Receiving error cannot read property 'type' of undefined at PollListCtrl.runQuery.
I'm not sure why this is coming up undefined. I've console logged profile-polls.controller.js where listConfig is created to make sure there is an object here. The response is
{type: "all", filters: {pollsCreated: Array(3)}}
But it is coming up undefined when I try to pass it to poll-list component in the profile-polls.html. Below is the gist for the relevant files. Can anyone tell me why this is not passing correctly?
https://gist.github.com/RawleJuglal/fa668a60e88b6f7a95b456858cf20597
I think you need to define watcher for your component. On start listConfig is undefined and only after some delay (next digest cycle) it gets value. So we create watcher and cancel it after if statement.
app.component('pollList', {
bindings: {
listConfig: '='
},
templateUrl: 'poll-list.html',
controllerAs: 'vm',
controller: PollListCtrl
});
function PollListCtrl($scope) {
var vm = this;
function run(){
console.log(vm.listConfig);
}
var cancelWatch = $scope.$watch(function () {
return vm.listConfig;
},
function (newVal, oldVal) {
if (newVal !== undefined){
run();
cancelWatch();
}
});
}
Demo plunkr
You should never use $scope in your angularjs application.
You can use ngOnInit() life cycle hook to access "bindings" value instead constructor.
ngOnInit(){
$ctrl.listConfig = { type: 'all' };
$ctrl.limit = 5;
}
I need to implement toggle functionality for the widget. When the user clicks on the minimization button then widget should shrink and expand when click on maximize button respectively.
I'm trying to achieve this functionality with below piece of code.
Functionality working as expected but it is registering the event multiple times(I'm emitting the event and catching in the filterTemplate directive).
How can we stop registering the event multiple times ?
Or
Is there anyway to like compiling once and on toggle button bind the template/directive to DOM and to make it work rest of the functionality .
So could you please help me to fix this.
function bindFilterTemplate(minimize) {
if ($scope.item && !minimize) {
if ($scope.item.filterTemplate) { // filter template is custom
// directive like this
// "<widget></widget>"
$timeout(function () {
var filterElement = angular.element($scope.item.filterTemplate);
var filterBody = element.find('.cls-filter-body');
filterElement.appendTo(filterBody);
$compile(filterElement)($scope); // Compiling with
// current scope on every time when user click on
// the minimization button.
});
}
} else {
$timeout(function () {
element.find('.cls-filter-body').empty();
});
}
}
bindFilterTemplate();
// Directive
app.directive('widget', function () {
return {
restrict: 'E',
controller: 'widgetController',
link: function ($scope, elem) {
// Some code
}
};
});
// Controller
app.controller('widgetController', function ($scope) {
// This event emitting from parent directive
// On every compile, the event is registering with scope.
// So it is triggering multiple times.
$scope.$on('evt.filer', function ($evt) {
// Server call
});
});
I fixed this issue by creating new scope with $scope.$new().
When user minimizes the widget destroying the scope.
Please let me know if you have any other solution to fix this.
function bindFilterTemplate(minimize) {
// Creating the new scope.
$scope.newChildScope = $scope.$new();
if ($scope.item && !minimize) {
if ($scope.item.filterTemplate) {
$timeout(function () {
var filterElement = angular.element($scope.item.filterTemplate);
var filterBody = element.find('.cls-filter-body');
filterElement.appendTo(filterBody);
$compile(filterElement)($scope.newChildScope);
});
}
} else {
$timeout(function () {
if ($scope.newChildScope) {
// Destroying the new scope
$scope.newChildScope.$destroy();
}
element.find('.cls-filter-body').empty();
});
}
}
I'm trying to test a component with controller, with some bindings:
class AppSpecificController {
constructor() {
this.text = this.initialText ? this.initialText : 'No initial text has been specified.';
}
}
export const AppSpecificComponent = {
bindings: {
'initialText': '<bindInitialText'
},
templateUrl: '/app/components/app-specific/app-specific.html',
controller: AppSpecificController,
controllerAs: 'appSpecific'
};
export default AppSpecificComponent;
In my unit test file I don't want to load the complete application, just the things I need. So I figured to mock a module or just create a new one named something with mock, add the component to that module, and load that module:
import {AppSpecificComponent} from './app-specific.component';
describe('AppSpecificComponent', () => {
let controller;
let scope;
let $componentController;
beforeEach(() => {
angular.module('mock-module', [])
.component('appSpecific', AppSpecificComponent);
// this fails
module('mock-module');
inject((_$componentController_, $rootScope) => {
scope = $rootScope.$new();
$componentController = _$componentController_;
});
controller = $componentController('appSpecific', {$scope: scope}, {initialText: 'Some text'});
});
it('should test something', () => {
expect(true).toBeTruthy();
});
});
Creating the module mock-module is fine, but loading it fails, and obviously injecting stuff in the not-so-much-loaded-module fails, as well as creating a controller on which I can start testing. It would be nice to be able to test the components individually, separate from the application in which it runs.
Just using the new operator for the class AppSpecificController doesn't work since then the bindings you receive from the component are not there:
// fails, no bindings available in controller
controller = new AppSpecificController();
I found the answer somewhere else on StackOverflow, not sure where anymore. The answer however I was looking for:
angular.mock.module($provide => {
$provide.controller('SomeController', () => { ... });
$provide.constant('someConstant', 'some constant');
});
I'm attempting to follow several suggestions on refreshing a kendo-grid such as this.
The essential is that in the html I have:
<div kendo-grid="vm.webapiGrid" options="vm.mainGridOptions">
Then in the controller I have:
vm.webapiGrid.refresh();
Note: I'm using the ControllerAs syntax so I am using "vm" rather than $scope.
My problem is that "vm.webapiGrid" is undefined. This seems so straightforward, but I'm not sure why it is undefined.
Found the answer. One other method of refreshing the datasource I read about was to do something like:
vm.mainGridOptions.datasource.transport.read();
This wasn't working for me as "read" was undefined. Looking at my datasource definition, I saw the reason, read needs a parameter (in this case "e"):
vm.mainGridOptions = {
dataSource: {
transport: {
read: function (e) {
task.getAllTasks(vm.appContext.current.contextSetting).
then(function (data) {
e.success(data);
});
},
}
},
To solve, I saved "e" in my scope and then reused it when I wanted to refresh:
vm.mainGridOptions = {
dataSource: {
transport: {
read: function (e) {
task.getAllTasks(vm.appContext.current.contextSetting).
then(function (data) {
e.success(data);
vm.optionCallback = e;
});
},
}
},
and then:
if (vm.optionCallback !== undefined) {
vm.mainGridOptions.dataSource.transport.read(vm.optionCallback);
}
Problem solved (I hope).
it's because you are using the options object to trigger the read, you should use the grid reference instead:
<div kendo-grid="vm.webapiGrid" options="vm.mainGridOptions">
as in:
$scope.vm.webapiGrid.dataSource.transport.read();
hope that helps.
Add id to the grid and trying refreshing using it.
<div kendo-grid="vm.webapiGrid" options="vm.mainGridOptions" id="grid1">
In controller use this:
$("#grid1").data('kendoGrid').refresh();
App design question. I have a project which has a very large number of highly customized inputs. Each input is implemented as a directive (and Angular has made this an absolute joy to develop).
The inputs save their data upon blur, so there's no form to submit. That's been working great.
Each input has an attribute called "saveable" which drives another directive which is shared by all these input types. the Saveable directive uses a $resource to post data back to the API.
My question is, should this logic be in a directive at all? I initially put it there because I thought I would need the saving logic in multiple controllers, but it turns out they're really happening in the same one. Also, I read somewhere (lost the reference) that the directive is a bad place to put API logic.
Additionally, I need to introduce unit testing for this saving logic soon, and testing controllers seems much more straightforward than testing directives.
Thanks in advance; Angular's documentation may be… iffy… but the folks in the community are mega-rad.
[edit] a non-functional, simplified look at what I'm doing:
<input ng-model="question.value" some-input-type-directive saveable ng-blur="saveModel(question)">
.directive('saveable', ['savingService', function(savingService) {
return {
restrict: 'A',
link: function(scope) {
scope.saveModel = function(question) {
savingService.somethingOrOther.save(
{id: question.id, answer: question.value},
function(response, getResponseHeaders) {
// a bunch of post-processing
}
);
}
}
}
}])
No, I don't think the directive should be calling $http. I would create a service (using the factory in Angular) OR (preferably) a model. When it is in a model, I prefer to use the $resource service to define my model "classes". Then, I abstract the $http/REST code into a nice, active model.
The typical answer for this is that you should use a service for this purpose. Here's some general information about this: http://docs.angularjs.org/guide/dev_guide.services.understanding_services
Here is a plunk with code modeled after your own starting example:
Example code:
var app = angular.module('savingServiceDemo', []);
app.service('savingService', function() {
return {
somethingOrOther: {
save: function(obj, callback) {
console.log('Saved:');
console.dir(obj);
callback(obj, {});
}
}
};
});
app.directive('saveable', ['savingService', function(savingService) {
return {
restrict: 'A',
link: function(scope) {
scope.saveModel = function(question) {
savingService.somethingOrOther.save(
{
id: question.id,
answer: question.value
},
function(response, getResponseHeaders) {
// a bunch of post-processing
}
);
}
}
};
}]);
app.controller('questionController', ['$scope', function($scope) {
$scope.question = {
question: 'What kind of AngularJS object should you create to contain data access or network communication logic?',
id: 1,
value: ''
};
}]);
The relevant HTML markup:
<body ng-controller="questionController">
<h3>Question<h3>
<h4>{{question.question}}</h4>
Your answer: <input ng-model="question.value" saveable ng-blur="saveModel(question)" />
</body>
An alternative using only factory and the existing ngResource service:
However, you could also utilize factory and ngResource in a way that would let you reuse some of the common "saving logic", while still giving you the ability to provide variation for distinct types of objects / data that you wish to save or query. And, this way still results in just a single instantiation of the saver for your specific object type.
Example using MongoLab collections
I've done something like this to make it easier to use MongoLab collections.
Here's a plunk.
The gist of the idea is this snippet:
var dbUrl = "https://api.mongolab.com/api/1/databases/YOURDB/collections";
var apiKey = "YOUR API KEY";
var collections = [
"user",
"question",
"like"
];
for(var i = 0; i < collections.length; i++) {
var collectionName = collections[i];
app.factory(collectionName, ['$resource', function($resource) {
var resourceConstructor = createResource($resource, dbUrl, collectionName, apiKey);
var svc = new resourceConstructor();
// modify behavior if you want to override defaults
return svc;
}]);
}
Notes:
dbUrl and apiKey would be, of course, specific to your own MongoLab info
The array in this case is a group of distinct collections that you want individual ngResource-derived instances of
There is a createResource function defined (which you can see in the plunk and in the code below) that actually handles creating a constructor with an ngResource prototype.
If you wanted, you could modify the svc instance to vary its behavior by collection type
When you blur the input field, this will invoke the dummy consoleLog function and just write some debug info to the console for illustration purposes.
This also prints the number of times the createResource function itself was called, as a way to demonstrate that, even though there are actually two controllers, questionController and questionController2 asking for the same injections, the factories get called only 3 times in total.
Note: updateSafe is a function I like to use with MongoLab that allows you to apply a partial update, basically a PATCH. Otherwise, if you only send a few properties, the entire document will get overwritten with ONLY those properties! No good!
Full code:
HTML:
<body>
<div ng-controller="questionController">
<h3>Question<h3>
<h4>{{question.question}}</h4>
Your answer: <input ng-model="question.value" saveable ng-blur="save(question)" />
</div>
<div ng-controller="questionController2">
<h3>Question<h3>
<h4>{{question.question}}</h4>
Your answer: <input ng-model="question.value" saveable ng-blur="save(question)" />
</div>
</body>
JavaScript:
(function() {
var app = angular.module('savingServiceDemo', ['ngResource']);
var numberOfTimesCreateResourceGetsInvokedShouldStopAt3 = 0;
function createResource(resourceService, resourcePath, resourceName, apiKey) {
numberOfTimesCreateResourceGetsInvokedShouldStopAt3++;
var resource = resourceService(resourcePath + '/' + resourceName + '/:id',
{
apiKey: apiKey
},
{
update:
{
method: 'PUT'
}
}
);
resource.prototype.consoleLog = function (val, cb) {
console.log("The numberOfTimesCreateResourceGetsInvokedShouldStopAt3 counter is at: " + numberOfTimesCreateResourceGetsInvokedShouldStopAt3);
console.log('Logging:');
console.log(val);
console.log('this =');
console.log(this);
if (cb) {
cb();
}
};
resource.prototype.update = function (cb) {
return resource.update({
id: this._id.$oid
},
angular.extend({}, this, {
_id: undefined
}), cb);
};
resource.prototype.updateSafe = function (patch, cb) {
resource.get({id:this._id.$oid}, function(obj) {
for(var prop in patch) {
obj[prop] = patch[prop];
}
obj.update(cb);
});
};
resource.prototype.destroy = function (cb) {
return resource.remove({
id: this._id.$oid
}, cb);
};
return resource;
}
var dbUrl = "https://api.mongolab.com/api/1/databases/YOURDB/collections";
var apiKey = "YOUR API KEY";
var collections = [
"user",
"question",
"like"
];
for(var i = 0; i < collections.length; i++) {
var collectionName = collections[i];
app.factory(collectionName, ['$resource', function($resource) {
var resourceConstructor = createResource($resource, dbUrl, collectionName, apiKey);
var svc = new resourceConstructor();
// modify behavior if you want to override defaults
return svc;
}]);
}
app.controller('questionController', ['$scope', 'user', 'question', 'like',
function($scope, user, question, like) {
$scope.question = {
question: 'What kind of AngularJS object should you create to contain data access or network communication logic?',
id: 1,
value: ''
};
$scope.save = function(obj) {
question.consoleLog(obj, function() {
console.log('And, I got called back');
});
};
}]);
app.controller('questionController2', ['$scope', 'user', 'question', 'like',
function($scope, user, question, like) {
$scope.question = {
question: 'What is the coolest JS framework of them all?',
id: 1,
value: ''
};
$scope.save = function(obj) {
question.consoleLog(obj, function() {
console.log('You better have said AngularJS');
});
};
}]);
})();
In general, things related to the UI belong in a directive, things related to the binding of input and output (either from the user or from the server) belong in a controller, and things related to the business/application logic belong in a service (of some variety). I've found this separation leads to very clean code for my part.