Regarding: https://github.com/rails/rails/issues/2798
Before when I was using respond_to, I didn't have to specify :location, but after switching to respond_with, I do, so I ran into that issue. From what I've read, location is only supposed to be required for a RESTful service specifically when :status is :created (with the location where you can go to get the resource) or :accepted (when further processing is needed on the request and I guess you are giving the location of where they can do to wait on it and eventually get it from that url). I understand that it may not be backwards compatible, but is there a way to not have to have it to be set to nil explicitly if it is unnecessary? From that bug, it looked like that would be a breaking change, so I'm wondering if something new should be considered for Rails 4? How about something like (sorry for my bad function names- having trouble coming up with anything good): wrap do # Something that may call save/setup transaction, etc. goes here. # By wrapping this in a block the wrap method that yields this block could # do a begin ... rescue around the yield and if StandardError rescued # it could set status :internal_server_error and return a generic json response # containing the error. @my_model.save # respond would be similar to respond_with/respond_to but is able # to look at @my_model.errors to determine if there are validation errors # in which case it would return :unprocessable_entity with the errors wrapped # in JSON for json format, etc., otherwise it would look at the request to # determine the operation type or you could pass :create, :destroy, :update, # etc. as an argument. Based on operation type would set status :created if in create, # head :no_content if destroy, status :ok if in update, show, index. And you # would specify status: :accepted if it is an async request. Would set the # location based on controller and action in request or use a specified location. respond @my_model end A really bad idea or not? I could write a gem for it easily if it were just a matter of adding a wrapping method and convenience response method that could call respond_with/respond_to. Thanks! -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/rubyonrails-core/-/y2zgnJ8PUgkJ. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
