// MySomethingController.php
// look no s
public function getSomethingAction($args)
{
...
}
// routing.yml
my_something:
type: rest
resource: Blah\Bundle\BlahBundle\Controller\MySomethingController
running:
php app/console router:debug
Output:
[router] Current routes
Name Method Pattern
get_something GET /somethings/{args}.{_format}
Why is the route 'somethings' ( plural with an 's' ) instead of 'something'?
is this a setting I have somewhere? or is this expected?
after digging in the code:
https://github.com/FriendsOfSymfony/FOSRestBundle/blob/master/Routing/Loader/Reader/RestActionReader.php
Here it is:
private function generateUrlParts(array $resources, array $arguments)
{
$urlParts = array();
foreach ($resources as $i => $resource) {
// if we already added all parent routes paths to URL & we have
// prefix - add it
if (!empty($this->routePrefix) && $i === count($this->parents)) {
$urlParts[] = $this->routePrefix;
}
// if we have argument for current resource, then it's object.
// otherwise - it's collection
if (isset($arguments[$i])) {
if (null !== $resource) {
$urlParts[] =
strtolower(Pluralization::pluralize($resource))
.'/{'.$arguments[$i]->getName().'}';
} else {
$urlParts[] = '{'.$arguments[$i]->getName().'}';
}
} elseif (null !== $resource) {
$urlParts[] = strtolower($resource);
}
}
return $urlParts;
}
I've opened an issue:
https://github.com/FriendsOfSymfony/FOSRestBundle/issues/247
in hopes that this would become optional
This is an update answer based on the ticket opened by #phillpafford.
Ismith77 commented on the ticket and I thought explained very well why:
Without the pluralization we wouldn't know the relationship between
the methods which is going to be important for example when
implementing #52. furthermore its a key idea of REST that we have the
GET for a single element in a collection be in a "subdir" of the
collection itself.
So if you do "proper" REST then /member/{id}.{_format} would be oddly
named but it would be actually wrong if your collection itself
wouldn't then also reside under /member{.format}.
The gist of all of this is .. the solution as is isn't so much about
convenience than it is about enforcing people actually following REST
principles.
PS: However I would like to point out that when you have a word like "data" which is plural on it's own this is a bit annoying...
Related
I've literally downloaded Laravel today and like the looks of things but i'm struggeling on 2 things.
1) I like the controllers' actions method of analysing urls instead of using routes, it seems to keep everything together more cleanly, but lets say I want to go to
/account/account-year/
how can I write an action function for this? i.e.
function action_account-year()...
is obviously not valid syntax.
2) If i had
function action_account_year( $year, $month ) { ...
and visited
/account/account_year/
An error would be displayed about missing arguments, how do you go about making this user friendly/load diff page/display an error??
You would have to manually route the hyphenated version, e.g.
Route::get('account/account-year', 'account#account_year');
Regarding the parameters, it depends on how you are routing. You must accept the parameters in the route. If you are using full controller routing (e.g. Route::controller('account')) then the method will be passed parameters automatically.
If you are manually routing, you have to capture the params,
Route::get('account/account-year/(:num)/(:num)', 'account#account_year');
So visiting /account/account-year/1/2 would do ->account_year(1, 2)
Hope this helps.
You can think of the following possibility as well
class AccountController extends BaseController {
public function getIndex()
{
//
}
public function getAccountYear()
{
//
}
}
Now simply define a RESTful controller in your routes file in the following manner
Route::controller('account', 'AccountController');
Visiting 'account/account-year' will automatically route to the action getAccountYear
I thought I'd add this as an answer in case anyone else is looking for it:
1)
public function action_account_year($name = false, $place = false ) {
if( ... ) {
return View::make('page.error' );
}
}
2)
not a solid solutions yet:
laravel/routing/controller.php, method "response"
public function response($method, $parameters = array())
{
// The developer may mark the controller as being "RESTful" which
// indicates that the controller actions are prefixed with the
// HTTP verb they respond to rather than the word "action".
$method = preg_replace( "#\-+#", "_", $method );
if ($this->restful)
{
$action = strtolower(Request::method()).'_'.$method;
}
else
{
$action = "action_{$method}";
}
$response = call_user_func_array(array($this, $action), $parameters);
// If the controller has specified a layout view the response
// returned by the controller method will be bound to that
// view and the layout will be considered the response.
if (is_null($response) and ! is_null($this->layout))
{
$response = $this->layout;
}
return $response;
}
How can I check if an object will be successfully instantiated with the given argument, without actually creating the instance?
Actually I'm only checking (didn't tested this code, but should work fine...) the number of required parameters, ignoring types:
// Filter definition and arguments as per configuration
$filter = $container->getDefinition($serviceId);
$args = $activeFilters[$filterName];
// Check number of required arguments vs arguments in config
$constructor = $reflector->getConstructor();
$numRequired = $constructor->getNumberOfRequiredParameters();
$numSpecified = is_array($args) ? count($args) : 1;
if($numRequired < $numSpecified) {
throw new InvalidFilterDefinitionException(
$serviceId,
$numRequired,
$numSpecified
);
}
EDIT: $constructor can be null...
The short answer is that you simply cannot determine if a set of arguments will allow error-free instantiation of a constructor. As commenters have mentioned above, there's no way to know for sure if a class can be instantiated with a given argument list because there are runtime considerations that cannot be known without actually attempting
instantiation.
However, there is value in trying to instantiate a class from a list of constructor arguments. The most obvious use-case for this sort of operation is a configurable Dependency Injection Container (DIC). Unfortunately, this is a much more complicated operation than the OP suggests.
We need to determine for each argument in a supplied definition array whether or not it matches specified type-hints from the constructor method signature (if the method signature actually has type-hints). Also, we need to resolve how to treat default argument values. Additionally, for our code to be of any real use we need to allow the specification of "definitions" ahead of time for instantiating a class. A sophisticated treatment of the problem will also involve a pool of reflection objects (caching) to minimize the performance impact of repeatedly reflecting things.
Another hurdle is the fact that there's no way to access the type-hint of a reflected method parameter without calling its ReflectionParameter::getClass method and subsequently instantiating a reflection class from the returned class name (if null is returned the param has no type-hint). This is where caching generated reflections becomes particularly important for any real-world use-case.
The code below is a severely stripped-down version of my own string-based recursive dependency injection container. It's a mixture of pseudo-code and real-code (if you were hoping for free code to copy/paste you're out of luck). You'll see that the code below matches the associative array keys of "definition" arrays to the parameter names in the constructor signature.
The real code can be found over at the relevant github project page.
class Provider {
private $definitions;
public function define($class, array $definition) {
$class = strtolower($class);
$this->definitions[$class] = $definition;
}
public function make($class, array $definition = null) {
$class = strtolower($class);
if (is_null($definition) && isset($this->definitions[$class])) {
$definition = $this->definitions[$class];
}
$reflClass = new ReflectionClass($class);
$instanceArgs = $this->buildNewInstanceArgs($reflClass);
return $reflClass->newInstanceArgs($instanceArgs);
}
private function buildNewInstanceArgs(
ReflectionClass $reflClass,
array $definition
) {
$instanceArgs = array();
$reflCtor = $reflClass->getConstructor();
// IF no constructor exists we're done and should just
// return a new instance of $class:
// return $this->make($reflClass->name);
// otherwise ...
$reflCtorParams = $reflCtor->getParameters();
foreach ($reflCtorParams as $ctorParam) {
if (isset($definition[$ctorParam->name])) {
$instanceArgs[] = $this->make($definition[$ctorParam->name]);
continue;
}
$typeHint = $this->getParameterTypeHint($ctorParam);
if ($typeHint && $this->isInstantiable($typeHint)) {
// The typehint is instantiable, go ahead and make a new
// instance of it
$instanceArgs[] = $this->make($typeHint);
} elseif ($typeHint) {
// The typehint is abstract or an interface. We can't
// proceed because we already know we don't have a
// definition telling us which class to instantiate
throw Exception;
} elseif ($ctorParam->isDefaultValueAvailable()) {
// No typehint, try to use the default parameter value
$instanceArgs[] = $ctorParam->getDefaultValue();
} else {
// If all else fails, try passing in a NULL or something
$instanceArgs[] = NULL;
}
}
return $instanceArgs;
}
private function getParameterTypeHint(ReflectionParameter $param) {
// ... see the note about retrieving parameter typehints
// in the exposition ...
}
private function isInstantiable($class) {
// determine if the class typehint is abstract/interface
// RTM on reflection for how to do this
}
}
In symfony, is there a method that I can use which does a reverse lookup on my routes to determine the module and action a URL points to?
Say, something like:
get_module("http://host/cars/list"); // ("cars")
get_action("http://host/frontend_dev.php/cars/list"); // ("list")
Bear in mind, I don't want to perform simple string-hacking to do this as there may be mappings that are not quite so obvious:
get_module("/"); // (What this returns is entirely dependent on the configured routes.)
Thanks!
Use the sfRouting class to match URLs. This is part of the sfContext object. Your code (in an action) would look like this:
public function executeSomeAction(sfWebRequest $request)
{
if($params = $this->getContext()->getRouting()->parse('/blog'))
{
$module = $params['module']; // blog
$action = $params['action']; // index
$route = $params['_sf_route'] // routing instance (for fun)
}
else
{
// your URL did not match
}
}
I am trying to attack this problem from a completely different angle, because it doesn't look like I can achieve my goal that way.
I want to loop over the item stack in the HeadScript View Helper, and make modifications to it. The documentation for this and some of the other view helpers makes this statement:
HeadScript overrides each of append(),
offsetSet(), prepend(), and set() to
enforce usage of the special methods
as listed above. Internally, it stores
each item as a stdClass token, which
it later serializes using the
itemToString() method. This allows
you to perform checks on the items in
the stack, and optionally modify these
items by simply modifying the object
returned.
So, where is this "object returned"? I am missing a piece of the puzzle here.
Thanks for your help!
In the toString() method of Zend_View_Helper_HeadScript I noticed a foreach() loop on $this, so I tried that and it worked. Here's a HeadScript extension I wrote that illustrates the solution:
class My_View_Helper_HeadScript extends Zend_View_Helper_HeadScript
{
public function toString($indent = null)
{
$files = array();
foreach ($this as $key => $item) {
if (!empty($item->attributes)
&& array_key_exists('src', $item->attributes)
&& ('scripts' == substr($item->attributes['src'], 1, 7))) {
$files[] = $item->attributes['src'];
unset($this[$key]);
}
}
if (0 < count($files)) {
$this->prependFile('/combo.php?type=scripts&files=' . implode(',', $files));
}
return parent::toString($indent);
}
}
In Bootstrap.php the following lines to point to my helpers:
$this->bootstrap('view');
$view = $this->getResource('view');
$view->addHelperPath('My/View/Helper', 'My_View_Helper');
In my layout, I have this line:
<?php echo $this->headScript(); ?>
If my solution is unclear in any way, let me know and I'll update it to clarify.
This situation arises from someone wanting to create their own "pages" in their web site without having to get into creating the corresponding actions.
So say they have a URL like mysite.com/index/books... they want to be able to create mysite.com/index/booksmore or mysite.com/index/pancakes but not have to create any actions in the index controller. They (a non-technical person who can do simple html) basically want to create a simple, static page without having to use an action.
Like there would be some generic action in the index controller that handles requests for a non-existent action. How do you do this or is it even possible?
edit: One problem with using __call is the lack of a view file. The lack of an action becomes moot but now you have to deal with the missing view file. The framework will throw an exception if it cannot find one (though if there were a way to get it to redirect to a 404 on a missing view file __call would be doable.)
Using the magic __call method works fine, all you have to do is check if the view file exists and throw the right exception (or do enything else) if not.
public function __call($methodName, $params)
{
// An action method is called
if ('Action' == substr($methodName, -6)) {
$action = substr($methodName, 0, -6);
// We want to render scripts in the index directory, right?
$script = 'index/' . $action . '.' . $this->viewSuffix;
// Script file does not exist, throw exception that will render /error/error.phtml in 404 context
if (false === $this->view->getScriptPath($script)) {
require_once 'Zend/Controller/Action/Exception.php';
throw new Zend_Controller_Action_Exception(
sprintf('Page "%s" does not exist.', $action), 404);
}
$this->renderScript($script);
}
// no action is called? Let the parent __call handle things.
else {
parent::__call($methodName, $params);
}
}
You have to play with the router
http://framework.zend.com/manual/en/zend.controller.router.html
I think you can specify a wildcard to catch every action on a specific module (the default one to reduce the url) and define an action that will take care of render the view according to the url (or even action called)
new Zend_Controller_Router_Route('index/*',
array('controller' => 'index', 'action' => 'custom', 'module'=>'index')
in you customAction function just retrieve the params and display the right block.
I haven't tried so you might have to hack the code a little bit
If you want to use gabriel1836's _call() method you should be able to disable the layout and view and then render whatever you want.
$this->_helper->layout()->disableLayout();
$this->_helper->viewRenderer->setNoRender(true);
I needed to have existing module/controller/actions working as normal in a Zend Framework app, but then have a catchall route that sent anything unknown to a PageController that could pick user specified urls out of a database table and display the page. I didn't want to have a controller name in front of the user specified urls. I wanted /my/custom/url not /page/my/custom/url to go via the PageController. So none of the above solutions worked for me.
I ended up extending Zend_Controller_Router_Route_Module: using almost all the default behaviour, and just tweaking the controller name a little so if the controller file exists, we route to it as normal. If it does not exist then the url must be a weird custom one, so it gets sent to the PageController with the whole url intact as a parameter.
class UDC_Controller_Router_Route_Catchall extends Zend_Controller_Router_Route_Module
{
private $_catchallController = 'page';
private $_catchallAction = 'index';
private $_paramName = 'name';
//-------------------------------------------------------------------------
/*! \brief takes most of the default behaviour from Zend_Controller_Router_Route_Module
with the following changes:
- if the path includes a valid module, then use it
- if the path includes a valid controller (file_exists) then use that
- otherwise use the catchall
*/
public function match($path, $partial = false)
{
$this->_setRequestKeys();
$values = array();
$params = array();
if (!$partial) {
$path = trim($path, self::URI_DELIMITER);
} else {
$matchedPath = $path;
}
if ($path != '') {
$path = explode(self::URI_DELIMITER, $path);
if ($this->_dispatcher && $this->_dispatcher->isValidModule($path[0])) {
$values[$this->_moduleKey] = array_shift($path);
$this->_moduleValid = true;
}
if (count($path) && !empty($path[0])) {
$module = $this->_moduleValid ? $values[$this->_moduleKey] : $this->_defaults[$this->_moduleKey];
$file = $this->_dispatcher->getControllerDirectory( $module ) . '/' . $this->_dispatcher->formatControllerName( $path[0] ) . '.php';
if (file_exists( $file ))
{
$values[$this->_controllerKey] = array_shift($path);
}
else
{
$values[$this->_controllerKey] = $this->_catchallController;
$values[$this->_actionKey] = $this->_catchallAction;
$params[$this->_paramName] = join( self::URI_DELIMITER, $path );
$path = array();
}
}
if (count($path) && !empty($path[0])) {
$values[$this->_actionKey] = array_shift($path);
}
if ($numSegs = count($path)) {
for ($i = 0; $i < $numSegs; $i = $i + 2) {
$key = urldecode($path[$i]);
$val = isset($path[$i + 1]) ? urldecode($path[$i + 1]) : null;
$params[$key] = (isset($params[$key]) ? (array_merge((array) $params[$key], array($val))): $val);
}
}
}
if ($partial) {
$this->setMatchedPath($matchedPath);
}
$this->_values = $values + $params;
return $this->_values + $this->_defaults;
}
}
So my MemberController will work fine as /member/login, /member/preferences etc, and other controllers can be added at will. The ErrorController is still needed: it catches invalid actions on existing controllers.
I implemented a catch-all by overriding the dispatch method and handling the exception that is thrown when the action is not found:
public function dispatch($action)
{
try {
parent::dispatch($action);
}
catch (Zend_Controller_Action_Exception $e) {
$uristub = $this->getRequest()->getActionName();
$this->getRequest()->setActionName('index');
$this->getRequest()->setParam('uristub', $uristub);
parent::dispatch('indexAction');
}
}
You could use the magic __call() function. For example:
public function __call($name, $arguments)
{
// Render Simple HTML View
}
stunti's suggestion was the way I went with this. My particular solution is as follows (this uses indexAction() of whichever controller you specify. In my case every action was using indexAction and pulling content from a database based on the url):
Get an instance of the router (everything is in your bootstrap file, btw):
$router = $frontController->getRouter();
Create the custom route:
$router->addRoute('controllername', new Zend_Controller_Router_Route('controllername/*', array('controller'=>'controllername')));
Pass the new route to the front controller:
$frontController->setRouter($router);
I did not go with gabriel's __call method (which does work for missing methods as long as you don't need a view file) because that still throws an error about the missing corresponding view file.
For future reference, building on gabriel1836 & ejunker's thoughts, I dug up an option that gets more to the point (and upholds the MVC paradigm). Besides, it makes more sense to read "use specialized view" than "don't use any view".
// 1. Catch & process overloaded actions.
public function __call($name, $arguments)
{
// 2. Provide an appropriate renderer.
$this->_helper->viewRenderer->setRender('overload');
// 3. Bonus: give your view script a clue about what "action" was requested.
$this->view->action = $this->getFrontController()->getRequest()->getActionName();
}
#Steve as above - your solution sounds ideal for me but I am unsure how you implmeented it in the bootstrap?