error_page and named locations
lists at ruby-forum.com
Fri Dec 12 18:05:34 MSK 2008
Igor Sysoev wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 10:50:21AM +0100, Igor Clark wrote:
>> If there's an implied
>> 3) falls back to a named location if no file is found
>> then I think it would be good to have some reference to the fallback
>> functionality, even if it's optional, as explicit names are more clear,
>> and for people trying to read documentation, directive names with
>> 'hidden' functionality are hard to find.
> Yes, however, fallback is not optional. The directive has at least two
> parameters: the last one will be always fallback and it may be
> @named_location or /uri/that/should/not/fail.
>> The 'uri' bit, on the other hand, can be assumed, as we know from the
>> fact that we're in a location block that this directive is dealing with
>> a particular URI, so we need to express what this directive does to
>> fulfil the request for that URI.
>> So I'd like to suggest something like 'try_files_with_fallback' - it's
>> perhaps a bit wordy, but seems to express more clearly what's happening.
> I think fallback should not be mentioned.
Yes, I think you're right, because it's one of a list of options being
tried, and in a sense it's not actually a fallback, it's just the last
use_* is good because it makes it clear that one of the options /will/
be used; try_* is good because it makes it clear that the arguments are
tried in turn until one /can/ be used. *_file is perhaps less good
because it implies only files can be used in the list.
Maybe use_resource or try_resource? I'd probably go for use_resource,
otherwise, out of the existing proposed names, I'd vote for use_file.
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
More information about the nginx