404 Error instead of 405 Status Code

[harshvladha]

mux := bone.New()
mux.Get("/test/", http.HandlerFunc(myHandler))

If I make requests to /test/ endpoint with POST method then I get 404 Not Found error instead of 405 Method Not Allowed.

Probable reason:
map[string][]*Route the key in this map is method name (e.g., GET, POST, etc..) and the requested endpoint is searched in the slice of the requested method, and if the endpoint is not found then 404 is returned.

Proposed Solution:

1. Search all Method's slices. (too costly operation)
   OR
2. Register routes with the different way.

[harshvladha]

Same as #37

[harshvladha]

I could have sent a PR about this, but it involves major changes, that's why I want to discuss the same.

[squiidz]

Hi, i have no problems with changes if it's not broking the public api.

[harshvladha]

Working on it! 👍

[squiidz]

great :)

[harshvladha]

I was thinking to change current Mux struct to

type Mux struct {
	Routes        []*Route //changed
	prefix        string
	notFound      http.Handler
	Serve         func(rw http.ResponseWriter, req *http.Request)
	CaseSensitive bool
}

and Route will have information of allowed methods and their handlers, something like:

type Route struct {
	Path           string
	methods        int //changed
	Size           int
	Atts           int
	wildPos        int
	Token          Token
	Pattern        map[int]string
	Compile        map[int]*regexp.Regexp
	Tag            map[int]string
	MethodHandlers map[string]*http.Handler //added
}

Route.methods will have ORed int values of Methods, as done for Route.Atts: PARAM, SUB, WC, REGEX.

func (r *Route) setMethod(m string, h http.Handler) {
	r.methods |= methodValues[m]
	r.MethodHandlers[m] = &h
}

will set the Method for the given route.

func (r *Route) handler(m string) (*http.Handler) {
	if methodValues[m]&r.methods != 0 {
		return r.MethodHandlers[m]
	}
	return nil
}

But in this case, I will need to iterate through all the value in Mux.Route slice and try to parse it, which is equivalent to iterating all the slices for respective methods in the current implementation.

So I would like to go with solution 1, proposed in the 1st comment of this thread.

[squiidz]

Iterating over all routes is really costly in term of performance... Maybe you could try to make a fail over, only when a route is not found, you try to found a matching one by url instead ?

[harshvladha]

@squiidz Coded as per your last comment. Commit id: 0cef4cb
Initiated a PullRequest #61

PS: Ignore commit a9baaab as this was not go-Fmt'ed