Hello everyone!
tldr; I propose to add a way for VerifiedRoutes to know if they’re used for get, post, etc to make them even more robust, and safer to refactor. This solution could be to add a “tag” to verified routes, like so: ~p"/user/#{user}"get.
Context
So, I’ve been using Phoenix for a while, both personally and professionally, and was reaaaaally glad when verified routes were introduced. Compared to the router helpers, they are shorter and easier to read, safer, and help ease your mind when introducing new routes.
There is however one shortcoming I have come across multiple times already. Let’s create some context:
I’ve got two routes with different verbs, but with the same name
# router.ex
get "/users/:id", UserController, :show
put "/users/:id", UserController, :update
Let’s say I want to rename the put route to end with /edit to match a new :edit route
get "/users/:id", UserController, :show
get "/users/:id/edit", UserController, :edit
put "/users/:id/edit", UserController, :update
This change is never going to be caught by verified routes, whilst I think it could be really handy, at the very least for large applications (and for control freaks, like the one I am).
Proposal
Although I do have a proposal, my main intention is to solve this issue I’ve been having quite some times already, so feel free to propose other options 
The simplest way I found to fix this issue would be to add a “tag” to verified routes. It uses an existing feature of sigils, and from what I saw shouldn’t be too hard to implement.
~p"/users/#{user}"get # Still works after refactor
~p"/users/#{user}"put # Emits a warning after refactor, since `put "/user/:id"` does not exist anymore
It also has the advantage of being easily made optional
~p"/users/#{user}" # matches anything, making existing verified routes exactly the same as before
The most obvious drawbacks I can see for this proposal are
- the process is manual, making it pretty error-prone (it’s easy to copy-paste a route and forget to update the tag)
- I personally think it decreases readability of verified routes, but I think that it’s still an acceptable trade-off.
As a side note, I though about having an option to enforce usage, but I think that this should be the role of a linter like Credo, more than the library itself.
Sooo, here’s for the proposal. It’s my very first one so, sorry if I missed any obvious information 
I’m willing to try to implement this if this is something that you think is interesting.
Thanks for your time, and have a nice day 
). Still, I just can’t think of a better way that would remove the need for manual validation.
