The downside is responses that are simply {} instead of {"response":
{}}. I can't see the downside to users, but don't know if the spec
allows the first form.
On Tue, Jul 8, 2008 at 5:26 PM, Cassie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> + shindig-dev
> (you forgot the list)
>
> I don't see any problem with ResponseItem<Void>... as long as the tests pass
> then it sounds golden to me.
>
> - Cassie
>
>
> On Tue, Jul 8, 2008 at 5:24 PM, Adam Winer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> Q: about this empty response business. I wanted to use
>> ResponseItem<Void> instead of ResponseItem<Object> for createXyz()
>> service methods, but that created empty responses which made test code
>> unhappy. Any reason not to just do this anyway (and fix the tests, of
>> course)?
>>
>> On Tue, Jul 8, 2008 at 4:15 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > Author: doll
>> > Date: Tue Jul 8 16:15:17 2008
>> > New Revision: 675046
>> >
>> > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=675046&view=rev
>> > Log:
>> > Fixed bug in samplecontainer caused by latest abdera changes.
>> >
>> > The abdera code can now return an empty response so the
>> > samplecontainer.html code has been modified to allow that emptiness.
>> >
>> >
>> > Modified:
>> >
>> > incubator/shindig/trunk/javascript/samplecontainer/samplecontainer.html
>> >
>> > Modified:
>> > incubator/shindig/trunk/javascript/samplecontainer/samplecontainer.html
>> > URL:
>> > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/shindig/trunk/javascript/samplecontainer/samplecontainer.html?rev=675046&r1=675045&r2=675046&view=diff
>> >
>> > ==============================================================================
>> > ---
>> > incubator/shindig/trunk/javascript/samplecontainer/samplecontainer.html
>> > (original)
>> > +++
>> > incubator/shindig/trunk/javascript/samplecontainer/samplecontainer.html Tue
>> > Jul 8 16:15:17 2008
>> > @@ -164,6 +164,9 @@
>> > function dumpStateFile() {
>> > sendRequestToServer('dumpstate', 'GET', null,
>> > function(data) {
>> > + if (!data) {
>> > + alert("Could not dump the current state.");
>> > + }
>> > document.getElementById('gadgetState').innerHTML
>> > = gadgets.json.stringify(data);
>> > });
>> > @@ -178,15 +181,11 @@
>> > "METHOD" : method,
>> > "POST_DATA" : encodeValues(opt_postParams)};
>> >
>> > - makeRequest(socialDataPath + url,
>> > + makeRequest(socialDataPath + url + "?st=" + gadget.secureToken,
>> > function(data) {
>> > data = data.data;
>> > - if (!data) {
>> > - alert("The request to the server caused an error.");
>> > - } else {
>> > - if (opt_callback) {
>> > - opt_callback(data);
>> > - }
>> > + if (opt_callback) {
>> > + opt_callback(data);
>> > }
>> > },
>> > makeRequestParams);
>> > @@ -219,7 +218,7 @@
>> >
>> > // We are using eval directly here because the outer response comes
>> > from a
>> > // trusted source, and json parsing is slow in IE.
>> > - var data = eval("(" + txt + ")");
>> > + var data = txt ? eval("(" + txt + ")") : "";
>> > var resp = {
>> > data: data
>> > };
>> >
>> >
>> >
>
>
