Feature Request: Routing

I'm not sure why it matters though if you can get to a controller directly or via the route. I'd assume you're only creating links, or documenting your API, with the routed url and not the original, so you won't get duplicate content if google doesn't have 2 different links going to the same location to crawl. They'd just know about the routed link you created.

Your solution of "on" and "off" wouldn't work for a lot of sites. Like, most of my controllers aren't routed, but a few are. What if I have 50 controllers and only want to reroute 5 of them? I'd have to create routes for all 50.

I see where you're coming from and understand. 

One of the reasons I'm suggesting this is for people, like myself, who have a background with other MVC frameworks which require routes for all endpoints. One of the reasons I'm a fan of routing is for documentation purposes. Even though I use CI, I map all my routes in the routes file so that developers behind me can easily get a map of my entire app without having to open all the controllers and look at their methods.

Again, if you built the application the way you described, you'd simply leave the routing as "On" and go about your business. This suggestion doesn't really limit anyone but adds an extra configuration to those who might want it.

I personally like to have full control of my routes and feel that my URL's shouldn't be tied to what the name of my controller is. I also like being able to kill a route if I don't want someone accessing it.