Catalyst::ActionRole::Methods - Dispatch by HTTP Methods


    package MyApp::Controller::Example;

    use Moose;
    use MooseX::MethodAttributes;

    extends 'Catalyst::Controller';

    sub myaction :Chained(/) Does('Methods') CaptureArgs(1) {
      my ($self, $c, $arg) = @_;
      # When this action is matched, first execute this action's
      # body, then an action matching the HTTP method or the not
      # implemented one if needed.

      sub myaction_GET :Action {
        my ($self, $c, $arg) = @_;
        # Note that if the 'parent' action has args or capture-args, those are
        # made available to a matching method action.

      sub myaction_POST {
        my ($self, $c, $arg) = @_;
        # We match the subroutine name whether its an action or not.  If you
        # make it an action, as in the _GET above, you are allowed to apply
        # action roles (which is the main advantage to this AFAIK).

      sub myaction_not_implemented {
        my ($self, $c, $arg) = @_;
        # There's a sane default for this, but you can override as needed.

      sub next_action_in_chain_1 :Chained(myaction) Args(0) { ... }

      sub next_action_in_chain_2 :Chained(myaction) Args(0) { ... }



This is a Moose::Role version of the classic Catalyst::Action::REST action class. The intention is to offer some of the popular functionality that comes with Catalyst::Action::REST in a more modular, 'build what you need' package.

Bulk of this documentation and test cases derive from Catalyst::Action::REST with the current author's gratitude.

This Action Role handles doing automatic method dispatching for requests. It takes a normal Catalyst action, and changes the dispatch to append an underscore and method name. First it will try dispatching to an action with the generated name, and failing that it will try to dispatch to a regular method.

    sub foo :Local :Does('Methods') {
      ... do setup for HTTP method specific handlers ...
    sub foo_GET {
      ... do something for GET requests ...
    # alternatively use an Action
    sub foo_PUT : Action {
      ... do something for PUT requests ...

For example, in the example above, calling GET on "/foo" would result in the foo_GET method being dispatched.

If a method is requested that is not implemented, this action will return a status 405 (Method Not Found). It will populate the "Allow" header with the list of implemented request methods. You can override this behavior by implementing a custom 405 handler like so:

   sub foo_not_implemented {
      ... handle not implemented methods ...

If you do not provide an _OPTIONS subroutine, we will automatically respond with a 200 OK. The "Allow" header will be populated with the list of implemented request methods. If you do not provide an _HEAD either, we will auto dispatch to the _GET one in case it exists.

VERSUS Catalyst::Action::REST

Catalyst::Action::REST works fine doesn't it? Why offer a new approach? There's a few reasons:

First, when Catalyst::Action::REST was written we did not have Moose and the only way to augment functionality was via inheritance. Now that Moose is common we instead say that it is typically better to use a Moose::Role to augment a class function rather to use a subclass. The role approach is a smaller hammer and it plays nicer when you need to combine several roles to augment a class (as compared to multiple inheritance approaches.). This is why we brought support for action roles into core Catalyst::Controller several years ago. Letting you have this functionality via a role should lead to more flexible systems that play nice with other roles. One nice side effect of this 'play nice with others' is that we were able to hook into the 'list_extra_info' method of the core action class so that you can now see in your developer mode debug output the matched http methods, for example:

    | Path Spec                           | Private                                |
    | /myaction/*/next_action_in_chain    | GET, HEAD, POST /myaction (1)          |
    |                                     | => /next_action_in_chain (0)           |

This is not to say its never correct to use an action class, but now you have the choice.

Second, Catalyst::Action::REST has the behavior as noted of altering the core Catalyst::Request class. This might not be desired and has always struck the author as a bit too much side effect / action at a distance.

Last, Catalyst::Action::REST is actually a larger distribution with a bunch of other features and dependencies that you might not want. The intention is to offer those bits of functionality as standalone, modern components and allow one to assemble the parts needed, as needed.

This action role is for the most part a 1-1 port of the action class, with one minor change to reduce the dependency count. Additionally, it does not automatically apply the Catalyst::Request::REST action class to your global Catalyst action class. This feature is left off because its easy to set this yourself if desired via the global Catalyst configuration and we want to follow and promote the idea of 'do one thing well and nothing surprising'.

NOTE There is an additional minor change in how we handle return values from actions. In general Catalyst does nothing with an action return value (unless in an auto action). However this might not always be the future case, and you might have used that return value for something in your custom code. In Catalyst::Action::REST the return value was always the return of the dispatched sub action (if any). We tweaked this so that we use the sub action return value, BUT if that value is undefined, we use the parent action return value instead.

We also dropped saying 'REST' when all we are doing is dispatching on HTTP method. Since the time that the first version of Catalysts::Action::REST was released to CPAN our notion of what 'REST' means has greatly evolved so I think its correct to change the name to be functionality specific and to not confuse people that are new to the REST discipline.

This action role is intended to be used in all the places you used to use the action class and have the same results, with the exception of the already mentioned 'not messing with the global request class'. However Catalyst::Action::REST has been around for a long time and is well vetted in production so I would caution care with changing your mission critical systems very quickly.


Catalyst since version 5.90030 has offered a core approach to dispatch on the http method (via Catalyst::ActionRole::HTTPMethods). Why still use this action role versus the core functionality? ALthough it partly comes down to preference and the author's desire to give current users of Catalyst::Action::REST a path forward, there is some functionality differences beetween the two which may recommend one over the other. For example the core method matching does not offer an automatic default 'Not Implemented' response that correctly sets the OPTIONS header. Also the dispatch flow between the two approaches is different and when using chained actions one might be a better choice over the other depending on how your chains are arranged and your desired flow of action.


This role contains the following methods.


Returns a list of the allowed methods.


This method overrides the default dispatch mechanism to the re-dispatching mechanism described above.


  John Napiorkowski <>

Author list from Catalyst::Action::REST

  Adam Jacob E<lt>adam@stalecoffee.orgE<gt>, with lots of help from mst and jrockway
  Marchex, Inc. paid me while I developed this module. (L<>)


The following contributor list was copied from Catalyst::Action::REST from where the bulk of this code was copied.

Tomas Doran (t0m) <>

John Goulah

Christopher Laco

Daisuke Maki <>

Hans Dieter Pearcey

Brian Phillips <>

Dave Rolsky <>

Luke Saunders

Arthur Axel "fREW" Schmidt <>

J. Shirley <>

Gavin Henry <>


Colin Newell <>

Wallace Reis <>

André Walker (andrewalker) <>


Copyright (c) 2006-2015 the above named AUTHOR and CONTRIBUTORS


You may distribute this code under the same terms as Perl itself.

1 POD Error

The following errors were encountered while parsing the POD:

Around line 340:

Non-ASCII character seen before =encoding in 'André'. Assuming UTF-8