News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Reserve the 418 status code. Parent comment

Re:Reserve the 418 status code by vfaronov on Monday August 14, 2017 @10:29AM (#15008771)
> In most cases it is clearer to simply adopt a payload format that includes application specific error codes

Absolutely. This is a common practice and there’s even a proposed standard for it (RFC 7807). But such a payload need not be sent with 200 (OK). It can refine the status code instead of overriding it.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Reserve the 418 status code by grandalf on Monday August 14, 2017 @04:40PM (#15012654)
> It can refine the status code instead of overriding it.

True, this is sometimes possible when (coincidentally) one of the HTTP specs or extensions defines one of the codes in a way that feels similar enough.

The mistake is to assume that there is already a code for everything and that one does not need to define application specific error codes, which is what many API developers do.

[ Parent | on HN ]