Forgot to reply to list. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Duane Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Aug 8, 2007 3:17 PM Subject: Re: Proposal: Pure Regex Router (and router wishlist) To: Daniel N <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
I realize I'm fighting against long-held tradition. Luckily, I'm so > much against the current way of things as I am deterred by its > inflexibility at times (or at least, the inflexibility of Rails > Routes). I feel like we should have a Pure Regex Router as the > foundation, and then other router-adding styles built on top of that. > > Correction: The above should read, "I'm *not* so much against the current way of things, as I am deterred by its inflexibility at times." Sorry about the harsh sounding original text. On 8/7/07, Daniel N <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > I'm not sure why you would want the above in any routes. Merb supports > restful routes so I don't see why you would want what you suggested there. > > You end up mixing the verb into the noun and get multiple url's for a > resourse just to do crud. That's what restful routes gets us away from. > Personally I like the restful conventions and find that it does nice things > to the way I think of stuff. > Agreed. I see that it was not a very convincing example, but the point was to show how an idea outside the box is currently "impossible" without rewriting the router. My objective is to find a solution with the fewest possible restrictions (a superset) so that the current best-practice ( i.e. restful routes and rails-alike routes) becomes a subset of the solution. The other two examples, map segments to other segments, and type agnostic > routing look interesting to me though. > Just my 0.02 > Thanks for your feedback on these. Duane Johnson (canadaduane)
_______________________________________________ Merb-devel mailing list [email protected] http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/merb-devel
