I have the following server specification:
(define (start request)
;; for now only calling the dispatch
;; we could put some action here, which shall happen before each dispatching
(hsk-dispatch request))
(define-values (hsk-dispatch a-url)
(dispatch-rules [("") #:method "get" overview-app]
[("index") #:method "get" overview-app]
[("home") #:method "get" overview-app]
[("hsk") #:method "get" hsk-app]
[("ajax" "hsk-1-data") #:method "get" hsk-1-data]))
(serve/servlet
start
#:servlet-path "/index" ; default URL
#:extra-files-paths (list (build-path (current-directory) "static")) ;
directory for static files
#:port 8000 ; the port on which the servlet is running
#:servlet-regexp #rx""
#:launch-browser? false ; should racket show the servlet running in a
browser upon startup?
;; #:quit? false ; ???
#:listen-ip false ; the server will listen on ALL available IP addresses,
not only on one specified
#:server-root-path (current-directory)
#:file-not-found-responder respond-unknown-file)
With some requires of other modules etc.. I am adding routes in the
dispatch-rules part of the program. However, I'd like to add routes and specify
which procedures handle requests to them elsewhere in the program.
The reason why I want to do this is, that I want to create a procedure similar
to what I recently saw in Chicken Scheme's web framework Awful:
http://wiki.call-cc.org/eggref/4/awful#using-ajax
There is a procedure, which generates jQuery code, which is on a web page,
which then requests a route, which I can specify when I call the ajax procedure.
I wonder if (1) and how (2) I could specify routes like that outside of the
dispatch-rules part of the program, so that I could get something like Awful's
ajax procedure (3) or maybe if there even already is such a thing for Racket's
webserver (4).
What I like about it is, that I can code everything "on the server side" and in
Racket instead of having to switch to JavaScript at some point and still I am
able to "connect" parts of the actual DOM elements to procedures on the server
side. Without such a thing, it might be better to let the server send only raw
data and handle all DOM tree logic in JavaScript in a static JavaScript file,
because that way, I'd have knowledge about the DOM elements in the code,
because I'd be creating them in JavaScript on the basis of that raw knowledge.
On the other hand, if I render some HTML on the server side and send it to the
client and the client needs to modify it and inform the server about it, I'll
have to rely on certain ids and classes of DOM elements simply being there,
while I had to switch context to JavaScript. This feels less clean than either
generating all DOM elements in JavaScript code or generating everything with a
procedure like Awful's ajax procedure.
I don't need much, probably only a few click listeners, so maybe my procedure
could be less complex than the ajax of Awful. Or since Racket is very similar
in Syntax, I could try to copy most of the code.
For another utf8 related reason, I cannot use Chicken Scheme at the moment, so
I reimplemented everything in Racket, where I do not have that problem, but
also do not know of any such ajax procedure.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Racket Users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to racket-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
