I have this in my web.php (Laravel 5.3)
Route::get('/{perfil}/{seccion}', 'HotelsController#index')->where(['perfil' => '(perfil|profile)'])->where(['seccion' => '(mis-hoteles|my-properties)']);
Route::get('/{perfil}/{seccion}', 'PerfilController#index')->where(['perfil' => '(perfil|profile)']);
I want the urls /perfil/mis-hoteles and /profile/my-properties to be served by the first route. And the urls /perfil/[whatever] and /profile/[whatever] to be served by the second route.
It does not work, /perfil/mis-hoteles is redirected by the second route.
I'd also tried something like
Route::get('/{perfil}/{seccion}', 'PerfilController#index')->where(['perfil' => '(perfil|profile)','seccion' => '^(!mis\-hoteles$)'])
for the second route, but it does not work .
What am I doing wrong?
The weird thing is, if I delete the second route and leave only
Route::get('/{perfil}/{seccion}', 'HotelsController#index')->where(['perfil' => '(perfil|profile)'])->where(['seccion' => '(mis-hoteles|my-properties)']);
it works, so there is a match. Why if there is a match laravel continues looking for a match finding the second route?
Laravel does not like it when your routes have the same method and uri sring. If you have two routes with same methods and uri strings (not the actual uris they WILL receive) which you do, it just overrides it.
So we need to "trick" it a bit.
Instead of this:
Route::get('/{perfil}/{seccion}', 'HotelsController#index')->where(['perfil' => '(perfil|profile)'])->where(['seccion' => '(mis-hoteles|my-properties)']);
Route::get('/{perfil}/{seccion}', 'PerfilController#index')->where(['perfil' => '(perfil|profile)']);
We are going to "lie" and say:
Route::get('/{perfil}/{seccion}', 'HotelsController#index')->where(['perfil' => '(perfil|profile)'])->where(['seccion' => '(mis-hoteles|my-properties)']);
Route::get('/{perfil}/{section}', 'PerfilController#index')->where(['perfil' => '(perfil|profile)']);
Notice the {perfil}/{seccion} and {perfil}/{section} just this one letter will tell Laravel that we don't want to override the old route.
Don't forget to change the accepted parameter in the Controllers respectively.
Hope this solves your problem, it did for me.
Related
I notice that when you use URL:::action, and set some arguments, sometimes laravel would cast them as GET requests, sometimes not.
Is there anyone know why and how to controller it?
echo URL::action('Campaign\\CampaignController#getIndex',['para' => 1]),"<br>";
echo URL::action('Campaign\\CampaignController#getOtherAction',['para' => 1]),"<br>";
echo URL::action('Campaign\\CampaignController#getOtherAction2',['para' => 1]),"<br>";
Output:
/campaign?para=1
/campaign/other-action/1
/campaign/other-action2/1
Note the getIndex gets argument as GET (?para=1)
This happens because system cannot differentiate requests to getIndex from others if they pass it as url segment.
Means
/campaign/other-action/1 translates to other-action as a method with 1 as param
By your expectation
/campaign/other-action/1 translates to getIndex as a method with other-action/1 as param
Index methods are not suppose to have URL segments as inputs. If you need url segments as inputs then you will have to pass it as a get parameter and thats what laravel is doing for you.
According to your first route output,
if the url is /campaign/1 which means it will expect a method named get1. Another example: if the url is /campaign/param system would expect a method getParam
NOTE for fellow stackoverflow-ers:Consider asking questions before downvoting
I actually found the reason.
when you are using route::controllers method, laravel would assume you have multiple parameters attached to each action
Route::controllers([
'order' => 'Order\OrderController',
'campaign' => 'Campaign\CampaignController'
]);
For example:
campaign/other-action/{VALUE1?}/{VALUE2?}/{VALUE3?}...
So when you pass ['para' => 1, 'para2' => 'abc'], laravel will try to match parameters to action. in this case: campaign/other-action/1/abc
Avoiding to use Route::controllers, an help you take control on laravel router argument behaviour.
For example, in routes.php:
Route::get('campaign/other-action/{id}','Campaign\CampaignController#getOtherAction2')
when you give
echo URL::action('Campaign\\CampaignController#getOtherAction2',['id'=>366, 'para' => 1, 'para2' => 'abc']);
you will get what you want:
campaign/other-action/366?para=1¶2=abc
I hope it is helpful and I now understand why laravel remove Route::controllers from 5.3 version.
In route.php I defined a route to a controller with 2 tokens on it.
Route::get('/{category}/{slug}', 'projectController#detail');
Everything is working fine till when there is a call to a URL that have the same structure but has nothing to do with the one that has to be caught by that route shown below.
So when I have for example "/admin/tags", the controller below is triggered because it has the same structure of "/{category}/{slug}" and of course it gives me an error, because it doesn't find a variable.
So now I fixed the problem moving that route on the bottom, but I believe I have to do something to prevent this behavior in advance, cause if I have multiple routes with different tokens everything would be triggered every time and there would be a mess.
So, what is it supposed to do in these cases?
P.S. I'm super beginner with Laravel
use some constraint to the route, reference parameters-regular-expression-constraints. For example:
Route::get('user/{name}', function ($name) {
//
})
->where('name', '[A-Za-z]+');
Or you can make the most specific before unspecific one. For example, in this sequence:
Route::get("/admin/tags", '......');
Route::get('/{category}/{slug}', 'projectController#detail');
if route need two token like that, i'm usually add prefix so my routes looks like this
Route::get('/categories/{category}/slug/{slug}', 'ProjectController#detail');
or
Route::get('/categories/{category}/{slug}', 'ProjectController#detail');
I was having the same issue.
I have constraints on every path parameter (as you always should) and unfortunately the conflict occurs between the following:
Route::get('{userId}/{path}', [
'as' => 'products',
'uses' => 'HomeController#click'
])->where(['id' => '[0-9]+', 'path' => '[0-9a-fA-F]+']);
Route::get('link/{link_path}', [
'as' => 'product-link',
'uses' => 'UserController#productLink'
])->where(['link_path' => '[0-9a-fA-F]+']);
Where even though the one path has the prepended 'link/' in the path it still tried to hit the other. By placing the route with the prepended 'link/' above the other route it took priority and works.
Personally I think if you have a condition that isn't met on the route where clause it should skip the route and move on to the next. It doesn't really make sense to me to put a conditional that doesn't actually get passed up if the conditions aren't met.
Hopefully this helps anyone else having this issue.
I'm seeing an issue with Laravel 4 when I have two routes pointing to the same action, one within a group and one just "loose" in the routes.php file.
<?php
// Routes.php
Route::group(array('domain' => '{subdomain}.domain.com'), function()
{
Route::get('profile/{id}/{name}', 'ProfileController#index');
});
Route::get('profile/{id}/{name}', 'ProfileController#index');
// Template.blade.php
Jim Smith
The template links to: currentsubdomain.domain.com/profile/%7Bid%7D/%7Bname%7D instead of the expected behaviour of swapping the ID and name for 123 and JimSmith respectively.
If I comment out, the first route (the one within the group), the code works as expected. Why does adding this additional route break the URL generation? Is there a way to work around this? Am I missing something obvious?
P.s. For those wondering why I need this route in two places it's so I can optionally generate the url with the subdomain using URL::action('ProfileController#index' array('subdomain' => 'james', 'id' => 123, 'name' => 'JimSmith');
The problem is that you don't have names/aliases for the routes so it's defaulting to the first one it comes across.
Consider this an alternate route structure:
Route::group(array('domain' => '{subdomain}.domain.com'), function() {
Route::get('profile/{id}/{name}', [
'as' => 'tenant.profile.index',
'uses' => 'ProfileController#index'
]);
});
Route::get('profile/{id}/{name}', [
'as' => 'profile.index',
'uses' => 'ProfileController#index'
]);
Now that you have these routes named, you can do:
{{ URL::route('profile.index', [123, 'jSmith']) }}
Or alternatively:
{{ URL::route('tenant.profile.index', ['subdomain', 123, 'jSmith']) }}
As just an added extra, you could only have this route defined once, then in all the controller methods you'd have something like:
public function index($subdomain = null, $id, $name) { }
Then you can just simply pass www through as the subdomain and have some code somewhere that discounts the www.domain.com domain from certain actions.
Multi-tenancy (if that is indeed what you're after) isn't easy and straight forward but there are some methods used to tackle certain parts. I'm actually planning on writing a tutorial regarding it, but for now I hope this helps somewhat.
Regarding the use of named routes, these 2 lines allow me to access the same page so which is correct?
// Named route
Route::get('test/apples', array('as'=>'apples', 'uses'=>'TestController#getApples'));
// Much simpler
Route::get('apples', 'TestController#getApples');
Is there any reason I should be using named routes if the latter is shorter and less prone to errors?
Named routes are better, Why ?
It's always better to use a named route because insstsead of using the url you may use the name to refer the route, for example:
return Redirect::to('an/url');
Now above code will work but if you would use this:
return Redirect::route('routename');
Then it'll generate the url on the fly so, if you even change the url your code won't be broken. For example, check your route:
Route::get('apples', 'TestController#getApples');
Route::get('apples', array('as' => 'apples.show', 'uses' => 'TestController#getApples'));
Both routes are same but one without name so to use the route without name you have to depend on the url, for example:
return Redirect::to('apples');
But same thing you may do using the route name if your route contains a name, for example:
return Redirect::route('apples.show');
In this case, you may change the url from apples to somethingelse but still your Redirect will work without changing the code.
The only advantage is it is easier to link to, and you can change the URL without going through and changing all of its references. For example, with named routes you can do stuff like this:
URL::route('apples');
Redirect::route('apples');
Form::open(array('route' => 'apples'));
Then, if you update your route, all of your URLs will be updated:
// from
Route::get('test/apples', array('as'=>'apples', 'uses'=>'TestController#getApples'));
// to
Route::get('new/apples', array('as'=>'apples', 'uses'=>'TestController#getApples'));
Another benefit is logically creating a URL with a lot parameters. This allows you to be a lot more dynamic with your URL generation, so something like:
Route::get('search/{category}/{query}', array(
'as' => 'search',
'uses' => 'SearchController#find',
));
$parameters = array(
'category' => 'articles',
'query' => 'apples',
);
echo URL::route('search', $parameters);
// http://domain.com/search/articles/apples
The only reason to name the route is if you need to reference it later. IE: from your page in a view or something, check whether you are in that route.
I am facing some problems in routing under cakephp
there are three actions in my controller
they are as below
www.example.com/photos/newphotos
www.example.com/photos/random
www.example.com/photos/popular
I want them as
www.example.com/newphotos
www.example.com/random
www.example.com/popular
so i routes file under config file I wrote as
Router::connect('/:newphotos', array('controller' => 'photos', 'action' => 'newphotos'));
Router::connect('/:popular', array('controller' => 'photos', 'action' => 'popular'));
Router::connect('/:random', array('controller' => 'photos', 'action' => 'random'));
its working fine when I hit the url
www.example.com/newphotos
but when I hit url www.example.com/random or www.example.com/popular , its again point to action newphotos.
so how can I solve it
(In other words I need to remove controller name "photos" from url for every action)
Many thanks
Why not remove the : from the routes?
If you want to stick with /: paths, then you would need to supply a third parameter to Router::connect() in which to specify patterns for the added options. That is, if you have /:popular as the first parameter, you would need array('popular' => 'popular') as the third parameter, making the rule look like:
Router::connect('/:popular', array('controller' => 'photos', 'action' => 'popular'), array('popular' => 'popular'));
This means that :popular will be matched against the given regex, that is the literal 'popular'. See CakePHP's docs for more info.
Nevertheless, this is useless and silly, so you should stick with paths without colons.
Just delete the colon from the first parameter. They are kind of "capturing variables", so now you basically are routing all / with some parameters to photos/newphotos, and the parameters being captured to :newphotos. As it always will match the first route, then it will not look for the others.