问题描述:

I am in the process upgrading an application I'm working on to the latest Angular 2 release candidate. As part of this work I am attempting to use the NgModule spec and migrating all of the parts of my application to modules. For the most part, this has gone very well with the exception of an issue with routing.

"@angular/common": "2.0.0-rc.5",

"@angular/compiler": "2.0.0-rc.5",

"@angular/core": "2.0.0-rc.5",

"@angular/forms": "0.3.0",

"@angular/http": "2.0.0-rc.5",

"@angular/platform-browser": "2.0.0-rc.5",

"@angular/platform-browser-dynamic": "2.0.0-rc.5",

"@angular/router": "3.0.0-rc.1",

My app is built as a composition of modules, with several modules being glued together as children of a parent module. For example, I have an Admin Module that consists of a Notifications Module, a Users Module, and a Telphony Module (for example). The routes to these modules should look like...

/admin/notifications/my-notifications

/admin/users/new-user

/admin/telephony/whatever

In the earlier release of the router, this was easy to accomplish using "children"

export const AdminRoutes: RouterConfig = [

{

path: "Admin",

component: AdminComponent,

Children: [

...UserRoutes,

...TelephonyRoutes,

...NotificationRoutes

]

}

]

In another file, as part of the sub-modules, I'd define the individual module routes as well i.e.

export const UserRoutes: RouterConfig = [

{

path: "users",

component: userComponent,

children: [

{path: "new-user", component: newUserComponent}

]

}

]

This all worked very well. In the process of upgrading to Modules, I moved everything into their own individual routing files instead so now these two look more like this

const AdminRoutes: Routes = [

{path: "admin", component: AdminComponent}

]

export const adminRouting = RouterModule.forChild(AdminRoutes)

and

const UserRoutes: Routes = [

path: "users",

component: userComponent,

children: [

{path: "new-user", component: newUserComponent}

]

]

export const userRouting = RouterModule.forChild(UserRoutes)

With all of that in place, I have a UsersModule which imports the userRouting, and then an AdminModule that imports the adminRoutes and the UsersModule. My thought was that since UsersModule is a child of AdminModule, the routing would work the way it used to. Unfortunately, it doesn't so I end up with a users route that is just

/users/new-user

instead of

/admin/users/new-user

Further, because of this, the new-user component isn't loaded into the router outlet of my admin component which throws off the styling and navigation of my application.

I can't for the life of me come up with how to reference the routes of my UserModule as children of my AdminModule. I've tried doing this the old way and get errors about the routes being in two Modules. Obviously since this is newly released, the documentation around some of these cases is a bit limited.

Any help anyone can provide would be greatly appreciated!

网友答案:

Okay, after fiddling around with this for the better part of the weekend I got it running on my end. What worked for me in the end was to do the following:

  • Export all Routes for every module you want to route. Do not import any of the RouterModule.forChild() in the child modules.
  • Export every component that is visible from the childs route definitions in the childs module definition.
  • Import (meaning the Typescript import keyword) all child routes as usual and use the ... operator to incorporate these under the correct path. I couldn't get it to work with the child-module defining the path, but having it on the parent works fine (and is compatible to lazy loading).

In my case I had three levels in a hierarchy like this:

  • Root (/)
    • Editor (editor/:projectId)
      • Query (query/:queryId)
      • Page (page/:pageId)
    • Front (about)

The following definitions work for me for the /editor/:projectId/query/:queryId path:

// app.routes.ts
import {editorRoutes}                   from './editor/editor.routes'

// Relevant excerpt how to load those routes, notice that the "editor/:projectId"
// part is defined on the parent
{
    path: '',
    children: [
        {
            path: 'editor/:projectId',
            children: [...editorRoutes]
            //loadChildren: '/app/editor/editor.module'
        },
    ]
}

The editor routes look like this:

// app/editor/editor.routes.ts
import {queryEditorRoutes}              from './query/query-editor.routes'
import {pageEditorRoutes}               from './page/page-editor.routes'

{
    path: "", // Path is defined in parent
    component : EditorComponent,
    children : [
        {
            path: 'query',
            children: [...queryEditorRoutes]
            //loadChildren: '/app/editor/query/query-editor.module'
        },
        {
            path: 'page',
            children: [...pageEditorRoutes]
            //loadChildren: '/app/editor/page/page-editor.module'
        }
    ]
}

And the final part for the QueryEditor looks like this:

// app/editor/query/query-editor.routes.ts
{
    path: "",
    component : QueryEditorHostComponent,
    children : [
        { path: 'create', component : QueryCreateComponent },
        { path: ':queryId', component : QueryEditorComponent }
    ]
}

However, to make this work, the general Editor needs to import and export the QueryEditor and the QueryEditor needs to export QueryCreateComponent and QueryEditorComponent as these are visible with the import. Failing to do this will get you errors along the lines of Component XYZ is defined in multiple modules.

Notice that lazy loading also works fine with this setup, in that case the child-routes shouldn't be imported of course.

网友答案:

I had the same problem.

The answer here is pretty good using loadChildren :

          {
             path: 'mypath',
             loadChildren : () => myModule
          }

https://github.com/angular/angular/issues/10958

网友答案:

I found a way to resolve this as well. Basically, I am defining my routes the way that I used to, but this time at the top child level. For example my admin route:

const AdminRoutes: Routes = [
   {
      path: 'admin',
      component: AdminComponent,
      children: [
          ...setupRoutes
      ]
   }
]

export const adminRouting = RouterModule.forChild(AdminRoutes)

My setup routes file is imported from a sub area, which defines routes of it's own, including more children. The catch is that this file exports the "Routes" object and not the RouterModule.forChild result.

After that is setup, I removed the child and sub-child routes from the submodule definitions. I then had to export all of the components used in the routes, from each of the submodules, just like Marcus mentioned above. Once I did that, the routes started working just like I wanted them to.

I don't think I really like this solution since my parent module knows too much about the child module routes. But at least its an easy way to get around it for RC5, and it doesn't leak all of my components all over the place. I'll go ahead and mark Marcus' answer as the answer since he put me on the right track.

网友答案:

When you are using ngModules and RC5, the routing configuration of your parent module does not need to know anything about the child modules routing. You only have to define the routes for your parent module here. Furthermore you have to import the child module into your parent module. In the child module you have to define your routes this way:

export const childRoutes: Routes = [
  {
    path: 'someChild',
      component: SomeChildComponent,
      children: [
        { path: '', component: SomeChildSubComponent1 },
        { path: 'comp1', component: SomeChildSubComponent1 },
        { path: 'comp2', component: SomeChildSubComponent2 }
      ]
  }
];

This will let you have a url like /someParent/someChild/comp1 - and the components are displayed in their corresponding router-outlet. Please note: You HAVE TO declace a component for the empty path. Otherwise you are not able to navigate to you children.

网友答案:

I got this to work as well and unless you actually need to render all parent components in the hierarchy I think my solution is far more elegant.

The key to understanding my approach is that all routes, no matter how deeply nested in modules are added to the root module. Quick example, let's say we have a DepartmentModule and an EmployeeModule which we'd like to navigate to using this URL

/department/1/employee/2

at which point we'd see employee 2's details. Configuring routes for department in department.routing.ts and employee in employee.routing.ts will not work the way we intended and you'll notice that you can navigate to

/employee/2

from the root component, while

/department/1/employee/2

will crash (route not found). A typical route configuration in this scenario would look like this:

export const departmentRoutes: Routes = [
    { path: 'department', component: DepartmentComponent, children: [
        { path: '', component: DepartmentsComponent },
        { path: ':id', component: DepartmentDetailsComponent }
    ]}
];

export const employeeRoutes: Routes = [
    { path: 'employee', component: EmployeeComponent, children: [
        { path: '', component: EmployeesComponent },
        { path: ':id', component: EmployeeDetailsComponent }
    ]}
];

and EmployeeModule would be imported by DepartmentModule. Now, like I said, that doesn't work unfortunately.

However, with just a single change it will:

export const employeeRoutes: Routes = [
    { path: 'department/:id/employee', component: EmployeeComponent, children: [
        { path: '', component: EmployeesComponent },
        { path: ':id', component: EmployeeDetailsComponent }
    ]}
];

The catch is, that DepartmentModule is not taking an active part anymore as soon you navigate to an employee URL, but you still can access every parameter from the ActivatedRoute:

export class EmployeeDetailsComponent {
    departmentId: number;
    employeeId: number;
    constructor(route: ActivatedRoute) {
        route.parent.params.subscribe(params =>
            this.departmentId= +params['id'])
        route.params.subscribe(params => 
            this.employeeId= +params['id']);
    }
}

I wonder if this is supposed to be the official approach, but for now this works for me until the next breaking change from the Angular 2 team .

相关阅读:
Top