Improve API to make the work with different response types easier about rho

[bryce-anderson]

I've made some progress, but I'm not sure how far it goes to the real deal. It seems pretty obvious to me that if you're going to return multiple status codes, you're going to want to return multiple types of responses so the progress is only a minor improvement.

[bryce-anderson]

I don't think things are going to get much better than this using standard function return types. I've previously done some work using others types to wrap the result such as a scalaz disjunction \/ and the stdlib Option types here which is the only obvious (to me at least) way forward. Perhaps things like the scalaz Validation will grow along those same lines.

I'm certainly willing to entertain other ideas, but I'm going to shelve this for a while until inspiration comes.

[arouel]

I agree with you that being bound to the same result type (e.g. String or JValue) is only a minor improvement. At the end we want the concrete types that could potentially be returned to document it with SwaggerSupport.

[arouel]

I would also bring into discussion if our already existing disjunction could extended by using a level in between the Status types.

scalaz.\/[ClientError[Message],Success[Pet]]
So we can group like this:

• Informational (1xx)
• Success (2xx)
• Redirection (3xx)
• Error (4xx or 5xx)
  • ClientError (4xx)
  • ServerError (5xx)

[arouel]

After thinking a bit I think a super type that covers the disjunction of N result types could match also our needs.

[bryce-anderson]

This issue is closed by 8249c8b.