IMO, the ring should use namespaced keys, eg. :ring/body, :ring/headers
Itโs something Iโm planning to put forward for Ring 2.0, though the namespaces will be :ring.request/*
and :ring.response/*
.
๐ that would be better
I think also, ring should use deferred
to support asynchronize, instead of arity of handler
deferred from Manifold?
Manifold is a significant size - itโs larger than Ring itself.
And others might want to use different async systems.
Ring uses the lowest-common-denominator. The simplest async solution that can be translated into any other async system.
If you want to use deferreds instead of the three-arity syntax, then itโs just three lines of middleware away.
actually, I like more async, I use promise-chan support asynchronization in my app internally. ๐
Adding promise-chan support is also just a middleware away ๐
isaac: The Ring spec predates the recent popularity of namespaced keywords.