Hellow I have code in my app.js, looking like that:
app.use('/someurl', require('./middleware/somemodule'));
-app.use instead app.all
and module looks like:
if(process.env.BLALAL === undefined){
throw "Error: process.env.BLALAL === undefined";
}
module.exports = function(req, res, next){
...
}
is it a bad practice ?
As said on the express api reference:
app.VERB(path, [callback...], callback)
The app.VERB() methods provide the routing functionality in Express,
where VERB is one of the HTTP verbs, such as app.post().
app.use([path], function)
Use the given middleware function, with optional mount path,
defaulting to "/".
The "mount" path is stripped and is not visible to the middleware
function. The main effect of this feature is that mounted middleware
may operate without code changes regardless of its "prefix" pathname.
IMO
The functionality may be nearly the same, but there is an underlying semantic meaning. The routes itself should be set through the app.VERB api, while any middleware should be set through the app.use api.
Normally middlewares modify the request or response objects, or inject functionality from other module that may answer the request, or not.
connect.static is a good example. It could be really an app or an HttpServer by itself, but is injected as middleware on other app object.
I personally don't like require inside other commands then var bla = require('bla');, it makes code much worse readable in my opinion and you did not get anything in return.
I am not sure what was your intention, but if your code depends on environment variable, it is better to throw immediately than later when your route is called. So app.use is better then app.all. But I don't understand why aren't you simply test your condition inside app.js and why you hide it in somemodule.
Related
I created a router file using Express. The callback functions reside in their discrete "controllers" files. Following is an excerpt of the parts relevant to my question, and lines such as require of controller functions have been omitted:
const express = require('express');
const router = express.Router();
// This should run first
router.param('coolParamName', validateParamBeforeHandlingReqs);
// Param name is ↑↑↑↑↑ "consumed" here, although NOT defined yet
// This should run after the above code
router.route('/').get(getAllUserNames).post(createUser);
router.route('/:coolParamName').get(getUserName).patch(updateUser).delete(deleteUser);
// Param name is ↑↑↑↑↑ defined here, and was consumed earlier - how?
As the comments explain, it seems like the param name has been defined as coolParamName on the bottom, but "consumed" by the code written above it. This feels strange to me, because I feel it's natural to define first and then use later - is it just me? Did I write a code that's against the intended design pattern?
I would like to understand how Express defines the name of param, and how router.param and router.router handle them.
router.param('coolParamName') essentially registers a callback that will get called for any route (in that router) that uses the :coolParamName parameter and matches the current request. The callback will get called once per request BEFORE the route that matches the request that contains the :coolParamName parameter.
It's kind of like middleware for a matching parameter. It allows you to automatically configure some setup code anytime that particular parameter is matched in a route.
FYI, I expect that router.param() may be one of the least used features of Express since it can be accomplished many other ways, but it probably works best for validation-type code that checks named properties for validity before the route itself gets called.
You could accomplish the same thing by just using a piece of middleware on that specific route too or even just calling a function inside the route handler. So, this is just a nicety feature if you happen to use the same parameter in multiple routes.
When I make a GET request with route parameters in express with mongoose like the following code, I sometimes see that the browser tries to load some unexpected files such as favicon.ico, robots.txt, humans.txt, sitemap.xml, ads.txt, etc., and 404 error shows up in the browser console.
app.get("/:userId", ...);
By refering to this Q&A, I figured out that if I don't use the route parameters right after the root route like the following code, it doesn't happen.
app.get("/user/:userId", ...);
In the same Q&A, however, there seem to be another way that uses req.url to ignore those unexpected files to be loaded, but it isn't explained in detail.
How do you do that?
All that's meant in that other answer is that you could examine req.url in your route handler and make sure it is not a known special name. In this specific case, it's probably simpler to use req.params.userId instead of req.url, but you could also use req.url in the same way.
const specials = new Set(["favicon.ico", "robots.txt", "humans.txt", "sitemap.xml", "ads.txt"]);
app.get("/:userId", (res, res, next) => {
// if it's a special URL, then skip it here
if (specials.has(req.params.userId)) {
next();
return;
}
// process your route here
});
Personally, I wouldn't recommend this solution because it presupposes a perfect knowledge of all possible special filenames. I don't use a top level wildcards ever because they ruin the ability to use your server for anything else.
Let's say I want to pass to an ExpressJS route callback an object.
I know I can append to app:
// router.js
const getFoo = (req, res) => res.json(req.app.foo);
// index.js
const app = express();
app.foo = {};
app.get('/foo', getFoo);
or I can use a higher order function:
// router.js
const getFoo = foo => (req, res) => res.json(foo);
// index.js
const app = express();
const foo = {};
app.get('/foo', getFoo(foo));
Both are easy to write, extend and test.
But, I don't know the implications of the solutions and whether one is better.
Is there anyone knowing real differences between the two approaches?
I think the second solution is more correct, here's why.
imagine you get used to the first solution and one day you need to send something called post or get or anything with the name of app property and you forget that there is already a property named like that, so you override original property without even realizing and when you call app.post() program will crash.
Believe me, you don't want hours of research wasted on something like that and realizing that you simply overrode original method
Also, in my opinion, it's always a bad idea mutating original object which wasn't generated by you
As #vahe-yavrumian mentioned it is not a good idea to mutate the state of the object created by a third party library.
between you can also use app.get() and app.set() methods to pass any data to the other routers in the queue (seems those methods are there just for this purpose.)
more information at https://expressjs.com/en/api.html.
The second solution easily allows you to pass different value for foo on different routes, if you ever found a need to do that.
The first solution essentially puts the value on the app singleton, which has all the implications of using singletons. (And as mentioned by #Anees, for express specifically the app settings with get and set are the proper place to store this, not a custom property)
app.all('*', function(req, res, next) {
vs
app.use(function (req, res, next) {
Whats the difference? doesn't both take in each request to the server?
For the wildcard * path, there's really not much of a meaningful difference at all. It appears to me like the internal implementation may be slightly more efficient for app.use(fn), then app.all('*', fn). And, if you intend for it to run on all routes, then app.use() makes more logical sense to me since what you're really doing is middleware and that's what app.use() is specially designed for.
Summary for app.all('*', fn) vs. app.use(fn):
No difference in order of execution.
app.use() fires regardless of methods, app.all() only fires for parser supported methods (probably not relevant since the node.js http parser supports all expected methods).
Summary for app.all('/test', fn) vs. app.use('/test', fn):
No difference in order of execution
app.use() fires regardless of methods, app.all() only fires for parser supported methods (probably not relevant since the node.js http parser supports all expected methods).
app.use() fires for all paths that start with /test include /test/1/ or /test/otherpath/more/1. app.all() only fires if its an exact match to the requested url.x
Details
All route handlers or middleware that match a given route are executed in the order they were defined so app.all('*', fn) and app.use(fn) do not have any different ordering when placed in identical places in the code.
In looking at the Express code for app.all() it appears that the way it works is that it just goes through all the HTTP methods that the locally installed HTTP parser supports and registers a handler for them. So, for example, if you did:
app.all('*', fn);
The Express code would run these:
app.get('*', fn);
app.put('*', fn);
app.post('*', fn);
app.delete('*', fn);
// ...etc...
Whereas app.use() is method independent. There would be only one handler in the app router's stack that is called no matter what the method is. So, even if an unsupported http verb was issued and the parser let the request get this far, the app.use() handler would still apply whereas the app.all() handler would not.
If you use a path with both app.all() and app.use() that is not just a simple wildcard like '*', then there is a meaningful difference between the two.
app.all(path, fn) only triggers when the requested path matches the path here in its entirety.
app.use(path, fn) trigger when the start of the requested path matches the path here.
So, if you have:
app.all('/test', fn1); // route 1
app.use('/test', fn2); // route 2
And, you issue a request to:
http://yourhost.com/test // both route1 and route2 will match
http://yourhost.com/test/1 // only route2 will match
Because only middleware with app.use() fires for partial matches where the requested URL is contains more path segments beyond what is specified here.
So, if you intend to insert some middleware that runs for all routes or runs for all routes that are descended from some path, then use app.use(). Personally, I would only use app.all(path, fn) if I wanted a handler to be run only for a specific path no matter what the method was and I didn't not want it to also run for paths that contain this path at the start. I see no practical reason to ever use app.all('*', fn) over app.use(fn).
I've read up other questions on people's routes mismatching and then ordering the routes solving the problem. I've got this problem where my URL route is being treated as a parameter and then express mismatches and leads to the wrong route. e.g. here are the two routes:
app.get('/byASIN/LowPrice/:asin/:price',function(req,res){});
and
app.get('/byASIN/:asin/:price', function(req, res) {});
Now all works fine but as soon as I take any param out of the first route it matches the route given below which is not what I want.
If I hit /byASIN/LowPrice/:asin/:price everything works fine but as soon as I hit /byASIN/LowPrice/:asin it matches byASIN/:asin/:price and hence calls the wrong function and crashes my server. I would like to have them match explicitly and if /byASIN/LowPrice/:asin is called, respond with some warning e.g. you're calling with one less argument. What am I missing here?
By default express Url parameters are not optinial, this is why
app.get('/byASIN/LowPrice/:asin/:price',function(req,res){});
does not match /byASIN/LowPrice/:asin, because the second parameter is missing.
However you can make a parameter optional by adding a ? to it:
app.get('/byASIN/LowPrice/:asin/:price?',function(req,res){});
this should solve your problem.
Try to define a route for /byASIN/LowPrice/:asin/:price to handle, then use a wildcard to handle everything else.
app.get('/byASIN/LowPrice/:asin/:price',function(req,res){});
app.get('*',function(req,res){});
Express matches the route by the order you insert them. If you have the loosely routes defined first, then express will use that one as the match first. An extreme example would be
app.get('*', function(req, res) {});
If this was defined as the first route, then no other route will be called (if without calling next()).
If you want express to always use the strict one first, then you will need to change the order of your routes by having the strict ones defined before the loosely ones.
It'd be nice if express support priority in the route, which could be a good solution for your problem, but until then, unfortunately, this can be fixed by ordering only :(