How to define "endpoint" without using "decorator syntax" ?

[4n1qz5skwv]

An starlette example,

async def mail_page(request: Request):
    ...

app = Starlette(routes=[
        Mount(root_path, routes=[
            Route(path='/{token:uuid}', endpoint=mail_page, methods=['GET','POST'], name='mail'),
        ])
    ]
)

This way we can have central control on the route connections and easy to configure.

[provinzkraut]

This is already how the decorators work. They don’t register a route handler, they just define it. They’re registered by passing it to the app, exactly like oh your example.

i recommend you read the documentation: https://docs.litestar.dev/latest/

[provinzkraut]

You’re not paying attention to the docs.

The example you showed is not what is happening. The decorators are not methods on the application instance. You still have to pass the route handlers to the application, which is exactly what you’re asking to do.

Yes, a decorator is used, but the decorator does not register a route handler.

[provinzkraut]

The issue you're having is that you want to do this

This way we can have central control on the route connections and easy to configure.

but arrived at the conclusion that the way to achieve it is to not use decorators.

This conclusion however is wrong, since what you want is already how Litestar works.

The equivalent of this Starlette app

async def mail_page(request: Request):
    ...

app = Starlette(routes=[Route(path='/{token:uuid}', endpoint=mail_page, methods=['GET'], name='mail')])

is this Litestar app:

@get("/{token:uuid}", name="mail")
async def mail_page(request: Request):
    ...

app = Litestar(route_handlers=[mail_page])

So to answer your question: You can't. Decorators are how you define the route handlers.
But you also don't need to, since the decorators are not registering the route handlers at the same time. These are strictly separated in Litestar.

The sanic example you provided is not equivalent to what's happening in Litestar.

@app.route("/test", methods=["GET")
async def handler(request):
  ...

in this Sanic example, @app.route does two things: It creates an endpoint function, and registers it on the application, which, going off your initial post here is what you want avoid. But this is not what's happening with Litestar's decorators. Notice how in the Sanic example .route is a method on the application instance. In Litestar, this is not the case. Decorating a function with a route handler decorator such as @post does not do anything besides creating a route handler. It does not register it, since there's no application associated with it.

You can even make the Litestar and Starlette equivalents look almost identical if you really want to:

async def mail_page(request: Request):
    ...

mail_page = Route(path='/{token:uuid}', endpoint=mail_page, methods=['GET'], name='mail')

app = Starlette(routes=[mail_page])

is this Litestar app:

async def mail_page(request: Request):
    ...

mail_page = get("/{token:uuid}", name="mail")(mail_page)

app = Litestar(route_handlers=[mail_page])

It's simply a difference in syntax, not in functionality.

[provinzkraut]

Point of sanic example is to show how they have both "decorator" and "non-decorator" system.

Yes, but they do so because their decorators do something else. They give you a "non-decorator" option so you can separate the definition of your endpoints from the registration. This however is already the case in Litestar.

The only thing you'd gain from a non-decorator option in Litestar would be not using decorators. There's no functionality to be gained here.

Let me ask you again: Why do you want to do this without decorators? What are you trying to achieve with that?

[Goldziher]

You can use the route decorator to get a similar effect to a degree.

You do realize though what you're asking for is purely aesthetic?