Support present hash

[u2]

#955

[dblock]

Should this be respond_to?(:merge)?

[u2]

No, removed already.

[dblock]

So, the real question given this code is why isn't present <hash> a noop to return the hash? What are we gaining by running it through present?

[dblock]

Another question is what does present <hash>, with: Presenter do and does it make any sense?

[u2]

Yes, present <hash> just merge body and return the body, no other thing.

[u2]

Yes, it's better to present <hash>, with: Presenter.I will try to rewrite it.

[dblock]

I think I am missing something. What is the difference in the result between present <hash> and present <hash>, with: Presenter?

[u2]

For the result, there is no difference.But present <hash>, with: Presenter fit the grape style.Just add a Presenter, and use with: Presenter for represent the object itself.Also, it can present anything, not only Hash.

[dblock]

Hm, I can see the argument for a noop class like this. Do you think it belongs in Middleware? It's not a Middleware.

(and sorry to be difficult :)

[u2]

I was hesitant to about that, and I am not sure where I can place Presenter.

[dblock]

Maybe just Grape::Presenters::Presenter?

[u2]

Ok, it's a good idea.I will change it right now. :).

[dblock]

Stray puts here.

Lets put this into a separate _spec file too.

[dblock]

I think the code here looks perfect. This needs an entry in README. Maybe just describe something around using this presenter to keep things consistent?

[u2]

I have updated README.

[dblock]

Merging, thanks for your patience.

[swistaczek]

Hey, I still dont get idea behind this change 💃

[dblock]

It's entirely to make returning data consistent, if you present an object you should also be able to present anything else. Sometimes it makes sense if your code path figures out what to present, then presents it.