[hunchentoot-devel] developing in hunchentoot

[Vsevolod]

On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 11:28 AM, Edi Weitz <edi at agharta.de> wrote:

> On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 7:53 AM, Eric Abrahamsen <girzel at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Most often, I'm redefining an existing handler (to
> > expand or correct it) and would rather overwrite that handler with its
> > new version, rather than adding a new entry. I'm finding it awkward to
> > modify my macro so that it checks for an existing handler with that
> > function name and overwrites it – more importantly I'm not certain
> > this is the best way to do it.
>
> DEFINE-EASY-HANDLER should overwrite existing handlers of the same
> name (or if they have the same - EQUAL - URI part).  If it doesn't do
> that, it's a bug.

Maybe he is referring to the fact, that after redefining the DISPATCHER, the
running server's dispatch table remains unchanged. In the sense, that the
server continues to use the dispatcher closures, created at the time of the
server start. At least for me it works this way (in old Hunchentoot): when I
redefine a dispatcher, I need to modify the dispatch table (or plainly
restart the server) for the change to take effect.

To clarify, I'd like to add, that I refer to the handler functions as per
the docs (e.g. html-generation functions). They take no arguments and are
responsible for forming the reply object. If you redefine them, it has
immediate effect. Dispatchers are the closures in the dispatch-table, that
take 1 argument -- request. If you redefine the dispatcher (for example,
with define-easy-handler, or manually), somehow, it doesn't effect the
running server's dispatch-table.

-- 
vsevolod
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mailman.common-lisp.net/pipermail/tbnl-devel/attachments/20090310/f426b661/attachment.html>