One thing I've found with liberator is that it's much more flexible to just (def my-resource { ,,,, })
as a map and defer constructing the resource
until you wire it up with your routes etc... rather than use defresource
.
Curious if others have settled into this pattern too... and wondering whether the docs should downplay or perhaps even deprecate defresource
I use this all the time. defresource
was a bad idea in the end but defxxx
macros had been en vogue at that time.
Yeah I remember 🙂 and we've all been guilty of writing our own brittle variants of defxxx
...
It would be good for the docs to eventually emphasise the map/data nature of resources... .that's the new vogue right? 🙂
I think the current docs might encourage people to think of resources in the wrong way - a few weeks ago we went through a code base and removed all def
'd resources and only def'd the maps... so we could make things more flexible