Angularjs Interpolation using double curly braces not working under ng-if - angularjs

UPDATE1: developed the plunker sample that will reproduce the problem. See below.
I have a strange problem in my project, where it appears in one place only. Finally, I was able to reproduce the problem using plunker sample:
http://plnkr.co/edit/JJbq54?p=preview
In the above sample, see the section "With ng-if" and "Without ng-if", enter something in the input text, and see how the double curly braces not working under ng-if, but ng-bind works fine. Also, if you remove check-if-required from the template sites-and-improvements.html also the problem is solved.
More details below:
I have the the following HTML5 code block:
<div ng-if="isFullCUSPAP" id="sites_and_imrpovements_comments">
<div class="form-row">
<div class="inputs-group">
<label>WIND TURBINE:</label>
<div class="input-binary">
<label>
<input type="radio" id="wind_turbine"
name="wind_turbine"
ng-model="$parent.wind_turbine"
value="Yes" force-model-update />
Yes
</label>
</div>
<div class="input-binary">
<label>
<input type="radio" id="wind_turbine"
name="wind_turbine"
ng-model="$parent.wind_turbine"
value="No" force-model-update />
No
</label>
</div>
<span ng-bind="wind_turbine"></span>
<span>wind_turbine = {{wind_turbine}}</span>
</div>
</div>
</div>
I know that ng-if will create a new child scope. See above code, scope variable wind_trubine. Only in this HTML5 file, the curly braces {{}} is not working. However, if I use ng-bind it works fine. In other HTML5 files, I have no problem what so ever. This HTML5 is implemented using directive as follows:
app.directive('sitesAndImprovements', function() {
return {
restrict: 'E',
replace:true,
templateUrl: '<path-to-file>/site-and-improvments.html',
link: function (scope, elem, attrs) {
//Business Logic for Sites and Improvements
}
}
})
And, simply, I put it in the parent as follows:
<sites-and-improvements></sites-and-improvements>
The only difference I could see, is that this implementation has two levels of nested ng-if, which would look like the following:
<div ng-if="some_expression">
...
...
<sites-and-improvements></sites-and-improvements>
...
...
</div>
Based on comments, I used controller As notation and defined MainController accordingly. See snapshots below. It seems there is a problem if ng-if is nested with two levels. The scope variable is completely confused. I don't get the same results using ng-bind and double curly braces.
If you examine the above snapshots, even though I used controller As notation, you will see that ng-bind gives different results when compared with interpolation using {{}}.
I even changed the default value of wind_turbine to be set as follows in the link function:
scope.MainController.wind_turbine = 'Yes';
I noticed that on page load, everything looks fine, but when I change the value of the input element wind_trubine using the mouse, all related reference are updated correctly except the one that uses {{}}.
Maybe this is because there are two nested levels of ng-if?
Appreciate your feedback.
Tarek

Remove the replace: true from the sites-and-improvements directive:
app.directive('sitesAndImprovements', function() {
return {
restrict: 'E',
̶r̶e̶p̶l̶a̶c̶e̶:̶t̶r̶u̶e̶,̶
templateUrl: 'site-and-improvments.html',
link: function (scope, elem, attrs) {
//debugger;
}
}
})
It is fighting the check-if-required directive:
app.directive('checkIfRequired', ['$compile', '$timeout', function ($compile, $timeout) {
return {
priority: 2000,
terminal: true,
link: function (scope, el, attrs) {
el.removeAttr('check-if-required');
$timeout(function(){
//debugger;
$(':input', el).each(function(key, child) {
if (child && child.id === 'test_me') {
angular.element(child).attr('ng-required', 'true');
}
if (child && child.id === 'testInput1') {
//debugger;
//angular.element(child).attr('ng-required', 'true');
}
});
$compile(el, null, 2000)(scope);
})
}
};
}])
The DEMO on PLNKR.
replace:true is Deprecated
From the Docs:
replace ([DEPRECATED!], will be removed in next major release - i.e. v2.0)
specify what the template should replace. Defaults to false.
true - the template will replace the directive's element.
false - the template will replace the contents of the directive's element.
-- AngularJS Comprehensive Directive API - replace deprecated
From GitHub:
Caitp-- It's deprecated because there are known, very silly problems with replace: true, a number of which can't really be fixed in a reasonable fashion. If you're careful and avoid these problems, then more power to you, but for the benefit of new users, it's easier to just tell them "this will give you a headache, don't do it".
-- AngularJS Issue #7636
For more information, see Explain replace=true in Angular Directives (Deprecated)

Another solution posted by AngularJS team here:
https://github.com/angular/angular.js/issues/16140#issuecomment-319332063
Basically, they recommend to convert the link() function to use compile() function instead. Here is the update code:
app.directive('checkIfRequired', ['$compile', '$timeout', function ($compile, $timeout) {
return {
priority: 2000,
terminal: true,
compile: function (el, attrs) {
el.removeAttr('check-if-required');
var children = $(':input', el);
children.each(function(key, child) {
if (child && child.id === 'test_me') {
angular.element(child).attr('ng-required', 'true');
}
});
var compiled = $compile(el, null, 2000);
return function( scope ) {
compiled( scope );
};
}
};
}]).directive('sitesAndImprovements', function() {
return {
restrict: 'E',
replace:true,
templateUrl: 'site-and-improvments.html'
}
});
The main problem I have with this solution is that I am using the scope parameter which is passed to the link() function. For example, in the .each() loop above, I need to get the value of the element ID which is based on interpolation using {{<angular expre>}}.
So I tried to use pre-link and post-link within the compile function where the scope is available. I noticed that the section with ng-if is removed when execution is in pre-link and then it is added shortly after that. So I had to use $watch to monitor changes to the children to run the needed process when required. I developed this plunker sample:
http://plnkr.co/edit/lsJvhr?p=preview
Even after all such effort, the issue is not resolved. So the bottom line for similar cases, is that if you need to use the scope then you have to remove replace: true.
Any feedback would be appreciated.
Tarek

Related

AngularJS $watch controller variable from a directive with scope

From the directive, I want to track changes to a controller variable using $watch.
I have created this jsfiddle. (https://jsfiddle.net/hqz1seqw/7/)
When the page loads, the controller and both directives $watch function gets called but when I change the radio buttons, only the controllers and dir-two $watch function gets called. Why isnt dir-ones $watch function being called?
I want both the directives $watch to fire however, I can only get one of them to (i.e. dir-two). Not sure what I need to change. Does it have something to do with isolated scope? Is there a better way of doing this?
AngularJS Code:
var mod = angular.module("myApp", []);
//Controller
mod.controller("myCtrl", function($scope){
$scope.tempformat = "C";
$scope.one="25 - dir-one";
$scope.$watch('tempformat', function(nv){
alert("nv from controller");
});
$scope.two="35 - dir-two";
});
//dir-one directive
mod.directive("dirOne", function(){
return{
restrict: 'E',
template: "<p>{{info}}</p>",
scope: {info: '='
},
link: function (scope, element, attr) {
scope.$watch('tempformat', function(nv){
alert("nv from directive-one");
if(scope.tempformat === "C"){
element.find("p").append("C");
}
else if(scope.tempformat === "F"){
element.find("p").append("F");
}
});
}
}});
//dir-two directive
mod.directive("dirTwo", function($window){
return{
restrict: "EA",
template: "<p></p>",
link: function (scope, element, attr) {
scope.$watch('tempformat', function(nv){
alert("nv from directive-two");
if(scope.tempformat === "C"){
element.find("p").append("C");
}
else if(scope.tempformat === "F"){
element.find("p").append("F");
}
});
}
}
});
HTML Code:
<div ng-app="myApp" ng-controller="myCtrl">
<h2>Temperature</h2>
<input type="radio" ng-model="tempformat" value="C"/> Celcius
<input type="radio" ng-model="tempformat" value="F"/> Farenheit
<dir-one info="one"></dir-one>
<dir-two info="two"></dir-two>
</div>
Does it have something to do with isolated scope?
The problem is the fact that dir-one separates its scope from the parent. There are some alternatives that can be done in this situation such as:
scope.$watch('$parent.tempformat', function(nv){ //...
which will look to the parent for the specified content.
Another alternative is to bind to the directive itself:
scope: {
info: '=',
tempformat: '='
},
and then in the html:
<dir-one info="one" tempformat="tempformat"></dir-one>
see: the documentation for more information. Particularly the Isolating the Scope of a Directive area.
Is there a better way of doing this?
In general isolate scopes help construct reusable components (as noted in the documentation) so if this is something that is being attempted (from the content noted in the answer) then I would support something along the lines of the second option where you can specify that watch content on the directive itself and consider that the "better" way of doing this.
From my experience, and this is solely my own preference, I would bind it to the directive since I usually isolate my scope(s) for a reason.

Passing a model to a custom directive - clearing a text input

What I'm trying to achieve is relatively simple, but I've been going round in circles with this for too long, and now it's time to seek help.
Basically, I have created a directive that is comprised of a text input and a link to clear it.
I pass in the id via an attribute which works in fine, but I cannot seem to work out how to pass the model in to clear it when the reset link is clicked.
Here is what I have so far:
In my view:
<text-input-with-reset input-id="the-relevant-id" input-model="the.relevant.model"/>
My directive:
app.directive('textInputWithReset', function() {
return {
restrict: 'AE',
replace: 'true',
template: '<div class="text-input-with-reset">' +
'<input ng-model="inputModel" id="input-id" type="text" class="form-control">' +
'<a href class="btn-reset"><span aria-hidden="true">×</span></a>' +
'</div>',
link: function(scope, elem, attrs) {
// set ID of input for clickable labels (works)
elem.find('input').attr('id', attrs.inputId);
// Reset model and clear text field (not working)
elem.find('a').bind('click', function() {
scope[attrs.inputModel] = '';
});
}
};
});
I'm obviously missing something fundamental - any help would be greatly appreciated.
You should call scope.$apply() after resetting inputModel in your function where you reset the value.
elem.find('a').bind('click', function() {
scope.inputModel = '';
scope.$apply();
});
Please, read about scope in AngularJS here.
$apply() is used to execute an expression in angular from outside of the angular framework. (For example from browser DOM events, setTimeout, XHR or third party libraries). Because we are calling into the angular framework we need to perform proper scope life cycle of exception handling, executing watches.
I've also added declaring of your inputModel attribute in scope of your directive.
scope: {
inputModel: "="
}
See demo on plunker.
But if you can use ng-click in your template - use it, it's much better.
OK, I seem to have fixed it by making use of the directive scope and using ng-click in the template:
My view:
<text-input-with-reset input-id="the-relevant-id" input-model="the.relevant.model"/>
My directive:
app.directive('textInputWithReset', function() {
return {
restrict: 'AE',
replace: 'true',
scope: {
inputModel: '='
},
template: '<div class="text-input-with-reset">' +
'<input ng-model="inputModel" id="input-id" type="text" class="form-control">' +
'<a href ng-click="inputModel = \'\'" class="btn-reset"><span aria-hidden="true">×</span></a>' +
'</div>',
link: function(scope, elem, attrs) {
elem.find('input').attr('id', attrs.inputId);
};
});
It looks like you've already answered your question, but I'll leave my answer here for further explanations in case someone else lands on the same problem.
In its current state, there are two things wrong with your directive:
The click handler will trigger outside of Angular's digest cycle. Basically, even if you manage to clear the model's value, Angular won't know about it. You can wrap your logic in a scope.$apply() call to fix this, but it's not the correct solution in this case - keep reading.
Accessing the scope via scope[attrs.inputModel] would evaluate to something like scope['the.relevant.model']. Obviously, the name of your model is not literally the.relevant.model, as the dots typically imply nesting instead of being a literal part of the name. You need a different way of referencing the model.
You should use an isolate scope (see here and here) for a directive like this. Basically, you'd modify your directive to look like this:
app.directive('textInputWithReset', function() {
return {
restrict: 'AE',
replace: 'true',
template: [...],
// define an isolate scope for the directive, passing in these scope variables
scope: {
// scope.inputId = input-id attribute on directive
inputId: '=inputId',
// scope.inputModel = input-model attribute on directive
inputModel: '=inputModel'
},
link: function(scope, elem, attrs) {
// set ID of input for clickable labels (works)
elem.find('input').attr('id', scope.inputId);
// Reset model and clear text field (not working)
elem.find('a').bind('click', function() {
scope.inputModel = '';
});
}
};
});
Notice that when you define an isolate scope, the directive gets its own scope with the requested variables. This means that you can simply use scope.inputId and scope.inputModel within the directive, instead of trying to reference them in a roundabout way.
This is untested, but it should pretty much work (you'll need to use the scope.$apply() fix I mentioned before). You might want to test the inputId binding, as you might need to pass it a literal string now (e.g. put 'input-id' in the attribute to specify that it is a literal string, instead of input-id which would imply there is an input-id variable in the scope).
After you get your directive to work, let's try to make it work even more in "the Angular way." Now that you have an isolate scope in your directive, there is no need to implement custom logic in the link function. Whenever your link function has a .click() or a .attr(), there is probably a better way of writing it.
In this case, you can simplify your directive by using more built-in Angular logic instead of manually modifying the DOM in the link() function:
<div class="text-input-with-reset">
<input ng-model="inputModel" id="{{ inputId }}" type="text" class="form-control">
<span aria-hidden="true">×</span>
</div>
Now, all your link() function (or, better yet, your directive's controller) needs to do is define a reset() function on the scope. Everything else will automatically just work!

Is it possible to conditionally apply transclution to directive?

Is it possible to decide whether to apply transclusion to an element based on a scope variable ?
For example ( Stupid simplified reduced example of what i'm trying to achieve )
app.directive('myHighlight', function () {
return {
transclude : true,
template : "<div style='border:1px solid red'><span ng-transclude></span></div>"
}
});
app.directive('myDirective', function () {
return {
template : "<span>some text</span>",
link : function (scope,element,attr) {
if ( 'shouldHighlight' in attr) {
// wrap this directive with my-highlight
}
}
}
});
And then in the html
<span my-directive></span>
<span my-directive should-highlight></span>
Note, please don't tell me to just add the highlight instead of should-highlight, as i said this is a dumb reduced example. Thanks.
Instead of optionally applying the highlight directive, always apply it and do the optional wrapping inside that directive. The optional wrapping is achieved with an ng-if and a boolean passed from myDirective to myHighlight via markup:
<div my-highlight="someBooleanValue">some text</div>
The myHighlight template:
<div ng-if="actuallyTransclude" style="border:1px solid red">
<span ng-transclude></span>
</div>
<div ng-if="!actuallyTransclude" ng-transclude></div>
Working jsfiddle: http://jsfiddle.net/wilsonjonash/X6eB5/
Sure. When you specify the transclude option, you know that you can declaratively indicate where the content should go using ng-transclude.
In the linking function of the directive, you will also get a reference to a transclude function (https://docs.angularjs.org/api/ng/service/$compile, see link section):
function link(scope, iElement, iAttrs, controller, transcludeFn) { ... }
The transcludeFn will return the transcluded content, so you can conditionally insert that were and when you want to in the link function of your directive.
Example (http://jsfiddle.net/DKLY9/22/)
HTML
<parentdir flg="1">
Child Content
</parentdir>
JS
app.directive('parentdir', function(){
return {
restrict : 'AE',
scope: {
flg : "="
},
transclude : true,
template : "<div>Parent {{childContent}} Content</div>",
link : function(scope, elem, attr, ctrl, transcludeFn){
if (scope.flg==1){
scope.childContent="Include Me instead";
}
else {
scope.childContent = transcludeFn()[0].textContent;
}
}
}
});
This is a simplified example. To get a better idea of how to use the transclude function, refer to the following : http://blog.omkarpatil.com/2012/11/transclude-in-angularjs.html
When I approach these kind of problems I just look at what angular did. Usually their source code is very readable and easy to re-use. ngTransclude is no different:
https://github.com/angular/angular.js/blob/master/src/ng/directive/ngTransclude.js
I leave the rest to you. You can either create your own transclusion directive that receives also a condition, or just duplicate the code into your specific directive when the if condition is true.
If you still have trouble, please let me know and we'll set up a plunker.

Manipulating DOM in directive, now what?

I have made a directive (inline-edit) and manipulated the DOM in the compile function, but how can I make the other directives that I have added to work? I guess I need to compile it, but how? See my jsfiddle here: http://jsfiddle.net/tidelipop/m4gbZ/
ng-click does not work as it is, but the strange thing is, why do ng-bind work? You can see that it does work if you unhide the textarea in dev tools.
angular.module('MyApp', [], function($compileProvider){
$compileProvider.directive("inlineEdit", function($compile, $q){
return {
restrict: "A",
scope: true,
controller: function($scope){
$scope.editMode = true;
$scope.save = function(){
console.log("Saving...");
};
},
compile: function(tElement, tAttrs){
tElement
.attr("ng-hide", "editMode")
.attr("ng-click", "editMode=!editMode")
.after("<textarea ng-show=\"editMode\" ng-model=\""+tAttrs.ngBind+"\"></textarea><button ng-click=\"save()\">Save</button>");
//var scopeResolver = $q.defer();
//$compile(tElement.parent().contents())(scopeResolver.promise);
return function(scope, element, attrs, controller){
//scopeResolver.resolve(scope);
//$compile(element.parent().contents())(scope);
console.log(element.parent().contents());
};
}
};
});
})
.controller("UserAdminCtrl", function($scope){
$scope.data_copy = {
user: {
user_id: 'sevaxahe',
comment: 'test'
}
};
});
It looks like your directive is conflicting with the ng-bind, I don't really know why, but the question I asked myself looking at your code was : Wouldn't it be easier using a template and a custon attribute for the model (instead of ng-bind) ?
And the answer is yes !
Actually that's just my opinion, but here is what I did by modifying your code http://jsfiddle.net/DotDotDot/m4gbZ/73/
I let you have a look, I had to change some parts (the ng-click doesn't work well on the textarea so I put this behavior on the Save button) but I think this is almost what you wanted. On code side, I modified the HTML to avoid calling ng-bind, using a custom scope variable which will be caught in the directive :
<span inline-edit ff="data_copy.user.comment">First</span>
On the directive side, I got rid of all the compile/controller stuff, and I added a template
return {
restrict: "A",
template:'<div><span ng-hide="editMode" ng-click="editMode=!editMode">{{aModel}}</span><textarea ng-show="editMode" ng-model="aModel"></textarea> <button ng-click="save()">{{getLabel()}}</button></div>',
replace:true,
scope: {aModel:'=ff'},
link: function(scope, element, attrs){
console.log(element)
scope.editMode = true;
scope.save = function(){
console.log("Saving...");
scope.editMode=!scope.editMode;
};
scope.getLabel=function(){
if(scope.editMode)
return "Save";
else
return "Change";
}
console.log(element.parent().contents());
}
}
Why ? The template, because angular will compile it itself without any intervention.
I added replace:true to replace the line, but it's optionnal
The scope part is more important. scope: {'=ff'} tells angular that I want to use an isolated scope, and I want the scope.aModel value to be bound with the ff variable passed in the HTML.
The '=' means that the modifications will be evaluated from the parent scope, and every modification will be reflected in the parent and in the directive
I replaced your controller and your compile function (no element to compile, and adding function can be done here instead of a dedicated controller) by a linking function containing the functions needed. As I said before, I added the editMode change behavior to the Save button, so I added a bit more code, but it's not the main point, I think you may have to change things here to reflect your expected behavior
I hope this will help you, as I don't really answer your question, but I think you could also explore this way
++

Avoid using extra DOM nodes when using nginclude

I'm struggling to wrap my mind around how to have an ng-include not use an extra DOM element as I'm building an angular app from a plain-HTML demo. I'm working with pretty slim HTML with fully developed, tightly DOM-coupled CSS (built from SASS) and refactoring is something I want to avoid at all costs.
Here's the actual code:
<div id="wrapper">
<header
ng-controller="HeaderController"
data-ng-class="headerType"
data-ng-include="'/templates/base/header.html'">
</header>
<section
ng-controller="SubheaderController"
data-ng-class="subheaderClass"
ng-repeat="subheader in subheaders"
data-ng-include="'/templates/base/subheader.html'">
</section>
<div
class="main"
data-ng-class="mainClass"
data-ng-view>
</div>
</div>
I need <section> to be a repeating element but have its own logic and different content. Both, content and number of repetitions are dependent on business logic. As you can see, putting the ng-controller and the ng-repeat on the <section> element will not work. What would, however, is to insert a new DOM node, which is what I'm trying to avoid.
What am I missing out? Is this best practice or is there a better way?
EDIT: just to clarify as asked in comments, the final HTML I'm trying to generate would be:
<div id="wrapper">
<header>...</header>
<section class="submenuX">
some content from controller A and template B (e.g. <ul>...</ul>)
</section>
<section class="submenuY">
different content from same controller A and template B (e.g. <div>...</div>)
</section>
<section class="submenuZ">
... (number of repetitions is defined in controller A e.g. through some service)
</section>
<div>...</div>
</div>
The reason I want to use the same template B (subheader.html), is for code cleanliness. I conceive subheader.html to have some kind of ng-switch in order to return dynamic content.
But basically, the underlaying quiestion is: is there a way to include the contents of a template transparently, without using a DOM node?
EDIT2: The solution needs to be reusable. =)
Some of the other answers suggest replace:true, but keep in mind that replace:true in templates is marked for deprecation.
Instead, in an answer to a similar question, we find an alternative: It allows you to write:
<div ng-include src="dynamicTemplatePath" include-replace></div>
Custom Directive:
app.directive('includeReplace', function () {
return {
require: 'ngInclude',
restrict: 'A', /* optional */
link: function (scope, el, attrs) {
el.replaceWith(el.children());
}
};
});
(cut'n'paste from the other answer)
Edit: After some research and for the sake of completeness, I've added some info. Since 1.1.4, the following works:
app.directive('include',
function () {
return {
replace: true,
restrict: 'A',
templateUrl: function (element, attr) {
return attr.pfInclude;
}
};
}
);
Usage:
<div include="'path/to/my/template.html'"></div>
There is, however, one gotcha: the template cannot be dynamic (as in, passing a variable through scope because $scope, or any DI for that matter, is not accessible in templateUrl - see this issue), only a string can be passed (just like the html snippet above). To bypass that particular issue, this piece of code should do the trick (kudos to this plunker):
app.directive("include", function ($http, $templateCache, $compile) {
return {
restrict: 'A',
link: function (scope, element, attributes) {
var templateUrl = scope.$eval(attributes.include);
$http.get(templateUrl, {cache: $templateCache}).success(
function (tplContent) {
element.replaceWith($compile(tplContent.data)(scope));
}
);
}
};
});
Usage:
<div include="myTplVariable"></div>
You can create a custom directive, linking to the template with the templateUrl property, and setting replace to true:
app.directive('myDirective', function() {
return {
templateUrl: 'url/to/template',
replace: true,
link: function(scope, elem, attrs) {
}
}
});
That would include the template as-is, without any wrapper element, without any wrapper scope.
For anyone who happens to visit this question:
As of angular 1.1.4+ you can use a function in the templateURL to make it dynamic.
Check out this other answer here
With the right setup, you can define your own ngInclude directive that can run instead of the one provided by Angular.js and prevent the built-in directive to execute ever.
To prevent the Angular-built-in directive from executing is crucial to set the priority of your directive higher than that of the built-in directive (400 for ngInclude and set the terminal property to true.
After that, you need to provide a post-link function that fetches the template and replaces the element's DOM node with the compiled template HTML.
A word of warning: this is rather draconian, you redefine the behavior of ngInclude for your whole application. I therefore set the directive below not on myApp but inside one of my own directives to limit its scope. If you want to use it application-wide, you might want to make its behavior configurable, e.g. only replace the element if a replace attribute is set in the HTML and per default fall back to setting innerHtml.
Also: this might not play well with animations. The code for the original ngInclude-directive is way longer, so if you use animations in your application, c&p the original code and shoehorn the `$element.replaceWith() into that.
var includeDirective = ['$http', '$templateCache', '$sce', '$compile',
function($http, $templateCache, $sce, $compile) {
return {
restrict: 'ECA',
priority: 600,
terminal: true,
link: function(scope, $element, $attr) {
scope.$watch($sce.parseAsResourceUrl($attr.src), function ngIncludeWatchAction(src) {
if (src) {
$http.get(src, {cache: $templateCache}).success(function(response) {
var e =$compile(response)(scope);
$element.replaceWith(e);
});
}
});
}
};
}];
myApp.directive('ngInclude', includeDirective);

Resources