On Tue, 7 Jun 2011, ik wrote:
As you know REST is an architecture, not just a set of classes or methods.
REST doesn't even require HTTP. So calling a webserver class RESTsomething
because onGet, onPut, etc. are exposed does not have any added value.
>I agree. This was why I didn't understand the original poster's question; the
>implementation is trivial.
At the moment we are talking about HTTP, so TFPREST... for HTTP CGI is actually
in order.
The issue is not about writing 10 lines of code each time you need
to separate GET from PUT, but the fact that you repeat yourself 10 lines of
code on each
location you require to this separation.
I'm using such work for example in Sinatra. I have an API for having recordings
after few of my applications (Asterisk based) finished working. so you do
the following:
GET /recording/filename HTTP/1.1
.......
DELETE /recording/filename HTTP/1.1
.......
So you can download the recording (if exists) and delete it when no longer need
it.
If I require to implement the same thing on fpWeb, it actually takes more code
because there is no separation of any kind.
At the moment I wish to create a CRUD engine in fpWeb (and keep it open source)
that had a layer above databases, so you do not provide direct access to the
database, but you provide access to the data, like a Proxy, but in HTTP, so
instead of using SQL (for example) you use JSON, and instead of using Pg, Fb,
MySQL, SQLite etc... it is agnostic, and you control what user can do what type
of access and action etc...
This is all understood.
But Ludo is right in that a REST implementation is more than just routing the
HTTP method :-)
Michael.
_______________________________________________
fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
