New router #727
Merged
New router #727
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Revert back router.register_route signature
Member
Author
|
Finish the PR, will merge it next week if no objections. |
Member
Author
|
Added doc page describing routes refactoring. |
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Resurrection of #435
The PR is almost backward compatible.
The only broken thing is:
router[name]returns aResourceinstead ofRoute.Resourcehasurl()andmatch()methods though, I don't expect that it will make problems with migration to new system.Old routes are still supported if they are added by
router.regiter_route()API.Coverage is still not perfect but I want to introduce the PR for discussion and review.