[v6] Standalone <Route>

[mjackson]

What is the new or updated feature that you are suggesting?

We should make it easy to render a standalone <Route> without requiring it to be wrapped in a <Routes>. This mirrors functionality we currently have in v5.

Unfortunately this probably means we will have to get rid of the secret menu in v6, but that's hard to type anyway. Reach Router users will have to modify their route config to use real <Route> components instead of sending <Route>-specific props to their own components.

Why should this feature be included?

This will make it easier for people to upgrade from v5.

[timdorr]

Maybe it makes sense to bring back the old <Match> component? 🤔

[MeiKatz]

Just for those who don't know it: what is the secret menu in v6?

[timdorr]

That's where you can get React Router in Animal Style, Protein Style, or get it 4x4.

[mjackson]

@MeiKatz

react-router/packages/react-router/__tests__/route-matching-test.tsx

Line 75 in bf679c4

describe("using <Routes> and the *secret menu*", () => {

[MeiKatz]

So the secret menu is adding path to any kind of component, that is not a <Route />?

[mjackson]

It's essentially the Reach Router API for React Router v6, where you can use any component you want instead of a <Route>. You just give it the same props that <Route> accepts.

It's problematic when you're using TypeScript, because now you have to add <Route>'s props to the props that all of your components expect, so I wouldn't be terribly sad to lose it.

[mjackson]

We discussed this internally and decided it's probably not the direction we want to go right now.

Instead of implementing standalone <Route> in v6, we are going to ship a backwards compatibility layer that will implement the v5 API on top of v6 (including a standalone <Route> component), which should help people when migrating.