Route using either a prefix or a domain - laravel

I am working on a platform that allows users to run their own site in either a sub folder of the main website domain, or map a custom domain for their site.
When using a custom domain the URL structure for each route is slightly different in that it is prefixed with the username, but when using a custom domain then this prefix is not used.
Is there a clever way to achieve this in my Route::group to handle both request types in one route and successfully use reverse routing to produce the appropriate URL based on the parameters passed to it.
Below is an example of using the prefix
Route::group(array( 'prefix' => 'sites/{username}'), function() {
Route::get('/photos/{album_id}.html', array('uses' => 'Media\PhotosController#album_view', 'as' => 'photo_album'));
});
And here is an example of using a custom domain
Route::group(array('domain' => '{users_domain}'), function() {
Route::get('/photos/{album_id}.html', array('uses' => 'Media\PhotosController#album_view', 'as' => 'photo_album'));
});
Ideally I would like to be in a position where I could use either
route('photo_album', ['username' => 'johnboy', 'album_id' => 123] )
and be returned
http://www.mainwebsitedomain.com/sites/johnboy/photos/123.html
or call the same route with different parameters
route('photo_album', ['users_domain' => 'www.johnboy.com', 'album_id' => 123] )
and be returned
http://www.johnboy.com/photos/123.html

This is a pretty tricky question so expect a few not so perfect workarounds in my answer...
I recommend you read everything first and try it out afterwards. This answer includes several simplification steps but I wrote down whole process to help with understanding
The first problem here is that you can't have multiple routes with the same name if you want to call them by name.
Let's fix that by adding a "route name prefix":
Route::group(array( 'prefix' => 'sites/{username}'), function() {
Route::get('/photos/{album_id}.html', array('uses' => 'Media\PhotosController#album_view',
'as' => 'photo_album'));
});
Route::group(array('domain' => '{users_domain}'), function() {
Route::get('/photos/{album_id}.html', array('uses' => 'Media\PhotosController#album_view',
'as' => 'domain.photo_album'));
});
So now we can use this to generate urls:
route('photo_album', ['username' => 'johnboy', 'album_id' => 123] )
route('domain.photo_album', ['users_domain' => 'www.johnboy.com', 'album_id' => 123])
(No worries we will get rid of domain. in the URL generation later...)
The next problem is that Laravel doesn't allow a full wildcard domain like 'domain' => '{users_domain}'. It works fine for generating URLs but if you try to actually access it you get a 404. What's the solution for this you ask? You have to create an additional group that listens to the domain you're currently on. But only if it isn't the root domain of your site.
For simplicity reasons let's first add the application domain to your config. I suggest this in config/app.php:
'domain' => env('APP_DOMAIN', 'www.mainwebsitedomain.com')
This way it is also configurable via the environment file for development.
After that we can add this conditional route group:
$currentDomain = Request::server('HTTP_HOST');
if($currentDomain != config('app.domain')){
Route::group(array('domain' => $currentDomain), function() {
Route::get('/photos/{album_id}.html', array('uses' => 'Media\PhotosController#album_view',
'as' => 'current_domain.photo_album'));
});
}
Soooo... we got our routes. However this is pretty messy, even with just one single route. To reduce the code duplication your can move the actual routes to one (or more) external files. Like this:
app/Http/routes/photos.php:
if(!empty($routeNamePrefix)){
$routeNamePrefix = $routeNamePrefix . '.';
}
else {
$routeNamePrefix = '';
}
Route::get('/photos/{album_id}.html', ['uses' => 'Media\PhotosController#album_view',
'as' => $routeNamePrefix.'photo_album']);
And then the new routes.php:
// routes for application domain routes
Route::group(['domain' => config('app.domain'), 'prefix' => 'sites/{username}'], function($group){
include __DIR__.'/routes/photos.php';
});
// routes to LISTEN to custom domain requests
$currentDomain = Request::server('HTTP_HOST');
if($currentDomain != config('app.domain')){
Route::group(['domain' => $currentDomain], function(){
$routeNamePrefix = 'current_domain';
include __DIR__.'/routes/photos.php';
});
}
// routes to GENERATE custom domain URLs
Route::group(['domain' => '{users_domain}'], function(){
$routeNamePrefix = 'domain';
include __DIR__.'/routes/photos.php';
});
Now the only thing missing is a custom URL generation function. Unfortunately Laravel's route() won't be able to handle this logic so you have to override it. Create a file with custom helper functions, for example app/helpers.php and require it in bootstrap/autoload.php before vendor/autoload.php is loaded:
require __DIR__.'/../app/helpers.php';
require __DIR__.'/../vendor/autoload.php';
Then add this function to the helpers.php:
function route($name, $parameters = array(), $absolute = true, $route = null){
$currentDomain = Request::server('HTTP_HOST');
$usersDomain = array_get($parameters, 'users_domain');
if($usersDomain){
if($currentDomain == $usersDomain){
$name = 'current_domain.'.$name;
array_forget($parameters, 'users_domain');
}
else {
$name = 'domain.'.$name;
}
}
return app('url')->route($name, $parameters, $absolute, $route);
}
You can call this function exactly like you asked for and it will behave like the normal route() in terms of options and passing parameters.

Related

What does 'as' method do in Laravel

In the example from the tutorial, it shows up.
Route::group([
'prefix' => 'admin',
'as' => 'admin.'
], function () {}
Can someone tells me what 'as' does? Also, is the dot next to the 'admin' neccessary?
Thank you.
Let's say, for example, that you have this route:
Route::get('admin', [
'as' => 'admin', 'uses' => 'AdminController#index'
]);
By using as you assign custom name to your route. So now, Laravel will allow you to reference said route by using:
$route = route('admin');
So you don't have to build the URL manually over and over again in your code. You don't really need . notation if you only want to call your route admin. If you want a more detailed name of your route, lets say for ex. admin product route, then you use the . notation, like this:
Route::get('admin/product', [
'as' => 'admin.product', 'uses' => 'AdminController#showProduct'
]);
So now, you will be able to call this route by the assigned name:
$route = route('admin.product');
Update:
The previous answer I provided is valid for a single routes. For the route groups, the procedure is very similar. In the route groups you need the . notation when you add a custom name, since you will be referencing another route after that . notation. This will allow you to set a common route name prefix for all routes within the group. So by your example, lets say you have a dashboard route inside your admin route group:
Route::group(['as' => 'admin.'], function () {
Route::get('dashboard', ['as' => 'dashboard', function () {
//Some logic
}]);
});
Now, you will be able to call the dashboard route like this:
$route = route(admin.dashboard);
You can read more about this in Laravel official documentation.
you may specify an as keyword in the route group attribute array, allowing you to set a common route name prefix for all routes within the group.
For Example
Route::group(['as' => 'admin::'], function () {
// Route named "admin::"
});
UseRoute Name like {{route(admin::)}} or route('admin::')
you can use an 'as' as a named route. if you do not prefix your route name in group route than you may add custom route name like this.
Route::group(['prefix' => 'admin', 'middleware' => ['auth', 'roles'], 'roles' => ['2']], function () {
Route::post('/changeProfile', ['uses' => 'UserController#changeProfile',
'as' => 'changeProfile']);
});

Laravel 5.4 route simplification

I've been trying to find some documentation on how to accomplish the following, but it seems like maybe I'm not using the correct search terms.
I would like to implement some simplified routes in Laravel 5.4 by omitting the route name from the path – for example:
/{page} instead of /pages/{page}
/profile instead of /users/{user}/edit
/{exam}/{question} (or even /exams/{exam}/{question}) instead of /exams/{exam}/questions/{question}
Example of current routes
Route::resource('exams.questions', 'ExamQuestionController', ['only' => ['show']]);
// exams/{exam}/question/{question}
I know how to do this with route closures and one-off routes (e.g.: Route::get...) but is there a way to do this using Route::resource?
In rails the above could be accomplished with:
resources :exams, path: '', only: [:index, :show] do
resources :question, path: '', only: [:show]
end
// /:exam_id/:id
While I haven't yet found a way to accomplish my test cases using strictly Route::resource, here is what I implemented to accomplish what I was trying to do:
// For: `/{exam}/{question}`
Route::group(['as' => 'exams.', 'prefix' => '{exam}'], function() {
Route::get('{question}', [
'as' => 'question.show',
'uses' => 'QuestionController#show'
]);
});
// For: `/exams/{exam}/{question}`
Route::group(['as' => 'exams.', 'prefix' => 'exams/{exam}'], function() {
Route::get('{question}', [
'as' => 'question.show',
'uses' => 'QuestionController#show'
]);
});
// For: `/profile`
Route::get('profile', function() {
$controller = resolve('App\Http\Controllers\UserController');
return $controller->callAction('edit', $user = [ Auth::user() ]);
})->middleware('auth')->name('users.edit');
// For: `/{page}`
// --------------
// Note that the above `/profile` route must come before
// this route if using both methods as this route
// will capture `/profile` as a `{page}` otherwise
Route::get('{page}', [
'as' => 'page.show',
'uses' => 'PageController#show'
]);
No, you cannot and should not be trying to do this with Route::resource.
The whole purpose of Route::resource is that it creates the routes in a specific way that matches the common "RESTful Routing" pattern.
There is nothing wrong with wanting simpler routes (no one is forcing you to use RESTful routing), but you will need to make them yourself with Route::get, etc. as you already know.
From the documentation (not exactly your case, but related to it - showing that Route::resource is not meant to be super-configurable):
Supplementing Resource Controllers
If you need to add additional routes to a resource controller beyond the default set of resource routes, you should define those routes before your call to Route::resource; otherwise, the routes defined by the resource method may unintentionally take precedence over your supplemental routes:
Route::get('photos/popular', 'PhotoController#method');
Route::resource('photos', 'PhotoController');

Route::match() not working in nested groups structure

I'm creating an API that is available only via POST. I'm planning to have more than one version of the API, so the current one uses v1 as part of the URL.
Now, in case an API call is made via GET, PUT or DELETE I would like to return a Fail response. For this I'm using Route::match(), which works perfectly fine in the code below:
Route::group(['namespace'=>'API', 'prefix' => 'api/v1', 'middleware' => 'api.v1'], function() {
Route::match(['get', 'put', 'delete'], '*', function () {
return Response::json(array(
'status' => 'Fail',
'message' => 'Wrong HTTP verb used for the API call. Please use POST.'
));
});
// User
Route::post('user/create', array('uses' => 'APIv1#createUser'));
Route::post('user/read', array('uses' => 'APIv1#readUser'));
// other calls
// University
Route::post('university/create', array('uses' => 'APIv1#createUniversity'));
Route::post('university/read', array('uses' => 'APIv1#readUniversity'));
// other calls...
});
However, I noticed that I could group the routes even more, to separate the API version and calls to specific entities, like user and university:
Route::group(['namespace'=>'API', 'prefix' => 'api'], function() {
Route::match(['get', 'put', 'delete'], '*', function () {
return Response::json(array(
'status' => 'Fail',
'message' => 'Wrong HTTP verb used for the API call. Please use POST.'
));
});
/**
* v.1
*/
Route::group(['prefix' => 'v1', 'middleware' => 'api.v1'], function() {
// User
Route::group(['prefix' => 'user'], function() {
Route::post('create', array('uses' => 'APIv1#createUser'));
Route::post('read', array('uses' => 'APIv1#readUser'));
});
// University
Route::group(['prefix' => 'university'], function() {
Route::post('create', array('uses' => 'APIv1#createUniversity'));
Route::post('read/synonym', array('uses' => 'APIv1#readUniversity'));
});
});
});
The Route::match() in the code above does not work. When I try to access any API call with e.g. GET, the matching is ignored and I get MethodNotAllowedHttpException.
Can I get the second routes structure to work with Route::match() again? I tried to put it literally everywhere in the groups already. Putting the Route::match() outside of the hole structure and setting path to 'api/v1/*' does dot work either.
If you use the post() function you don't need to deny manualy other verb.
What you can do is to create a listener for the MethodNotAllowedHttpException and display what you want. Or you can also use any() function at the end of your route's group to handle all route that is not defined.

Route Grouping and Namespaces

i have multiple namespaces in my application namely FrontEnd namespace and BackEnd namespace, now in my routes file i would like to know the correct way to direct each route to a namespace.
This is what i have at the moment:
Route::group(['namespace' => 'FrontEnd'], function()
{
Route::group(array('prefix' => '/api/v1/'), function()
{
});
});
Now the above works alright (at least when i tried it) but just to make sure i was doing the right thing i wanted to ask so i don't experience and problems in the future.
I would like to know if this is the correct way of going about it instead:
Route::group(array('prefix' => '/api/v1/'), function()
{
Route::group(['namespace' => 'FrontEnd'], function()
{
});
});
Or does it not matter at all whichever way i decide to go?
you can pass all your option for route group in attribute array like this
Route::group(array('middleware' => 'youemiddleware', 'prefix' => 'yourprefixes', 'namespace' => 'yournamespaces', 'domain' => 'subdomains'), function()
{
// your routes
});
I see no preference one over the other.
How about this?
Route::group(array('prefix' => '/api/v1/', 'namespace' => 'FrontEnd'), function()
{
// code goes here
});

Routing confusion in laravel 4

I'm experiencing routing confusion in laravel 4.
Route::group(['prefix' => 'myProfile', 'before' => 'auth|inGroup:Model|isMe'], function()
{
Route::get('/{username}', function(){
echo 'hello';
});
});
Route::get('/{username}', [
'as' => 'show-profile',
'uses' => 'ProfileController#index'
]);
When i write to address bar domain.app/myProfile it runs second route and runs ProfileController#index...
Thanks.
Looks like correct behaviour. To access first route you would have to type something like domain.app/myProfile/FooUser. You didn't specify / route in myProfile route group, so it cannot match it and uses second one.
Breaking down your routes:
1)
Route::get('/{username}', [
'as' => 'show-profile',
'uses' => 'ProfileController#index'
]);
Use /example URI to access the above route.
2)
Route::group(['prefix' => 'myProfile', 'before' =>'auth|inGroup:Model|isMe'], function()
{
Route::get('/{username}', function(){
echo 'hello';
});
});
Use /myProfile/example URI to access the above route.
Your application is working as expected.

Resources