aeons aeons merged commit 5fc2f82 into http4s:master Feb 26, 2018
2 checks passed
2 checks passed
continuous-integration/appveyor/pr AppVeyor build succeeded
Details
continuous-integration/travis-ci/pr The Travis CI build passed
Details
@rossabaker rossabaker mentioned this pull request Apr 20, 2018
19 of 31 tasks complete
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Linked issues

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

4 participants
You can’t perform that action at this time.