Is it possible to use the "/" route for a controller in Laravel with Inertia? [closed]

Question

Closed. This question is not reproducible or was caused by typos. It is not currently accepting answers.

This question was caused by a typo or a problem that can no longer be reproduced. While similar questions may be on-topic here, this one was resolved in a way less likely to help future readers.

Closed last month.

Improve this question

What I want to set up in .\routes\web.php is something like

Route::resource('/main', CallController::class);

So, if user goes to www.sitename.com/, the index of CallController should be executed and displayed. However, if I try to compile that with npx vite build, I am invariably met with an error of such type:

Expected identifier but found ":"
216 |   * @route '/{}'
217 |   */
218 |  export const show = (args: { : string | number } | [param: string | number ] | string | number, options?: RouteQueryOptions): RouteDefinition<'get'> => ({
    |                               ^
219 |      url: show.url(args, options),
220 |      method: 'get',

The error only seems to go away, if some other path other that / is being assigned to as the path for the CallController's index.

The only workaround that I have found is to set the resource route as /calls and redirect from it from `/':

Route::get('/', function () {
        return redirect('/main');
    })->name('home');

But I wonder, whether it is the intended behaviour and if it is possible to use / as a route for a resource/controller?

9uifranco · Accepted Answer · 2025-10-05 19:03:06Z

If I'm not wrong that error is from TypeScript.

What’s missing there is a valid route parameter name. When you create a resource route with '/' like this...

Route::resource('/', CallController::class);

Laravel internally tries to create all the resource routes (show, edit, update, and destroy) and since the resource name is empty it ends up generating invalid placeholders like {}. You can confirm it by running php artisan route:list.

Take a look at how it work internally in ResourceRegistrar class. When the resource name is empty, the $base parameter is empty which is why Laravel generates these invalid {} routes.

You can either do what you're already doing, or register each route manually like:

Route::get('/', [CallController::class, 'index'])->name('main.index');
Route::resource('main', CallController::class)->except(['index']);

Collectives™ on Stack Overflow

Is it possible to use the "/" route for a controller in Laravel with Inertia? [closed]

1 Answer 1

Comments

Hot Network Questions

Collectives™ on Stack Overflow

1 Answer 1

Comments

Related