You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
None of this section from the docs is actually implemented ...
There seems to be fairly broad agreement that having distinct
meanings for /foo and /foo/ is a Bad Thing, which makes sense
since it would be difficult for a user to predict the difference.
However, it is often useful to ensure that they both map to the same
resource rather than having one work and the other get a 404 error.
add-resource accepts a slash: keyword argument. When true (the
default), add-resource will automatically map the child resource
to both the given URL prefix and to the same URL with a trailing
slash added. That is,
add-resource(parent, "foo/bar", child)
will map child to both foo/bar and foo/bar/. To change this
behavior pass the slash: keyword argument:
slash: #"canonical"
Make the trailing slash URL prefix canonical (by redirecting the
one without the trailing slash). Think "slash is canonical".
slash: #"copy"
Map the given resource to both the given URL and the URL with
the trailing slash. Think "slash is a copy".
slash: #"redirect" (the default)
Redirect the trailing slash version of the URL to the one with
no trailing slash. Think "slash is redirected".
slash: #f
Don't map the trailing slash URL prefix to any resource. Use
this carefully since it can cause confusing results for users.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
cgay
changed the title
slash handling functionality not implemented
Trailing slash handling not implemented
Sep 8, 2014
So do you think this behavior would be worth having? I guess I removed it at some point when I rewrote the routing code. I think it would be trivial for users to do themselves with a small helper function so I'm inclined to just remove the doc and close this bug.
None of this section from the docs is actually implemented ...
There seems to be fairly broad agreement that having distinct
meanings for
/foo
and/foo/
is a Bad Thing, which makes sensesince it would be difficult for a user to predict the difference.
However, it is often useful to ensure that they both map to the same
resource rather than having one work and the other get a 404 error.
add-resource accepts a
slash:
keyword argument. When true (thedefault),
add-resource
will automatically map the child resourceto both the given URL prefix and to the same URL with a trailing
slash added. That is,
add-resource(parent, "foo/bar", child)
will map child to both
foo/bar
andfoo/bar/
. To change thisbehavior pass the
slash:
keyword argument:slash: #"canonical"
Make the trailing slash URL prefix canonical (by redirecting the
one without the trailing slash). Think "slash is canonical".
slash: #"copy"
Map the given resource to both the given URL and the URL with
the trailing slash. Think "slash is a copy".
slash: #"redirect"
(the default)Redirect the trailing slash version of the URL to the one with
no trailing slash. Think "slash is redirected".
slash: #f
Don't map the trailing slash URL prefix to any resource. Use
this carefully since it can cause confusing results for users.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: