I have been developing with WebApi and have moved on to WebApi2 where Microsoft has introduced a new IHttpActionResult
Interface that seems to recommended to be used over returning a HttpResponseMessage
. I am confused on the advantages of this new Interface. It seems to mainly just provide a SLIGHTLY easier way to create a HttpResponseMessage
.
I would make the argument that this is "abstraction for the sake of abstraction". Am I missing something? What is the real world advantages I get from using this new Interface besides maybe saving a line of code?
Old way (WebApi):
public HttpResponseMessage Delete(int id)
{
var status = _Repository.DeleteCustomer(id);
if (status)
{
return new HttpResponseMessage(HttpStatusCode.OK);
}
else
{
throw new HttpResponseException(HttpStatusCode.NotFound);
}
}
New Way (WebApi2):
public IHttpActionResult Delete(int id)
{
var status = _Repository.DeleteCustomer(id);
if (status)
{
//return new HttpResponseMessage(HttpStatusCode.OK);
return Ok();
}
else
{
//throw new HttpResponseException(HttpStatusCode.NotFound);
return NotFound();
}
}
You might decide not to use IHttpActionResult
because your existing code builds a HttpResponseMessage
that doesn't fit one of the canned responses. You can however adapt HttpResponseMessage
to IHttpActionResult
using the canned response of ResponseMessage
. It took me a while to figure this out, so I wanted to post it showing that you don't necesarily have to choose one or the other:
public IHttpActionResult SomeAction()
{
IHttpActionResult response;
//we want a 303 with the ability to set location
HttpResponseMessage responseMsg = new HttpResponseMessage(HttpStatusCode.RedirectMethod);
responseMsg.Headers.Location = new Uri("http://customLocation.blah");
response = ResponseMessage(responseMsg);
return response;
}
Note, ResponseMessage
is a method of the base class ApiController
that your controller should inherit from.