Please add app.route('foo').use()

[nakedible]

For Express 4.x, documentation says "Using app.route() is a recommended approach to avoiding duplicate route naming and thus typo errors." However, since all() and use() are different, it would be nice to be able to call use() on route objects as well, to avoid duplicate route naming.

[nakedible]

Suggested tags: 4x, Feature Request, Routes.

[defunctzombie]

We decided against this because .use carries a specific meaning with what it does to req.path

[nakedible]

Doesn't route do the same? That is, strip the path segment from the url? Or is there some more I'm not seeing?

In any case, does this means that your recommended usage is:

app.use('/app', middleware);
app.route('/app')
  .get(function (req, res) { ... });

or

app.route('/app')
  .all(middleware)
  .get(function (req, res) { ... });

Does the latter make a difference in OPTIONS behavior or something else?

[jonathanong]

no, app.route() doesn't strip the path segment from the url. only .use() does. up to @defunctzombie if he wants to support this though. it could make the internal code simpler if all middleware used .route() internally, but i'm not sure i see a use-case for this.

[defunctzombie]

I need to check on the OPTIONS behavior but I would lean towards making sure .all doesn't affect OPTIONS for .route or app.all() but that might break some other assumptions people have made (or backwards compat) so it could be a no-go.

The second approach is what I would recommend but it could depend on your reliance on req.path inside the middleware.

[nakedible]

Well, at the very least, when enabling all debugging, using .all will add 24 separate handlers. That doesn't seem reasonable for simply using a middleware.

The way I see it is simply that there are three types of handlers on the incoming requests:

• Handlers that simply skip requests not matching path prefix
• Handlers that skip requests not matching path prefix and strip prefix from requests matching path prefix
• Handlers that match a certain METHOD and resolve path containing wildcards, params, etc.

These three types should be usable in all situations.

[nakedible]

Yeah, sorry, route() does not strip the path, I confused it with Router - I thought those two were the same thing, with route('/path') just calling app.use('/path', new Router()) and returning the generated instance.

[defunctzombie]

I think we should change .all to simply add middleware and not affect options responses. Yes, it will be slightly different than app.all, but whatever.

[jonathanong]

I think we should change .all to simply add middleware and not affect options responses. Yes, it will be slightly different than app.all, but whatever.

+1

[danschumann]

I'm a fan of the following syntax, since i keep my apps very modularized:

(note: often times a sub app will handle most of it's own routing, so this much indentation wouldn't be necessary irl)

app

  .route('/library')
    .use(middleware.auth.hasLibraryCard)
      .route('/books')
        .get(controllers.books.index)

        .get('/:book_id',
          controllers.books.show)

        .route('/overdue')
          .get(controllers.overdueBooks.index)
          .post(controllers.overdueBooks.create)
          .end() // this would be nice to help in chaining

        .post(controllers.books.create)
        .end() 

      .route('/shelves')
        .route('/:shelf_id')
          .use(middleware.loadShelf) // to req.locals or something
          .get(controllers.shelves.show)
          .post(controllers.shelves.update)
          .end()
        .end()
      .end()
    .end()

  .route('fire_station')
    // etc....

cheers!

[jonathanong]

easier to make a module that does that for you, then see if people are interested in it. adding it to express means additional bloat.

plus, i hate that .end() stuff. and the ridiculous amount of nesting.

[nijikokun]

plus, i hate that .end() stuff. and the ridiculous amount of nesting.

👍