Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Doc: missing RouteRecord type definiton #2634

Fiouz opened this Issue Mar 3, 2019 · 1 comment


None yet
2 participants
Copy link

Fiouz commented Mar 3, 2019



Reproduction link

Steps to reproduce

  1. Read the API documentation at for the routes router construction options and see that the routes field is designated as an array of RouteConfig (with an accompanying definition of that type).
  2. Read the API documentation at for $route.matched and see that the copy of the aforementioned routes option is now designated as an array of RouteRecord (with not definition of that type)

What is expected?

If the latter is a copy of the former, it should be expected that it should be the same object type or that an explicit relationship between the 2 types be mentioned in the API doc as a canonical definition.

What is actually happening?

There is no canonical definition of what a RouteRecord type is, we only have an example that denotes the array of RouteConfig and we don't understand why copying a type does not result of an instance of the same type.

@posva posva added the docs label Mar 3, 2019


This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

posva commented Mar 3, 2019

it's a different presentation but still the same information. Not sure what I will do here but I will see

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
You can’t perform that action at this time.