Laravel Middleware: Where should you put it as a best practice?
I was reading the Laravel documentation about middleware and at a certain point it said: "it would be more convenient to specify middleware within your controller's constructor."
I always assigned the middleware to the routes in the routing files because it felt easier to understand which functions were affected by the middleware.
I was wondering if there was a specific reason why the documentation says to put the middleware assignments directly in the Controller constructor or if it was just a matter of preference.
laravel
asked Jan 19 at 16:21
Matteo PulcranoMatteo Pulcrano
1
add a comment |
I was reading the Laravel documentation about middleware and at a certain point it said: "it would be more convenient to specify middleware within your controller's constructor."
I always assigned the middleware to the routes in the routing files because it felt easier to understand which functions were affected by the middleware.
I was wondering if there was a specific reason why the documentation says to put the middleware assignments directly in the Controller constructor or if it was just a matter of preference.
laravel
asked Jan 19 at 16:21
Matteo PulcranoMatteo Pulcrano
1
add a comment |
I was reading the Laravel documentation about middleware and at a certain point it said: "it would be more convenient to specify middleware within your controller's constructor."
I always assigned the middleware to the routes in the routing files because it felt easier to understand which functions were affected by the middleware.
I was wondering if there was a specific reason why the documentation says to put the middleware assignments directly in the Controller constructor or if it was just a matter of preference.
laravel
asked Jan 19 at 16:21
Matteo PulcranoMatteo Pulcrano
1
I was reading the Laravel documentation about middleware and at a certain point it said: "it would be more convenient to specify middleware within your controller's constructor."
I always assigned the middleware to the routes in the routing files because it felt easier to understand which functions were affected by the middleware.
I was wondering if there was a specific reason why the documentation says to put the middleware assignments directly in the Controller constructor or if it was just a matter of preference.
laravel
laravel
asked Jan 19 at 16:21
Matteo PulcranoMatteo Pulcrano
1
asked Jan 19 at 16:21
Matteo PulcranoMatteo Pulcrano
1
asked Jan 19 at 16:21
Matteo PulcranoMatteo Pulcrano
1
asked Jan 19 at 16:21
Matteo PulcranoMatteo Pulcrano
1
asked Jan 19 at 16:21
Matteo PulcranoMatteo Pulcrano
1
1
add a comment |
add a comment |
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
Its all depends on your own choice.
I always prefer to use middleware in route as a group, which keeps things centralized and I can find them easily.
Route::group(['middleware' => ['middleware1']], function () {
// your routes under middleware1
});
Route::group(['middleware' => ['middleware2']], function () {
// your routes under middleware2
});
answered Jan 19 at 16:47
Abdur RahmanAbdur Rahman
54110
add a comment |
I think it's a matter of preference, i like to assign the middleware to the route so i don't have to exclude certain methods in the controller plus it's much easier to know which routes use the middleware just by looking at the routes file.
answered Jan 19 at 16:34
Hassan IbrahimHassan Ibrahim
413
add a comment |
it is more convenient to specify middleware within your controller's constructor.
This simply means you have more control over each methods if you use it in your controller's constructor, so that you can specify certain rules in method levels.
But when you are assigning to the routes you can only control the routes rules.
answered Jan 19 at 16:39
Fahim UddinFahim Uddin
3031314
add a comment |
Thank you for your question, as mentioned before in most cases it is a decision made by the team you are working with.
From my own personal experience, I can only explain to you why we choose to use middleware definition in routes file instead of a controller.
In large applications, there are many cases of a dozen controllers.
With that being said, there can be cases where you have to change some middleware name. If you define it on route group you would have to change only one line of code, but if you define it in a constructor you would have to go to every controller and change it.Some companies are using controllers to inject certainly classes into it. There can be a huge amount of injecting and assigning classes in the constructor itself.
That's why defining crucial checks should not be happening on this level of code.
answered Jan 19 at 21:48
FondueBugFondueBug
1
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function () {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function () {
StackExchange.snippets.init();
});
});
}, "code-snippets");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "1"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f54269060%2flaravel-middleware-where-should-you-put-it-as-a-best-practice%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Its all depends on your own choice.
I always prefer to use middleware in route as a group, which keeps things centralized and I can find them easily.
Route::group(['middleware' => ['middleware1']], function () {
// your routes under middleware1
});
Route::group(['middleware' => ['middleware2']], function () {
// your routes under middleware2
});
answered Jan 19 at 16:47
Abdur RahmanAbdur Rahman
54110
add a comment |
Its all depends on your own choice.
I always prefer to use middleware in route as a group, which keeps things centralized and I can find them easily.
Route::group(['middleware' => ['middleware1']], function () {
// your routes under middleware1
});
Route::group(['middleware' => ['middleware2']], function () {
// your routes under middleware2
});
answered Jan 19 at 16:47
Abdur RahmanAbdur Rahman
54110
add a comment |
Its all depends on your own choice.
I always prefer to use middleware in route as a group, which keeps things centralized and I can find them easily.
Route::group(['middleware' => ['middleware1']], function () {
// your routes under middleware1
});
Route::group(['middleware' => ['middleware2']], function () {
// your routes under middleware2
});
answered Jan 19 at 16:47
Abdur RahmanAbdur Rahman
54110
Its all depends on your own choice.
I always prefer to use middleware in route as a group, which keeps things centralized and I can find them easily.
Route::group(['middleware' => ['middleware1']], function () {
// your routes under middleware1
});
Route::group(['middleware' => ['middleware2']], function () {
// your routes under middleware2
});
answered Jan 19 at 16:47
Abdur RahmanAbdur Rahman
54110
answered Jan 19 at 16:47
Abdur RahmanAbdur Rahman
54110
answered Jan 19 at 16:47
Abdur RahmanAbdur Rahman
54110
answered Jan 19 at 16:47
Abdur RahmanAbdur Rahman
54110
54110
add a comment |
add a comment |
I think it's a matter of preference, i like to assign the middleware to the route so i don't have to exclude certain methods in the controller plus it's much easier to know which routes use the middleware just by looking at the routes file.
answered Jan 19 at 16:34
Hassan IbrahimHassan Ibrahim
413
add a comment |
I think it's a matter of preference, i like to assign the middleware to the route so i don't have to exclude certain methods in the controller plus it's much easier to know which routes use the middleware just by looking at the routes file.
answered Jan 19 at 16:34
Hassan IbrahimHassan Ibrahim
413
add a comment |
I think it's a matter of preference, i like to assign the middleware to the route so i don't have to exclude certain methods in the controller plus it's much easier to know which routes use the middleware just by looking at the routes file.
answered Jan 19 at 16:34
Hassan IbrahimHassan Ibrahim
413
I think it's a matter of preference, i like to assign the middleware to the route so i don't have to exclude certain methods in the controller plus it's much easier to know which routes use the middleware just by looking at the routes file.
answered Jan 19 at 16:34
Hassan IbrahimHassan Ibrahim
413
answered Jan 19 at 16:34
Hassan IbrahimHassan Ibrahim
413
answered Jan 19 at 16:34
Hassan IbrahimHassan Ibrahim
413
answered Jan 19 at 16:34
Hassan IbrahimHassan Ibrahim
413
413
add a comment |
add a comment |
it is more convenient to specify middleware within your controller's constructor.
This simply means you have more control over each methods if you use it in your controller's constructor, so that you can specify certain rules in method levels.
But when you are assigning to the routes you can only control the routes rules.
answered Jan 19 at 16:39
Fahim UddinFahim Uddin
3031314
add a comment |
it is more convenient to specify middleware within your controller's constructor.
This simply means you have more control over each methods if you use it in your controller's constructor, so that you can specify certain rules in method levels.
But when you are assigning to the routes you can only control the routes rules.
answered Jan 19 at 16:39
Fahim UddinFahim Uddin
3031314
add a comment |
it is more convenient to specify middleware within your controller's constructor.
This simply means you have more control over each methods if you use it in your controller's constructor, so that you can specify certain rules in method levels.
But when you are assigning to the routes you can only control the routes rules.
answered Jan 19 at 16:39
Fahim UddinFahim Uddin
3031314
it is more convenient to specify middleware within your controller's constructor.
This simply means you have more control over each methods if you use it in your controller's constructor, so that you can specify certain rules in method levels.
But when you are assigning to the routes you can only control the routes rules.
answered Jan 19 at 16:39
Fahim UddinFahim Uddin
3031314
answered Jan 19 at 16:39
Fahim UddinFahim Uddin
3031314
answered Jan 19 at 16:39
Fahim UddinFahim Uddin
3031314
answered Jan 19 at 16:39
Fahim UddinFahim Uddin
3031314
3031314
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thank you for your question, as mentioned before in most cases it is a decision made by the team you are working with.
From my own personal experience, I can only explain to you why we choose to use middleware definition in routes file instead of a controller.
In large applications, there are many cases of a dozen controllers.
With that being said, there can be cases where you have to change some middleware name. If you define it on route group you would have to change only one line of code, but if you define it in a constructor you would have to go to every controller and change it.Some companies are using controllers to inject certainly classes into it. There can be a huge amount of injecting and assigning classes in the constructor itself.
That's why defining crucial checks should not be happening on this level of code.
answered Jan 19 at 21:48
FondueBugFondueBug
1
add a comment |
Thank you for your question, as mentioned before in most cases it is a decision made by the team you are working with.
From my own personal experience, I can only explain to you why we choose to use middleware definition in routes file instead of a controller.
In large applications, there are many cases of a dozen controllers.
With that being said, there can be cases where you have to change some middleware name. If you define it on route group you would have to change only one line of code, but if you define it in a constructor you would have to go to every controller and change it.Some companies are using controllers to inject certainly classes into it. There can be a huge amount of injecting and assigning classes in the constructor itself.
That's why defining crucial checks should not be happening on this level of code.
answered Jan 19 at 21:48
FondueBugFondueBug
1
add a comment |
Thank you for your question, as mentioned before in most cases it is a decision made by the team you are working with.
From my own personal experience, I can only explain to you why we choose to use middleware definition in routes file instead of a controller.
In large applications, there are many cases of a dozen controllers.
With that being said, there can be cases where you have to change some middleware name. If you define it on route group you would have to change only one line of code, but if you define it in a constructor you would have to go to every controller and change it.Some companies are using controllers to inject certainly classes into it. There can be a huge amount of injecting and assigning classes in the constructor itself.
That's why defining crucial checks should not be happening on this level of code.
answered Jan 19 at 21:48
FondueBugFondueBug
1
Thank you for your question, as mentioned before in most cases it is a decision made by the team you are working with.
From my own personal experience, I can only explain to you why we choose to use middleware definition in routes file instead of a controller.
In large applications, there are many cases of a dozen controllers.
With that being said, there can be cases where you have to change some middleware name. If you define it on route group you would have to change only one line of code, but if you define it in a constructor you would have to go to every controller and change it.Some companies are using controllers to inject certainly classes into it. There can be a huge amount of injecting and assigning classes in the constructor itself.
That's why defining crucial checks should not be happening on this level of code.
answered Jan 19 at 21:48
FondueBugFondueBug
1
answered Jan 19 at 21:48
FondueBugFondueBug
1
answered Jan 19 at 21:48
FondueBugFondueBug
1
answered Jan 19 at 21:48
FondueBugFondueBug
1
1
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Stack Overflow!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f54269060%2flaravel-middleware-where-should-you-put-it-as-a-best-practice%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
