Hey I wonder if anyone is on-line to answer a quic...

# http4k

[Ricardo]

Hey I wonder if anyone is on-line to answer a quick question about the http4k contract library?

[dave]

Shoot! 🙃

[Ricardo]

Ha thanks David!

[Ricardo]

Just looking at the bindContract function vs the bind function and it appears the former does not create a HttpHandler.

[dave]

(for reference, Londpn office hours are when were generally about )

[Ricardo]

Is this deliberate?

[Ricardo]

Ah OK, cheers!

[dave]

Yes. That will create a contract route, which sits inside a contract block. It's the contract block which creates the handler

[Ricardo]

It just would be nice if ContractRoute was also an HttpHandler.

[Ricardo]

It means we can test an endpoint without running it through an application or a contract block.

[Ricardo]

From a design perspective, is there a reason why this isn't the case?

[dave]

You can use a very simple contract block (literally just contract { routes+= <cr> }) to test it

[dave]

But I'm not sure that the machinery of the contract routing would allow it to work because it lives outside.

[dave]

From a design perspective - not really TBH. Just the way it worked out. I haven't got the code in front of me at the mo so I can't check easily 🙃

[dave]

But it is a valid question - maybe we can look at if it would be possible (I am sceptical though)

[dave]

I'm afk, but try adding this and see if it would work

operator fun ContractRoute.invoke(request:Request)  = toRouter(Root)?.match(request) ?: Response(NOT_FOUND)

[dave]

@Ricardo one thing with that though - security will not be applied as it's done at the routing layer - you do have access in the extension function to get the security filter though so it could also be applied inside the invoke method

[dave]

(with a tweak)

[Ricardo]

I have actually modified the ContractRoute in a branch. Should I send a PR?

[dave]

Yep - thinking about it I think we have all the correct machinery to do it in a more consistent fashion (so we might not end up using it exactly as your PR although I will likely merge it), but let's see what you've got already. 🙃 (We'll deffo give you a credit in the changelog anyway)

Thanks 🙃

[Ricardo]

This is what I came up with:

[Ricardo]

https://github.com/http4k/http4k/pull/267

[Ricardo]

It's probably a bit duff

[dave]

@Ricardo doesn't matter - we can refactor if it needs bashing into shape 😉! The important thing is that it's a great idea and we should definitely do it if we can. 🙃

[dave]

(although am on hols at the moment, so it'll probably be next week before merging it in)

[Ricardo]

Cool enjoy your hols

[Ricardo]

Thanks for the help