Add simpler version of ClosureBackedEmbeddedApplication

[ldaley]

I think we can create something that requires a little less setup for the embedded tests in the docs.

Dependent on #293.

[rhart]

This simpler version is providing a default constructor so no app dir needs to be set? Or is it more involved?

And this task also includes updating all the snippets in the Javadoc?

[ldaley]

I'm not entirely sure. All I know is that it's a bit too much boilerplate now.

I think maybe even just a static factory method…

ratpack.groovy.test.EmbeddedApplications.embeddedApp {
  modules {}
  handlers {}
}

And have the following overloads:

EmbeddedApplication embeddedApplication(Closure) // use default launch config
EmbeddedApplication embeddedApplication(LaunchConfig, Closure)

Most samples would static import it so it would be…

def app = embeddedApplication {
  handlers {
    get { … }
  }
}

That's a bit of a brain dump. Haven't thought it through too much.

[rhart]

There are a couple of places that only want to set the base directory in the launch config, like RatpackGroovyAppSpec. So, is it worth also adding an overload for EmbeddedApplication embeddedApplication(BaseDir, Closure)?

[ldaley]

Yeah, I think it is.

On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 10:55 PM, rhart notifications@github.com wrote:

There are a couple of places that only want to set the base directory in the launch config, like RatpackGroovyAppSpec. So, is it worth also adding an overload for EmbeddedApplication embeddedApplication(BaseDir, Closure)?

Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
#299 (comment)

[rhart]

66e919a is a start to this