✨ v3 (feature): new Route method

[wangjq4214]

related to #1829

[balcieren]

@wangjq4214 Why you changed Route with RouteInfo ?

[wangjq4214]

@wangjq4214 Why you changed Route with RouteInfo ?

I think the method returned by this function is probably more commonly used, so a simpler name is needed. Changing the previous name is not quite right, I will change it back, do you have any idea about the name of this type?

[balcieren]

@wangjq4214 We can use Router interface for this method

[efectn]

Router interface is not compatible for this stuff. It has path param in methods

[balcieren]

Router interface is not compatible for this stuff. It has path param in methods

That's true. You are right.

[balcieren]

I think we should change Route struct name

[efectn]

Maybe we can add interface named RegisterI or something else and return it instead of *Register. Wdym @wangjq4214

[balcieren]

Actually RouteFunc might be a good name to seperate from Route

[ReneWerner87]

@wangjq4214 thx for the PR

can you create some test with route which have a deeper level

so for example 3 level

so we can be sure that there can be scaled infinitely

[wangjq4214]

@efectn thx