Resourceful vs restful controller routing

[niallobrien]

Are we switching to resourceful routing over restful routing for any particular reason?
Is there a reason why they can't both exist?
Are we worried that this will make the framework less accessible?

Thanks.

[buhl]

AFAIK both are still there. (just not in the documentation yet)

[niallobrien]

@bgm Not true.
Try generate a link or URL to a controller method named getIndex(). You will have to access it via HomeController@getIndex. This is not restful as it was in Laravel 3 when $restful = true;

[ktee55]

Personally I like the old manual way of restful routing, that way I feel like I have more control over it; change as what you want; no need for "composer dump autoload". If we copy&paste or take advantage of snippets it's not such a big deal and with st2 things are much easier: https://gist.github.com/3717337

But I guess we can still go for the old way in someway, aren't we? I don't know.

[niallobrien]

@Ktee8 Why use that snippet when you can just do something like Route::resource('users', 'UsersController'); in L4 now?

[niallobrien]

Does L4 automatically generate named routes for resources like Rails? I only ask because I don't see anything in the URL class for resources, but do for actions and named routes and was wondering what's the best way to do this if we're going with 100% resourceful?

[ktee55]

Could it be your answer? https://github.com/daylerees/autoload-demo I'm sorry if I'm off target.

[niallobrien]

@Ktee8 No, sorry. That issue is not directly related to this one.

[JeffreyWay]

Thinking in terms of resources is inherently restful. So it's not really an issue of choosing resourceful vs. restful.

When Laravel generates a full resource for you - ( Route::resource('users', 'UsersController') - that's still following the RESTful architecture (similar to the Rails flavor).

[JeffreyWay]

In reference to whether L4 generates the named routes, as part of Route::resource, I'm not sure. I asked Taylor about that a month or so ago, and he seemed to imply that he would implement that.

[buhl]

@niallobrien how about

Route::controller('UserController','users');

[niallobrien]

@JeffreyWay Yes, but in Laravel 3 we could do something like get_login() and post_login() if we wanted to when $restful = true;
I also note that there's not a nice way of actually generating URLs for performing CRUD on resources. For example, if I want to edit my profile, how do I generate the url to /users/4/edit ?
See: #37

[JeffreyWay]

Well ideally, when/if Taylor adds named route support to resourceful controller creation, then you'd do something along the lines of:

$url = URL::to_route('edit_user_path', array($id));

But I guess, until then, you have to do it manually??

[niallobrien]

@JeffreyWay Yeah, that's what we were discussing in #laravel IRC. I think adding a URL::resource() method would be a cleaner solution, but both would work.

Also, while on the topic of resources, I don't see anything there for nested resources. Might open a new issue for that.

[JeffreyWay]

Hmm - I'm looking over the URL::resource ticket that Shawn just added. Not sure I think that's preferable to clean named routes.

I thought I read something from Taylor on Twitter about implementing nested resources. Maybe not...

[ktee55]

Named routes: that's what I wanted to say instead of "old manual way of restful routing"; then why you need that restful snippet? 'cause I want something to refer to and change some parts as what I want; then if with Route::resource, I can make it, that's exactly what I want. Thanks.