Your idea is very great – it makes sense only on huge projects with a
lot of routing definitions.
One important thing: it should be good readable and easy to understand
the configuration rules.
Ex.:
routing.yml
article_base:
url: /article
class: sfGotoRoute
options: { route: article }
routing/article.yml:
article_show:
url: /:id/:slug
param: { module: article, action: show }
class: sfPropelRoute
options: { model: Article, type: object }
article_add:
url: /add
...
It sounds really good, but the problem is overview of defined route
names.
I dont want to check in every route file if there is a route with same
name defined.
The problem could be solved by given namespace like:
url_for('@article:show?id=123&slug=foobar');
And in my routing/article.yml:
show:
url: ...
add:
url: ...
in routing.yml:
routing.yml
article:
url: /article
class: sfGotoRoute
options: { route: article }
Now it seems not be clean and compatible with actual routing syntax:
what´s the namespace, what´s not!
The cleanest way is to define namespaces in routing.yml like:
sf_route_namespaces:
article:
url: /article
route: article
...
my_route:
url: /
...
It needs more change to get the chance to be a part of symfony
core :-)
On Nov 24, 11:41 am, Olivier Poitrey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> About legibility, I don't advise to use sfJump directly, it's just an
> underlaying tool for sfPatternSubRouting to do the grouping job. If
> you use the splitted files feature of sfPatternSubRouting, I would
> tend to say your big routing file will be more maintainable.
>
> About the perf, I've no numbers yet. I developed those patches the day
> I posted the mail last week, thus it's not yet tested in production.
> It's more a request for comment than a stable and finalized code :)
>
> On 24 nov. 08, at 07:47, naholyr wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > But in your case, you may have watched the times displayed in the
> > debug bar for the routing part. What was your gain ?
>
> > About the readability ? It's kinda smart having used the system for
> > those "utility" rules (especially the sfRewrite one, and the
> > subrouting idea) but is the routing.yml still maintainable and
> > parsable by humans ? With all that jumps and gotos :s
>
> > On Nov 21, 8:29 am, Olivier Poitrey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > On 21 nov. 08, at 14:11, Kiril Angov wrote:
>
> > > > I want to ask first, is the performance gain noticeable?
>
> > > It completely depends on your routing configuration actually. If you
> > > have only a few routes with very simple patterns, I would say no. If
> > > you have one hundred routes with some very complex patterns, the
> > > performance gain can be high.
>
> > > --
> > > Olivier Poitrey
>
> --
> Olivier Poitrey
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"symfony developers" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/symfony-devs?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
