On Aug 27, 2007, at 9:20 AM, Marcin Kasperski wrote:
Well, that's generally the same trick as discussed earlier as a workaround - forcing parameter difference (here - extra param). I do not understand why named routes works the way you describe. Does there exist any case when one wants to specify the named route while calling url_for and then have url generated by another route???
If there's a shorter route possible that it might be able to find, it can. However, I am open to adding an option to Routes that lets you declare "Named routes force generation with the exact route named". Would anyone want this option?
I'd want this a separate option, rather than the default behavior as I wouldn't want to catch anyone using Routes given how it operates now to be utterly surprised when routes might not be generated as they had been expecting.
Thanks for the explanation, nevertheless, while I do not understand why it is implemented as it is, I at least understand what is happening. If the logic is to stay, I would suggest adding some more docs about it, it is really confusing for somebody new to Routes. (in general, Routes Manual would probably benefit from separate section about 'url_for', currently the manual is oriented more towards routes resolution)
Definitely, I'm working on updating the docs and moving them to the wiki, so its easier to collect comments and feedback.
Cheers, Ben
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
