I have a simple AngularJS webpage, where a variable acts as a filter. That variable can be given in the URL as, e.g., http://example.org/?filter=foobar. That variable can also be given/selected in a form on the page.
What I want to do is, when the page is already loaded and in the url bar the filter term is changed, for the filter variable to be updated (and so the active filter changed) without the page reloading.
This was working for me before, but a recent update and change to html5 mode (for different reasons) seems to have broken this. Now the page is reloaded.
What I did, and still do, is add watchers:
$scope.$watch(
function () { return $location.search().filter },
function(filter) { $scope.filter = filter; }
);
$scope.$watch(
'filter',
function(filter) { $location.search('filter', filter); }
);
To be honest, I wrote that code based on examples, so I may not have full understanding.
The other similar questions on SO do not provide answers to my question; they use $state or ngRoute, which I don't and it worked before without those things.
Related
While transitioning an existing angular site, I encountered an annoying problem. The initial symptom was that a certain controller was not running it's initialize function immediately following the login. I logged and I tracked, and eventually I realized it was a design flaw of the page. Essentially, index.html contains a <header>, <ng-view>, and <footer>. There are a couple of ng-if attributes that live in the header that I want to evaluate after the login, but since the view is the only thing that is reloaded, it was not reinitializing the header controller, and thus not updating the ng-if values.
Then I was reminded of ngInclude, which seems like the perfect solution, until I got it hooked up and realize that doesn't work either. It loads the template the first time, and doesn't reinitialize when the view changes. So then I got the bright idea of passing the HeaderController to another controller or service, and controlling this one stubborn boolean value through a proxy of sorts. That also didn't work. Then I tried putting a function and a boolean into another service, and mirroring that property in the header controller, but thus far I have not gotten this working.
I have done plenty of research about multiple views in the index, and so far I hear a lot about this ui-router, but I'm still not convinced that is the way I want to go. It does not seem to be a simple solution. I have not tried putting the ng-include into the templates yet either, because then I feel like that is going back in time to when we had to update 100 pages every time we changed the menu.
I lost a whole day to this. If anyone could tell me how to trigger the evaluation of this one property in my header controller which I would like to live outside the other templates, please let me know!
Ok so you need to know in your HeaderController when the view has reloaded. There's a number of ways of doing this but the easier and maybe the more correct in this particular case is with an event.
So when you are refreshing the view you just do this, let's say you need the new value of ob1 and ob2 variables.
// ViewController
$rootScope.$emit('viewRefresh', {ob1: 'newvalue1', ob2: 'newvalue2'});
And in your HeaderController you need to listen for that event, and set on your $scope the new values for those attrs (if you're not using controller as syntax).
// HeaderController
$rootScope.$on('viewRefresh', function onRefresh(event, data) {
$scope.ob1 = data.ob1;
$scope.ob2 = data.ob2;
})
Another Solution
Sharing a Promise through a Service (using $q)
function HeaderService($q) {
var defer = $q.defer();
return {
getPromise: function() {return defer.promise},
notify: function(data) {defer.notify(data)}
}
}
function HeaderController(HeaderService) {
var vm = this;
HeaderService.getPromise().then(function(data) {
vm.ob1 = data.ob1;
vm.ob2 = data.ob2;
})
}
function ViewController(HeaderService) {
var data = {ob1: 'newvalue1', ob2: 'newvalue2'};
HeaderService.notify(data)
}
I am trying to call an API end point once a user clicks a button holding a myNavigator.pushPage() request. However,I can not get the $scope data generated from the $http.get request to be passed to the new page.
If I test using console.log('test'); inside the .success of the $http.get request I successfully get the log info in the console but any data held in $scope.var = 'something'; does not gets passed to the page! Really confused!
$scope.historyDetails = function(id){
var options = {
animation: 'slide',
onTransitionEnd: function() {
$http.get('http://xxx-env.us-east-1.elasticbeanstalk.com/apiget/testresult/testId/'+id).success(function(data) {
$scope.testscore = 'something'; // this is not getting passed to page!
console.log('bahh'); // But I see this in console
});
}
};
myNavigator.pushPage("activity.html", options);
}
Page:
<ons-page ng-controller="HistoryController">
...
<span style="font-size:1.2em">{{testscore}} </span><span style="font-size:0.5em;color:#555"></span>
...
</ons-page>
Yes, that's so because both pages has different controllers, resulting in different scopes. One can not access variables from one scope to another.
Hence one solution in this case can be using rootScope service.
Root Scope is parent scope for all scopes in your angular application.
Hence you can access variable of root scopes from any other scope, provided that you are injecting $rootScope service in that controller.
to know more about rootScope check this link.
Good luck.
Update 1:
check these articles
http://www.dotnet-tricks.com/Tutorial/angularjs/UVDE100914-Understanding-AngularJS-$rootScope-and-$scope.html
https://toddmotto.com/all-about-angulars-emit-broadcast-on-publish-subscribing/
As Yogesh said the reason you're not getting your values is because if you look at $scope.testscore and try to find where is the $scope defined you will see that it's an argument for the controller function (thus it's only for that controller).
However we can see that the controller is attached to the page and you are pushing another page.
So in that case you have several options:
Use the $rootScope service as Yogesh suggested (in that case accept his answer).
Create your own service/factory/etc doing something similar to $rootScope.
(function(){
var historyData = {};
myApp.factory('historyData', function() {
return historyData;
});
})();
Technically you could probably make it more meaningful, but maybe these things are better described in some angular guides.
If you have multiple components sharing the same data then maybe you could just define your controller on a level higher - for example the ons-navigator - that way it will include all the pages. That would be ok only if your app is really small though - it's not recommended for large apps.
If this data is required only in activity.html you could just get it in that page's controller. For example:
myApp.controller('activityController', function($scope, $http) {
$http.get(...).success(function(data) {
$scope.data = data;
});
}
But I guess you would still need to get some id. Anyway it's probably better if you do the request here, now you just need the id, not the data.
You could actually cheat it with the var directive. If you give the activity page <ons-page var="myActivityPage"> then you will be able to access it through the myActivityPage variable.
And the thing you've been searching for - when you do
myNavigator.pushPage("activity.html", options);
actually the options is saved inside the ons-page of activity.html.
So you can do
myNavigator.pushPage("activity.html", {data: {id: 33}, animation: 'slide'});
And in the other controller your id will be myActivityPage.options.data.id.
If you still insist on passing all the data instead of an id - here's a simple example. In the newer versions of the 2.0 beta (I think since beta 6 or 7) all methods pushPage, popPage etc return a promise - which resolve to the ons-page, making things easier.
$scope.historyDetails = function(id){
myNavigator.pushPage("activity.html", {animation: 'slide'}).then(function(page) {
$http.get('...' + id).success(function(data) {
page.options.data = data;
});
});
});
Side note: You may want to close the question which you posted 5 days ago, as it's a duplicate of this one (I must've missed it at that time).
I have a site that has a user page. On that page, there are several links that let you explore the user's profile. I'd like to make it so that, when one of those links is clicked on, the url changes, but the top third of the page containing the user's banner doesn't reload.
I'm using Backbone.js
I have a feeling that I'm in one of those situation where I have such a poor understanding of the problem I'm dealing with that I'm asking the wrong question, so please let me know if that appears to be the case
My mistake was assuming that there was a special, built-in way of doing this in backbone. There isn't.
Simply running the following line of code
window.history.pushState('object or string', 'Title', '/new-url');
will cause your browser's URL to change without reloading the page. You can open up the javascript console in your browser right now and try it with this page. This article explains how it works in more detail (as noted in this SO post).
Now I've just bound the following event to the document object (I'm running a single page site):
bindEvents: () ->
$(document).on('click', 'a', #pushstateClick)
pushstateClick: (e) ->
href = e.target.href || $(e.target).parents('a')[0].href
if MyApp.isOutsideLink(href) == false
if e.metaKey
#don't do anything if the user is holding down ctrl or cmd;
#let the link open up in a new tab
else
e.preventDefault()
window.history.pushState('', '', href);
Backbone.history.checkUrl()
See this post for more info.
Note that you CAN pass the option pushstate: true to your call to Backbone.history.start(), but this merely makes it so that navigating directly to a certain page (e.g. example.com/exampleuser/followers) will trigger a backbone route rather than simply leading to nowhere.
Routers are your friend in this situation. Basically, create a router that has several different routes. Your routes will call different views. These views will just affect the portions of the page that you define. I'm not sure if this video will help, but it may give you some idea of how routers interact with the page: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T4iPnh-qago
Here's a rudimentary example:
myapp.Router = Backbone.Router.extend({
routes: {
'link1': 'dosomething1',
'link2': 'dosomething2',
'link3': 'dosomething3'
},
dosomething1: function() {
new myapp.MyView();
},
dosomething2: function() {
new myapp.MyView2();
},
dosomething3: function() {
new myapp.MyView3();
}
});
Then your url will look like this: www.mydomain.com/#link1.
Also, because <a href=''></a> tags will automatically call a page refresh, make sure you are calling .preventDefault(); on them if you don't want the page to refresh.
From my understanding, the differences is the callback functions to events on an AppRouter should exist in the Controller, instead of the same Router object. Also there is a one-to-one relationship between such AppRouter & Controllers, all my code from Router now moves to Controller, I don't see too much point of that? So why use them? I must be missing something?
The way I see it is to separate concerns:
the controller actually does the work (assembling the data, instanciating the view, displaying them in regions, etc.), and can update the URL to reflect the application's state (e.g. displayed content)
the router simply triggers the controller action based on the URL that has been entered in the address bar
So basically, if you're on your app's starting page, it should work fine without needing any routers: your actions (e.g. clicking on a menu entry) simply fire the various controller actions.
Then, you add on a router saying "if this URL is called, execute this controller action". And within your controller you update the displayed URL with navigate("my_url_goes_here"). Notice you do NOT pass trigger: true.
For more info, check out Derick's blog post http://lostechies.com/derickbailey/2011/08/28/dont-execute-a-backbone-js-route-handler-from-your-code/ (paragraph "The “AHA!” Moment Regarding Router.Navigate’s Second Argument")
I've also covered the topic in more length in the free preview of my book on Marionette. See pages 32-46 here: http://samples.leanpub.com/marionette-gentle-introduction-sample.pdf
I made some override for the router. And currently use it in this way (like Chaplin):
https://gist.github.com/vermilion1/5525972
appRoutes : {
// route : controller#method
'search' : 'search#search'
'*any' : 'common#notFound'
},
initialize : function () {
this.common = new Common();
this.search = new Search();
}
I've got a backbone.js application that defines two controllers, and the controllers both define route patterns which match the location.hash. I'm having trouble getting both of them to fire - e.g.
ManagerController = Backbone.Controller.extend({
routes: {
":name": "doStuff"
},
doStuff : function(name) {
console.log("doStuff called...");
}
});
Component1Controller = Backbone.Controller.extend({
routes: {
"xyz123": "doMoreStuff"
},
doMoreStuff : function() {
console.log("doMoreStuff called...");
}
});
so if the url is "http://mysite.com/#xyz123", then I am seeing 'doStuff()' called, or if I comment out that route, then 'doMoreStuff()' is called. But not both.
I'm using this architecture because my page is highly component oriented, and each component defines its own Controller. A 'component manager' also defines a Controller which does some house keeping on all routes.
Should I be able to configure two controllers that both respond to the same route? Cheers,
Colin
Short answer: No, you can't do that. One Controller per page.
Long answer: When you instantiate a new Controller, it adds its routes to the History singleton. The History singleton is monitoring the hash component of the URL, and when the hash changes, it scans the routes for the first expression that matches its needs. It then fires the function associated with that route (that function has been bound to the controller in which it was declared). It will only fire once, and if there is a conflict the order in which it fires is formally indeterminate. (In practice it's probably deterministic.)
Philosophical answer: The controller is a "view" object which affects the presentation of the whole page based on the hash component of the URL. Its purpose is to provide bookmark-capable URLs that the user can reach in the future, so that when he goes to a URL he can start from a pre-selected view among many. From your description, it sounds like you're manipulating this publicly exposed, manually addressable item to manipulate different parts of your viewport, while leaving others alone. That's not how it works.
One of the nice things about Backbone is that if you pass it a route that's already a regular expression, it will use it as-is. So if you're trying to use the controller to create a bookmarkable description of the layout (component 1 in the upper right hand corner in display mode "A", component 2 in the upper left corner in display mode "B", etc) I can suggest a number of alternatives-- allocate each one a namespace in the hash part of the URL, and create routes that ignore the rest, i.e.
routes: {
new RegExp('^([^\/]*)/.*$'): 'doComponent1stuff',
new RegExp('^[^\/]*/([^\/]*)\/.*$': 'doComponent2stuff',
}
See how the first uses only items after the first slash, the second after the second slash, etc. You can encode your magic entirely how you want.
I suggest, though, that if you're going to be doing something with the look and feel of the components, and you want that to be reasonably persistent, that you look into the views getting and setting their cookies from some local store; if they're small enough, cookies will be enough.
I have a very similar issue. At present, backbone stops after the first matching route. I have a dirty workaround where I am overriding the loadUrl method of Backbone History. Here I am iterating through all of the registered routes and triggering callback for all of the matching routes .
_.extend(Backbone.History.prototype, {
loadUrl : function() {
var fragment = this.fragment = this.getFragment();
var matched = false;
_.each(this.handlers, function(handler) {
if (handler.route.test(fragment)) {
handler.callback(fragment);
matched = true;
}
});
return matched;
}
})
Philosophically, I am fine with having single controller per page. However, in a component based view framework, it will be nice to have multiple views per route rendering different parts of a view state.
Comments are welcome.
I've used namespacing to deal with a similar problem. Each module comes with it's own module controller, but is restricted to handle routes that start with /moduleName/ this way modules can be developed independently.
I haven't fully tested this yet, if you take a look at the Backbone.js source, you can see this at line 1449:
// Attempt to load the current URL fragment. If a route succeeds with a
// match, returns `true`. If no defined routes matches the fragment,
// returns `false`.
loadUrl: function(fragment) {
fragment = this.fragment = this.getFragment(fragment);
return _.any(this.handlers, function(handler) {
if (handler.route.test(fragment)) {
handler.callback(fragment);
return true;
}
});
}
The any method will stop as soon as it matches a handler route (with the "return true"), just comment the return and the short-circuit will never happend, and all the handlers will be tested. Tested this with a marionette app with two modules, each one having it's own router and controller, listening same routes anb both fired up.
I think this is the simplest way of resolving it
routes: {
'': 'userGrid',
'users': 'userGrid',
}