[Routing] Allow using kernel parameters in routes #3316
Conversation
|
While trying to write tests for this, I've realised parameter replacement is already done, inside As a side note, is there a reason, why it is narrowed to |
|
Some more elaborations, as to why I want pattern replacements. I have defined a custom parameter named which of course does the trick but involves an extra line and is heavier on matcher, thoughts? |
|
looks like this is supported already |
|
oh, no, you have better sollution that supports concatenation, sorry. |
|
@fabpot ping |
|
#4745 solves this issue more cleanly, closing this one. |
Commits ------- 0555913 [FrameworkBundle] Allow using kernel parameters in routes Discussion ---------- [FrameworkBundle] Allow using kernel parameters in routes Kernel parameters can now be used at any position in patterns, defaults and requirements. Relates to: #3316, #3276 **Differences from 3316:** - The substitution is now done in the `Router`, - 3316 uses `$container->getParameterBag()` which is not part of the `ContainerInterface`. The way it been solved in this PR is that some code have been duplicated inside the `Router`, see `resolveString()`. **BC break:** Before this PR, nonexistent parameters would have be silently ignored (ie `%idontexist%` would not have been replaced). After this PR, they will throw an exception. However you can escape the value (ie `%%idontexist%%` will be accepted and replaced by `%idontexist%`). _This behavior is not mandatory and can be reverted if needed. However this keeps the router more consistent with the DI_. Any feedback ? @helmer @Koc --------------------------------------------------------------------------- by Seldaek at 2012-07-04T12:40:08Z :+1: for consistency. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- by helmer at 2012-07-04T13:07:11Z +1 a much better solution to the problem than mine, closing #3316 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- by Tobion at 2012-07-04T13:21:59Z How about escaping kernel params with `\%idontexist%` as I suggested it for route params in 4563? --------------------------------------------------------------------------- by stof at 2012-07-04T13:28:55Z @Tobion this would not be consistent with the way DI parameters are escaped elsewhere --------------------------------------------------------------------------- by Koc at 2012-07-04T14:24:25Z Looks good for me, thanx.
Bug fix: no
Feature addition: yes
Backwards compatibility break: no
Tests pass:
I've had this snippet in my DelegatingLoader override for a while now, but as I saw others are also interested (#3276), I thought I'd share.