KohanaPHP » Kohana v3.x

Well, Request::route is a public instance field that contains the route that was matched. Getting access to its name using $request->route->name would seem to me pretty much straight forward, except for the fact that the Route object doesn't know its own name.

A simple fix might be:

Index: system/classes/kohana/route.php
===================================================================
--- system/classes/kohana/route.php    (revision 40208)
+++ system/classes/kohana/route.php    (working copy)
@@ -68,7 +68,7 @@
      */
     public static function set($name, $uri, array $regex = NULL)
     {
-        return Route::$_routes[$name] = new Route($uri, $regex);
+        return Route::$_routes[$name] = new Route($name, $uri, $regex);
     }

     /**
@@ -173,6 +173,9 @@
         // Create a URI with the route and convert it to a URL
         return URL::site(Route::get($name)->uri($params), $protocol);
     }
+    
+    // Route's name from the route setup
+    public $name = '';

     // Route URI string
     protected $_uri = '';
@@ -198,7 +201,7 @@
      * @return  void
      * @uses    Route::_compile
      */
-    public function __construct($uri = NULL, array $regex = NULL)
+    public function __construct($name, $uri = NULL, array $regex = NULL)
     {
         if ($uri === NULL)
         {
@@ -210,6 +213,8 @@
         {
             $this->_regex = $regex;
         }
+        
+        $this->name = $name;

         // Store the URI that this route will match
         $this->_uri = $uri;

What do you think?

Or just use Route::name($this->request->route)

Though I can't particularly see a reason not to store the name in the object as you suggest.

Indeed so, though it is a bit ungainly. I missed that API until you mentioned it, and I think that having the name accessible directly from the route object is more straight forward and easier to understand.

I'd appreciate it if we can get this change into a future Kohana release.

If routes can be anonymous, in which case - what will Route::name() return? I assume the numerical index of the route in the routes list? I don't see how that is better then "null" and in which case there is no problem to return "null" from Request->route->name.

Anyway, Route::name() indeed works well, it just less discoverable and friendly then having a simple attribute on the route object - nor do I think the use cases conflict BTW, having one does not mean removing the other.

I think this small change should not warrant such lengthy discussion, so if you don't believe this to be a worthwhile pursuit then I suggest closing this bug as won't fix. I will not promise not to complain, though ;-)