4 ms·

> there's no relative routes > React router's <Link> do not allow you to link outside of the current site Both valid points. Not show stoppers though. And not

> there's no relative routes > React router's <Link> do not allow you to link outside of the current site Both valid points. Not show stoppers though. And not enough to make me regret using the library. The solution to the external links issue is a one-liner. > there's no way to refresh the page https://github.com/ReactTraining/react-router/issues/1982 https://github.com/ReactTraining/react-router/issues/1982 ("that's your responsibility, not ours") That is your responsibility. Why do you need the routing library to handle page refreshing for you? > the scroll position will stick when you navigate to a new route Making the page scroll to the top when navigating to a new page is trivial. I would 100% rather have this problem instead of the opposite: scroll jumping to the top when I don't want it to. That's so much harder to fix. > Navigating to the same page would not actually reload the page, it would just trigger a componentDidMount() on all components in the page again, which led me to have a lot of bugs when I did some initialization in my constructor That's exactly what it's supposed to do. It's a client side routing solution. (I'm also pretty sure that it doesn't remount) From the issues that you've had with the library, it seems like client side routing is not actually what you're looking for. If you regret using it so much, may I ask what the alternative would be? IMO a project either needs client side routing, or it doesn't. If it does, then React Router is the obvious choice. Otherwise, of course, don't use it and save yourself from unnecessary complexity.

johnfn 8y ago
> The solution to the external links issue is a one-liner. It is most definitely not a one-liner. > Making the page scroll to the top when navigating to a new page is trivial. So do it for me. There’s no reason a routing library should break default behavior. > That's exactly what it's supposed to do. It's a client side routing solution. (I'm also pretty sure that it doesn't remount) Then it’s “supposed” to have inconsistent behavior. Navigating anywhere else in my site will call constructors to all my components. Navigating to the same page won’t. > From the issues that you've had with the library, it seems like client side routing is not actually what you're looking for. My site was a music site. I wanted clientside routing so I could keep music playing while you navigated between links. Seemed like a slam dunk for clientside routing to me. > may I ask what the alternative would be? Quite honestly I would go onto GitHub and look for any routing solution that didn’t have multiple closed unfixed issues with hundreds of thumbs up.
- lopatin 8y ago
  > It is most definitely not a one-liner. const LinkWrapper = ({to, ...rest}) => to.startsWith(window.location.origin) ? <Link to={to} {...rest} /> : <a href={to} />; > So do it for me. There’s no reason a routing library should break default behavior. It's not default behavior for a client side router. Making it automatically scroll to the top would save you a few lines of code while creating a monumental headache for those who need it to retain the scroll position.
  - bryanrasmussen 8y ago
    I guess you might need a polyfill for window.location.origin depending on target browsers, and since they discussed relative urls earlier I guess they want to handle relative urls as well and probably want to also handle starts with //. I think generally what happens, based on what I often end up doing and what I've seen in bigger projects that depend on React Router, is you make a linker component to handle issues, and in fairness you end up not having a 1 liner then.
  - johnfn 8y ago
    This has a number of bugs. Links don’t have to start with window.location.origin, they can just start with /. You didn’t pass in ...rest into the a tag, but oh did you know that the props of a are not the same type as the props to Link? They’re not - so even if you did that it wouldn’t have worked. Oh, and don’t forget to handle “javascript:” prefixed links - those are valid too. Oh and good luck getting this to type check with Typescript. You might be able to pull off something fancy with subtraction types, but who knows if it’ll continue to work when react router upgrades next year. You might think I’m being overly pedantic. Perhaps I am - however in the course of my site I ran into each and every one of these issues after starting out with a clever one liner much like the one you provided. And every time I fixed one I wondered why react router couldn’t handle this for me. > Making it automatically scroll to the top would save you a few lines of code while creating a monumental headache for those who need it to retain the scroll position. Maybe I’m just not being charitable enough, but it beats me how a boolean flag is a “monumental headache” but all the above work with absolute links is an obvious thing anyone can do.

johnfn 8y ago

> The solution to the external links issue is a one-liner. It is most definitely not a one-liner. > Making the page scroll to the top when navigating to a new page is trivial. So do it for me. There’s no reason a routing library should break default behavior. > That's exactly what it's supposed to do. It's a client side routing solution. (I'm also pretty sure that it doesn't remount) Then it’s “supposed” to have inconsistent behavior. Navigating anywhere else in my site will call constructors to all my components. Navigating to the same page won’t. > From the issues that you've had with the library, it seems like client side routing is not actually what you're looking for. My site was a music site. I wanted clientside routing so I could keep music playing while you navigated between links. Seemed like a slam dunk for clientside routing to me. > may I ask what the alternative would be? Quite honestly I would go onto GitHub and look for any routing solution that didn’t have multiple closed unfixed issues with hundreds of thumbs up.

lopatin 8y ago
> It is most definitely not a one-liner. const LinkWrapper = ({to, ...rest}) => to.startsWith(window.location.origin) ? <Link to={to} {...rest} /> : <a href={to} />; > So do it for me. There’s no reason a routing library should break default behavior. It's not default behavior for a client side router. Making it automatically scroll to the top would save you a few lines of code while creating a monumental headache for those who need it to retain the scroll position.
- bryanrasmussen 8y ago
  I guess you might need a polyfill for window.location.origin depending on target browsers, and since they discussed relative urls earlier I guess they want to handle relative urls as well and probably want to also handle starts with //. I think generally what happens, based on what I often end up doing and what I've seen in bigger projects that depend on React Router, is you make a linker component to handle issues, and in fairness you end up not having a 1 liner then.
- johnfn 8y ago
  This has a number of bugs. Links don’t have to start with window.location.origin, they can just start with /. You didn’t pass in ...rest into the a tag, but oh did you know that the props of a are not the same type as the props to Link? They’re not - so even if you did that it wouldn’t have worked. Oh, and don’t forget to handle “javascript:” prefixed links - those are valid too. Oh and good luck getting this to type check with Typescript. You might be able to pull off something fancy with subtraction types, but who knows if it’ll continue to work when react router upgrades next year. You might think I’m being overly pedantic. Perhaps I am - however in the course of my site I ran into each and every one of these issues after starting out with a clever one liner much like the one you provided. And every time I fixed one I wondered why react router couldn’t handle this for me. > Making it automatically scroll to the top would save you a few lines of code while creating a monumental headache for those who need it to retain the scroll position. Maybe I’m just not being charitable enough, but it beats me how a boolean flag is a “monumental headache” but all the above work with absolute links is an obvious thing anyone can do.