I'm trying to apply Marionette into our architecture as it seems to fit our current application better than other solutions. Our frontend HTML is mostly server-side generated using PHP and Twig (just to give some context).
I'm now trying to use Marionette 3 Regions to achieve View compositions in a context where header, footer and generally the main content HTML are already there in the page.
I couldn't find any example with this approach so I'm asking here if someone could give some advice.
Thanks!
You can easily attach views to existing DOM elements using marionette:
var MyView = Mn.View({
el: '#base-element',
template: false
});
Also reference: http://marionettejs.com/docs/master/marionette.view.html
Related
There is chance that I might not be able to explain my problem properly. Let me try.
I am developing a single page application using angular. This app basically displays the episodes of an online novel series. There is a navigation bar, which has query menus (Like, latest episode, episode of a particular date, episodes with a particular tag, etc). For each of these queries, i want a separate url.
/latest - should display the latest episode
/tag/:tagname - should return all episodes with that tag.
For all these queries, the resultant view is the same (list of episodes). So I will be using the same partial for all routes.
My question is, Should I actually create a new controller for each query? like, LatestEpisodeController, TagController?
Is there anyway I can use the url to determine what the user wants and run that query from within the same controller?
Ofcourse you can use same controller in routing definition, the question is what is the purpose of that? It will be worse to debug it later, if you have a shared functionality it's better to turn it into a factory or service and then use in controllers.
But the answer is YES, you can use same controllers and implement different behaviour basing on i.e. $location.path()
yes you can use single controller for multiple routing..
you can create different functions in controller and in each function do the according job.
In my case I have created different html page for different url and registered same controller for the html pages and in the html page I have called controller method using ng-init in div portion.
You can use same controller and same views as you wish...
$location can help you to get current path or full url if you want and you can call your service depends on your path...
here I write a little example for you to get the idea
PLUNKER
Recently I was thinking about the differences and similarities between Backbone.js and AngularJS.
What I find really convenient in Backbone are the Backbone-Models and the Backbone-Collections. You just have to set the urlRoot and then the communication with the backend-server via Ajax basically works.
Shouldn't it be possible to use just the Backbone-Models and Collections in AngularJS application?
So we would have the best of both worlds two-way data-binding with AngularJS and convenient access to the server-side (or other storage options) through Backbone-Models and Collections.
A quick internet search didn't turn up any site suggesting this usage scenario.
All resources either talk about using either the one or the other framework.
Does someone have experience with using Backbone-Models or Collections with AngularJS.
Wouldn't they complement each other nicely? Am I something missing?
a working binding for example above...
http://jsbin.com/ivumuz/2/edit
it demonstrates a way for working around Backbone Models with AngularJS.
but setters/getters connection would be better.
Had a similar idea in mind and came up with this idea:
Add just a getter and setter for ever model attribute.
Backbone.ngModel = Backbone.Model.extend({
initialize: function (opt) {
_.each(opt, function (value, key) {
Object.defineProperty(this, key, {
get: function () {
return this.get(key)
},
set: function (value) {
this.set(key, value);
},
enumerable: true,
configurable: true
});
}, this);
}
});
See the fiddle: http://jsfiddle.net/HszLj/
I was wondering if anyone had done this too. In my most recent / first angular app, I found Angular to be pretty lacking in models and collections (unless I am missing something of course!). Sure you can pull data from the server using $http or $resource, but what if you want to add custom methods/properties to your models or collections. For example, say you have a collections of cars, and you want to calculate the total cost. Something like this:
With a Backbone Collection, this would be pretty easy to implement:
carCollection.getTotalCost()
But in Angular, you'd probably have to wrap your custom method in a service and pass your collection to it, like this:
carCollectionService.getTotalCost(carCollection)
I like the Backbone approach because it reads cleaner in my opinion. Getting the 2 way data binding is tricky though. Check out this JSBin example.
http://jsbin.com/ovowav/1/edit
When you edit the numbers, collection.totalCost wont update because the car.cost properties are not getting set via model.set().
Instead, I basically used my own constructors/"classes" for models and collections, copied a subset of Backbone's API from Backbone.Model and Backbone.Collection, and modified my custom constructors/classes so that it would work with Angular's data binding.
Try taking a look at restangular.
I have not implemented it anywhere, but I saw a talk on it a few days ago. It seems to solve the same problem in an angular way.
Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eGrpnt2VQ3s
Valid question for sure.
Lot of limitations with the current implementation of $resource, which among others doesn't have internal collection management like Backbone.Collection. Having written my own collection/resource management layer in angular (using $http, not $resource), I'm now seeing if I can substitute much of the boilerplate internals for backbone collections and models.
So far the fetching and adding part is flawless and saves code, but the binding those backbone models (or the attributes within, rather) to ng-models on inputs for editing is not yet working.
#ericclemmons (github) has done the same thing and got the two to marry well - I'll ask him, get my test working, and post the conclusion...
I was wondering the same-
This is the use-case:
salesforce mobile sdk (hybrid) has a feature called smartstore/smartsync, that expects backbone models/collection ,which gets saved to local storage for offline access .
And you guessed it right, we want to use angularjs for rest of the hybrid app.
Valid question.
-Sree
You should look at the angularJS boilerplate with parse here. Parse is backbone like, but not exactly backbone. Thats where im starting my idea of a angularJS backboneJS project
I'm reading up in choosing the correct client-side framework to segment/modularize my frontend code in Widgets.
Basically what I have/want is:
a complex website with multiple pagetypes, so no single-page application.
all pages are able to render a complete page WITHOUT the use of javascript. IOW: javascript is used as enrichment only.
Lots of pages have a very dynamic way in which widgets can be shown on screen. To overcome complexity at the server-side I've modularized my code into widgets (composite pattern), where each widget is responsible for it's own:
server-side controller code
server-side templating (using hogan/mustache)
routing endpoints, should it need to be called from the client
structural css (css converning the structure of the widget as opposed to the look&feel)
a server-side RegionManager ultimately decides which widgets are rendered and where they are rendered on screen. Endresults is that the RegionManager spits out the entire html (server-generated) as the composite of the rendering of all of it's widgets.
Now, some of these widgets DO have client-side logic and need rerendering on the client. Take a searchpage for instance, which needs to be able to update through ajax. (I've described this process, which uses DRY templating on client and server, here)
What I ultimately want is that, given I already use the composite pattern on the server, to extend this to the client somehow so that a Widget (1 particular logic block on the screen) contains all mentioned server-side code, plus all needed client-side code.
I hope this makes sense.
Would Marionette be suited to be used as a client side framework in this scenario? I'm asking since I'm not 100% sure if the concept of a Marionette Module is what I describe as being a Widget in above scenario. (I'm mentioning Twitter Flight in my question, since I believe this would be a fit, but it currently is so new that I'm hesitant to go with it at the moment_
I think basically what I'm asking is if anybody has some experience doing something along these lines.
I think just using Backbone.js is perfect for this type of application you are describing. You have probably already read this, but most of the backbone literature is focused around your views having associated server generated JSON models and collections, then using the View's render function to generate (on the client) the HTML UI that represents the model/collection.
However it doesn't have to be used this way. In fact there is nothing stopping you attaching views to existing elements that contain content already, which gives you all of the benefits of Backbone's modularity, events system and so on. I often use views that have no model or collection, purely because I like the conformity of style. I have also used an approach like I describe below in the cases where I have had to work with older, existing applications that have not yet got, or never will have a nice REST API, but they do provide content in HTML.
Firstly, lets assume the following HTML represents one of your widgets:
<div id="widget">
<div class="widget-title"></div>
<div class="widget-body">
<!-- assume lots more html is in here -->
Do something!
</div>
</div>
In this case, you could use backbone with a single Widget Model. This would be a very simple model, like this:
App.WidgetModel = Backbone.Model.extend({
intialize: function () {
this.url = this.options.url;
}
});
Take note of the fact the Widget receives a URL as a parameter to its constructor/initialize function. This widget model would represent many of your widgets (and of course you could adopt this general approach with more complicated models and pluck different data from the rendered HTML). So next for your views. As you probably know, normally you pass most views a model or collection when you instantiate them. However in this case, you could create the Widget model in your View's initialize Function and pass it a URL from the pre-rendered HTML as follows:
App.WidgetView = App.View.ComboboxView = Backbone.View.extend({
initialize: function () {
this.model = new App.WidgetModel({}, { url: this.$("a").attr("href") });
}
// rest of the view code
});
So instantiating the view would be something like:
new App.WidgetView({el: $("#widget")})'
By doing all of the above you can do pretty much everything else that backbone offers you and its modular and encapsulated nicely, which is what you are after.
The end result of this whole approach is:
You have rendered the Widget UI as pure HTML which (I assume) is functional without JavaScript.
You attach a View to the existing HTML.
You pass into the View as options, content by extracted (such as a URL) from the rendered HTML with jQuery.
The View is responsible for instantiating the Model passing on the relevant options the model needs (such as a URL).
This means all dynamic server side content is intially contained in the rendered HTML and your View is a modular JavaScript component that can do stuff to it, which I think is the end result you're after.
So you mentioned that you would like to have AJAX functionality for your widgets and that fine with this approach too. Using this approach, you can now use the standard Backbone fetch and save functions on the Widget model to get new content. In this example it is from the URL retrieved from the rendered HTML. When you get the response, you can use the view's, render function, or other finer grained functions to update the HTML on the page as required.
A few points:
The only thing to look out for is that you'll need to change the content type of the fetch and save functions to "text/html" if that's what the server is providing. For example:
this.model.fetch({
type: "POST",
contentType: "text/html"
});
Lastly, the model I have proposed is instantiated with no content. However if your ajax calls are a content type of "text/html", you may need to play around with you model so it can store this content in its attributes collection properly. See this answer for more information.
The default behavior of marionette.js is to append a template into the element specified by the regions selector. However, I usually end up having to create a special region type and override the appendHtml function to do a replace instead.
That is not too difficult, but why is append the default?
I usually will create the layout template with an empty div to specify where the region should go. Then I replace that div with sub template when I show it.
I guess am wondering if there I'm missing the design pattern for templates that makes append more intuitive.
Thanks for the help.
Update:
So I usually will have some view for something I want rendered into the page and will want to todd n element onto the page where I want it. I will do javascript that will look something like this:
ReplaceRegion = Marionette.Region.extend({
open: function(view){
this.$el.replaceWith(view.el);
}
});
App = new Backbone.Marionette.Application();
App.addRegions({
myRegion: {
selector: "#someRegion",
regionType: ReplaceRegion
}
};
var view = new CoolWidgetView();
App.myRegion.show(view);
And then somewhere in my html I'll throw an empty div in the mix where I want my template to show up.
<div id="mywidget"></div>
Now if it is the only child element, I can use a selector that would just be the parent, but that becomes more tricky when the view i'm inserting has siblings.
Also, I'm not really asking for a change to the default, as much as I'm wondering if there's a better way to insert items where you would like them in your layouts. I'm still relatively new to the layout and design of these things so anything helps!
Thanks Derick for writing great software!
Marionette regions provide both a show and a close method. Have you tried closing the region before you show the new one?
Marionette.Region docs
I'm trying to figure out the best way for a backbone view to read template data. I'm using underscore templates.
I have a template defined in a script block on the page:
<script id="template" type="text/html">
This is my template
</script>
However, I'm having trouble reading in the template in certain parts of the view (I assume this is somethin g to do with el scoping). For example:
var SomeView = Backbone.View.extend({
tagName: 'div',
className: 'someClassName',
t1 : $('#template').html(),
initialize: function() {
var t1 = this.t1;
var t2 = $('#template').html();
...
},
...
t1 contains the correct template html, while t2 is null.
Why is this? and Where is the correct place in the view to read in this template from the DOM?
I'm trying to figure out the best way for a backbone view to read template data. I'm using underscore templates.
To answer that particular part of your question. May I suggest using a plugin in requirejs?
Since you run an app.js, I guess maybe you are using requirejs. I'm testing my luck here. My guess could be totally wrong. But in the case that you are, why not try to use the text! plugin from requirejs that reads in a file as string (your template) like so?
define(
['text!templates/template.html'], function(myTemplate){
});
So far, this works beautifully as far as my template goes. Never ran into a single problem with this method.
You'll be able to find this under here in the "Modularizing a Backbone View" section
The value of an object literal is evaluated immediately, so your jQuery selector for the template is returning empty. You need to wait until the DOM is ready to select the template.
See this article for more information:
http://lostechies.com/derickbailey/2011/11/09/backbone-js-object-literals-views-events-jquery-and-el/