Hello,
> But what do you do for entities that are properties of your child
> resources i.e.
http://hostname/customers/100/orders?
>
> I think it would be best to have another HttpRestAdapter with a new
> URL:
http://hostname/customers/100/orders.
For this example (customers and orders of a specific customer), I
_think_ you would model it with TWO pipes:
=== HARD CODED EXAMPLE ===
// base pipeline
Pipeline pipeline = new Pipeline("http://hostname/");
Pipe<Customer> customersPipe = pipeline.add("customers",
Customer[].class);
==> maps to 'http://hostname/customers/'
Pipe<Order> ordersOfCustomer100 =
pipeline.add("customers/100/orders",
Order[].class);
==> maps to 'http://hostname/customers/100/orders'
So here, technically in the implementation detail you would actually
have two _different_ HttpRestAdapter objects, one in the
'customersPipe' pipe and one in 'ordersOfCustomer100'.
The problem I see with this is that you have to register an instance-specific Pipe. Makes
no sense to have to register it, as you only need it once. Keeping it around afterwards is
really a memory leak.
Greetings,
Matthias
>
>>
>> >
>> > It means, that if we want to get a single instance of a resource
>> > (i.e. Task#100) we have to create a new HttpRestProvider with a
>> > new URL.
>> >
>> > For delete(), OTOH we can execute it with a specific id, and the
>> > same goes for put() to perform an update of a child resource.
>>
>>
>> Correct, a put on /tasks does make no sense. A delete on /tasks
>> would
>> (I guess in most cases) mean all items are deleted, which feels
>> wrong....
>>
> Sure, it's all relative to endpoint URL - to decide if it makes
> sense or not. But if I understand correctly the resource URL in
> our design should always be pointing to a resource type url (i.e.
>
http://hostname/customers), and never to
>
http://hostname/customers/100, or
>
http://hostname/customers/100/orders), and that is the reason for
> current semantics of get(), delete(), post(), put() ?
>
>> So IMO these put/delete operations make more sense on URIs, like
>> /tasks/{id} (update / remove a single item).
>>
>>
>>
>> >
>> > So we have GET, and POST operations performed on a 'parent'
>> > resource, and DELETE, and PUT operations performed on child
>> > resources. This asymmetry is confusing to me ... non-intuitive.
>>
>> Hrm... I disagree, as indicated in my sentences on put/delete
>> above...
>>
>> I like Stefan's image on restful URIs:
>>
http://www.infoq.com/resource/articles/rest-introduction/en/resources/fig...
>>
>
> +1
> Actually I'd say this exactly describes the API and usage as I
> proposed it above :)
> URL defines a resource, and GET, DELETE, POST, PUT operate on that
> exact resource URL.
> In this scheme of things you never operate on a 'child' resource,
> as the 'child' resource is already expressed through a URL (i.e.
>
http://hostname/customers/100, or
>
http://hostname/customers/100/orders - a collection on a child
> resource).
>
>> The above picture 'models' URIs for this UML diagram:
>>
http://www.infoq.com/resource/articles/rest-introduction/en/resources/fig...
>>
>
> Actually I understand this as two layers where figure1 layer API,
> uses figure2 layer API.
> That's the business interface layer that delegates to
> HttpRestAdapter, the two layer approach. In our case persistence
> view with operations like findById ...
>
>
>> (Taken from this article =>
>>
http://www.infoq.com/articles/rest-introduction)
>>
>> However the figure2.jpg shows as well, that there maybe cases
>> where a
>> DELETE on /tasks (or '/customers/{id}/orders') and a POST on
>> /tasks/{id} (or '/orders/{id}') can make sense.
>>
>> => We need to cover that too...
>> If I recall correctly those two 'corner cases' are also not
>> covered
>> by
>> the JavaScript library.
>>
>>
>> > - I wouldn't eat exceptions, and return null even in a
>> > not-yet-real
>> > exception handling :)
>> >
(
https://github.com/danielpassos/aerogear-android/blob/new-pipeline/src/ma...)
>> >
>> > Really, either don't catch it, or if you do catch it, rethrow it
>> > as
>> > is, or wrap into another - normally RuntimeException is
>> > perfectly
>> > fine, so you don't pollute your API with throws declarations.
>>
>>
>> +1 on this comment - but he added a TODO already ;)
>>
>
> That's why I wrote 'even in a not-yet-real exception handling' i.e.
> don't _ever_ do it like that :)
>
>>
>> >
>> > - I would use IllegalArgumentException here:
>> >
https://github.com/danielpassos/aerogear-android/blob/new-pipeline/src/ma...
>> >
>> > It's more appropriate, as it's a standard pattern for this kind
>> > of
>> > use-case. By convention UnsupportedOperationException is used
>> > for
>> > empty methods where interface contract is not fully supported.
>> >
>>
>> +1
>>
>>
>>
>> > - We have to do something about this "getId"
>> >
(
https://github.com/danielpassos/aerogear-android/blob/new-pipeline/src/ma...)
>> >
>> > One idea is to have an annotation - @Id. But scanning for
>> > annotations needs to be done at init time or lazily on first use
>> > ...
>> > So maybe we could have an abstract base class with abstract
>> > method
>> > getId() that every data object has to extend, and implement. A
>> > simpler, and more robust solution actually, as compiler will
>> > enforce it so there is no way for not providing one, as could
>> > happen with forgotten or wrong placement of @Id annotation for
>> > example.
>> >
>>
>> I think the problem here is that not every object has an 'id', the
>> field could be name 'recordId' - In JavaScript this is
>> configurable.
>> iOS has a TODO here...
>>
>
> That's interesting. Can you give some examples?
>
>
>>
>> -Matthias
>>
>>
>>
>> >
>> > That's about it for now ... :)
>> >
>> > - marko
>> >
>> >
>> > ----- Original Message -----
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Hi guys
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> I did some changes in the android library based on iOS stuff,
>> >> it's
>> >> closer to the pipeline adapter implementation. I would
>> >> appreciate
>> >> feedback and review.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
https://github.com/aerogear/aerogear-android/pull/1
>> >>
https://github.com/aerogear/aerogear-android-todo/pull/1
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Thanks,
>> >> Passos
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> aerogear-dev mailing list
>> >> aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>> >>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
>> >>
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > aerogear-dev mailing list
>> > aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>> >
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Matthias Wessendorf
>>
>> blog:
http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>> sessions:
http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>> twitter:
http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> aerogear-dev mailing list
>> aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
>>
> _______________________________________________
> aerogear-dev mailing list
> aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
--
Matthias Wessendorf
blog:
http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
sessions:
http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
twitter:
http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
_______________________________________________
aerogear-dev mailing list
aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev