[added] Greedy splat (**)

[klzns]

As discussed #2284, this pull request add support to greedy splat **.

Example of matching:

/*/c matches /you/are/okay/c
/*/c does not match /you/are/cool/c
/**/c matches /you/are/cool/c

Fix #2284

[knowbody]

thank you! great work 😄

[klzns]

@knowbody thanks! I'm glad that I contributed to react-router 😄

[leandrooriente]

Nice job 😄

[taion]

Looking at this a little, do you think it'd be worth adding a caveat saying that e.g.

<Route path="**">
  <IndexRoute />
  <Route path="foo" />
  <Route path="bar" />
</Route>

will only ever match the index route? It should be obvious, but you never know.

[knowbody]

I think it's a good idea @taion

[mjackson]

There's already an open issue to add a warning about unreachable routes. We
should definitely take care of that soon.
On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 7:45 AM Mateusz Zatorski [email protected]
wrote:

I think it's a good idea @taion https://github.com/taion

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#2401 (comment).

[taion]

Actually, can you reach any routes under splats? It looks like even

<Route path="*">
  <IndexRoute />
  <Route path="foo" />
  <Route path="bar" />
</Route>

can't match the non-index routes because of https://github.com/rackt/react-router/blob/v1.0.0-rc3/modules/PatternUtils.js#L84-L87.

This splat stuff and the implicit coercion of repeated route params to arrays is pretty confusing IMO.

[knowbody]

@mjackson but we should have something like a debug mode for that, we don't want to check for the unreachable routes every time. Have a look at the initial work in #2351

[taion]

Let's continue discussion in #2422. In working through #2421, I see a few edge cases that could lead to potentially surprising behavior, and I think this is an API that we should try to simplify.