Open
Conversation
|
I'd love this to be merged in as I to am exposing this as a routing lib and suffering from the same issue. Allowing users to map to a named param rather than |
Author
Author
|
@allmarkedup btw in my own lib I just made a a custom build and copied that directly into my package for the time being, if you want to use my build it's here: https://github.com/downplay/jarl-react/tree/master/packages/jarl-react/source/vendor |
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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
It felt weird and inconsistent that wildcard captures cannot be named. As I am using url-pattern in a routing library I want to make the interface simple for catch-all routes and a named wildcard seems a far better API than making the user map
_to something more friendly later.This patch allows the syntax
*:nameto name a wildcard rather than using the magic key_. Wildcards can still be unnamed so this does not break any existing functionality.This syntax was chosen because it was in any case ambiguous under the old parsing rules, this clears up an ambiguity whilst adding useful new behaviour.
Tests have been added but docs have not been updated yet, if this functionality is desired in master then I will write some updates to the readme as well.