Home/ Questions/Q 8360443
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Asked: 2026-06-09T11:28:11+00:00

The default route file has the following segment: # This is a legacy wild

  • 0

The default route file has the following segment:

  # This is a legacy wild controller route that's not recommended for RESTful applications.
  # Note: This route will make all actions in every controller accessible via GET requests.
  # match ':controller(/:action(/:id))(.:format)'

So what exactly is the problem with letting Rails assume the controller, action, and view to display when the format is ‘:controller(/:action(/:id))(.:format)’ ? I mean, for more specific things like nesting I can always use specific routes…

Share

Leave an answer

You must login to add an answer.

Need An Account,

1 Answer

  1. Editorial Team

    If developers are allowed to being lazy, they will be. We are super great at optimizing efforts.

    Not being explicit about routes may help you save 5 seconds each time you have a new controller, but it will be a headache for new developers, which will be unfamiliar with your codebase and hence don’t know how things are glued. They will have to reverse engineer your views-controllers.

    Being there. Not pretty.

    Being explicit is usually better.

    • 0