Framework: Route model binding generating weird model name

[rafaelrenanpacheco]

• Laravel Version: 5.3.10
• PHP Version: 7.0.8
• Database Driver & Version: MySQL 15.1
  

  Description:

Hi there!

In a fresh Laravel 5.3 installation, I'm having a problem when using route model binding in a specific resource. To all my other resources it works fine, but for this specific one, look what is happening:

This is the route declaration using a resourcefull controller:

Route::resource('ordem.conta', 'OrdemContaController', ['except' => 'show']);

So, in the controller file I'll expect the following bindings in the @edit action:

public function edit(Ordem $ordem, Conta $conta)
{
    ...
}

That shall be fired when I call this URL:

localhost/ordem/38/conta/38/edit

But, something weird happened. The Ordem model was found as expected, but Conta model was not. So I ran php artisan route:list to look for any issues in these routes, and I found this:

GET|HEAD | ordem/{ordem}/conta/{contum}/edit | ordem.conta.edit | App\Http\Controllers\OrdemContaController@edit

As you can see, conta became contum by some reason. And this was responsible for not finding my Conta model through model binding.

The same issue exists for PUT/PATCH and DELETE, which requires model binding for the Conta object.

Is this a bug, or there is a way to disable this "contum" word?

Best regards,
Rafael Pacheco.

[themsaid]

Laravel assumes the URI is in english, so it tries to follow the english rules of singular/plural forms using Doctrine Inflector, if you provide a name users Laravel will try to look for a model User.

As for Conta, just like data, it thinks the singular form would be contum.

I suggest if you're not using english in your resource names to do the following:

Route::resource('ordem.conta', 'OrdemContaController', ['except' => 'show', 'parameters' => [
    'ordem' => 'ordem',
    'conta' => 'conta',
]]);

[rafaelrenanpacheco]

Is this a new behavior in 5,3? In 5.2 and before it works just fine.

cc @themsaid

[themsaid]

I think that's new in 5.3 yeah.

[rafaelrenanpacheco]

Thanks!

I will set the parameters as you said.

Best regards,
Rafael Pacheco.

[themsaid]

Perfect :)

[rafaelrenanpacheco]

Hi @themsaid, it's me again.

I found that this singular transformation do exists in Laravel 5.2, but it was not changing my routes in 5.2 Only in 5.3 it started to changing them to singular.

So I went to the ResourceRegistrar class, and found the following default configuration:

In Laravel 5.2

protected static $singularParameters = false;

In Laravel 5.3

protected static $singularParameters = true;

As you can see, 5.3 defaults to singularization, and 5.2 defaults to respect the resource name.

This is a breaking change, and shouldn't it be documented in the migration guide? Or even change 5.3 to false just like 5.2 did?

Best regards,
Rafael Pacheco.

[themsaid]

It's documented under "Resource Parameters Are Singular By Default" in the upgrade guide, you can also override this behaviour using:

Route::singularResourceParameters(false);

[rafaelrenanpacheco]

My fault, the documentation explains very clear the new behavior.

Thank you @themsaid for your help!