I have a scope in my main controller, and then I feed in an isolate scope into my link function. Is there any way to also access the main scope from my link function? Here's a simplified version of what I'm trying to do:
Angular:
angular.module('root', [])
.controller('index', ['$scope', function($scope){
$scope.messages = ["Hello", "Howdy", "What's up"]
}
.directive('myDirective', function() {
return {
restrict: 'E',
scope: { greeting: '=' },
link: function(scope, element, attrs) {
var greeting = scope.greeting; //one message from the array, fed in by <my-directive greeting='message'> from index.html
var length = scope.messages.length; //length of whole messages array
//do stuff
}
}
}
HTML: (index.html)
<body ng-app='root' ng-controller='index'>
<div ng-repeat='message in messages'>
<my-directive greeting='message'></my-directive>
</div>
</body>
I want to be able to access both the message and the "meta" information about the entire messages array from my link function. However, right now I can only access the message (var greeting) but the length variable does not evaluate.
Is there a way to do this in angular?
Let me know if you need any other clarifications!
The rules on isolate scopes are really simple, but hard to understand from the Angular docs.
If you omit the scope: property from the directive declaration, the directive will share scope with its parent. In other words, it will have direct access to the scope of the controller that called it, and all of its variables.
A better practice is to pass the necessary variables into the isolate scope, which you're already doing with the greetings variable. Your scope might look like this.
scope: {
greeting: '=',
messages: '='
}
Then write the directive like this:
<my-directive greeting='message' messages='messages'></my-directive>
And as long as $scope.message and $scope.messages are defined in your controller, you're all set.
Related
First Directive:
app.directive("myDirectiveOne", function($rootScope){
return {
templateUrl : "/custom-one-html.html",
restrict: "AE",
replace:true,
scope: {
somedata: "=",
flags: "=",
functionone: "&"
}
,controller: function($rootScope,$scope, $element) {
$scope.firstFunction = function(){
console.log("First function is getting called")
}
$scope.$on('firstBroadcast',function(event, data){
$rootScope.$broadcast('secondBroadcast', data)
});
}
Second Directive:
app.directive("myDirectiveTwo", function($rootScope){
return {
templateUrl : "/custom-two-html.html",
restrict: "AE",
replace:true,
scope: {
data: "=",
functiontwo: "&"
}
,controller: function($rootScope,$scope, $element) {
$scope.secondFunction = function(){
console.log("Second function is getting called")
$rootScope.$broadcast('firstBroadcast', {})
}
$scope.$on('secondBroadcast',function(event, data){
$scope.callSomeFunctionWithData(data);
});
$scope.secondFunction();
$scope.editFunction = function(x){
console.log("This is the edit function", x);
}
Parent Controller:
$scope.parentFuntion = function(){
console.log("No trouble in calling this function")
}
So, the problem is when I try calling a function from a myDirectiveTwo html template, the controller which is active is the parent controller and not the isolated one.
May be it has something to do with the broadcasts I am using?
Html Code:
<div ng-repeat="x in data">
<h5>{{x.name}}</h5>
<button ng-click="editFunction(x)">Edit</button>
</div>
The strange thing is I get data values and ng-repeat works fine on load. But, when I click on the button it doesnt do anything. And if I add the same function in the parent controller, it gets called.. :(
How do I make the isolated scope controller active again..?
The problem is that ng-repeat creates a child scope, therefore the editFunction ends up being on the parent scope.
From docs
... Each template instance gets its own scope, where the given loop variable is set to the current collection item ...
Docs here
You can verify that this is the issue by getting your button element's scope and checking the $parent, as such angular.element(document.getElementsByTagName("button")).scope()
Although considered code smell, you can append $parent to your function call in order to access it, though keep in mind this now places a dependency on your HTML structure.
<button ng-click="$parent.editFunction(x)">Edit</button>
The issue was that I was using a deprecated method replace:true. This caused the unexpected scenarios.. As #Protozoid suggested, I looked at his link and found the issue.. To quote from the official documentation:
When the replace template has a directive at the root node that uses transclude: element, e.g. ngIf or ngRepeat, the DOM structure or scope inheritance can be incorrect. See the following issues: Incorrect scope on replaced element: #9837 Different DOM between template and templateUrl: #10612
I removed replace:true and its fine now :)
This is the link:
Here
I have something like this:
.controller('contr',['$scope', '$http',function($scope, $http){
$http.post(...).success(function(){
$scope.myTextVar = "some text here";
$scope.completed == true;
});
}]);
an HTML snippet like so:
<div class="myClass" ng-if="completed == true" manipulate-header>
<p>{{myTextVar}}</p>
</div>
and the directive, for simplicity sake let's say it looks like this:
.directive('manipulateHeader',function(){
return{
restrict: 'A',
link: function(scope, elem){
console.log(angular.element(elem).find('p'));
}
}
});
The manipulate-header directive is supposed to do some manipulation of the text inside the <p></p> tag, however, it runs before {{myTextVar}} gets replaced and hence it outputs {{myTextVar}} instead of some text here.
How may i get around this problem? (i can pass the variable inside the directive scope, but i'm thinking there must be another way).
EDIT: the controller is there and working as intended. Issue is not related to it. I didn't include it to shorten the post.
If it MUST be a directive
If you're trying to do string manipulation in your link function, you're going to have a bad time. The link function is executed before the directive is compiled (that's the idea of the link function), so any bindings (ng-bind or otherwise) will not have been compiled inside of link functions.
To execute code after the compilation stage, you should use a controller. However, you cannot access the DOM in controllers (or rather, you shouldn't). So the logical solution is to instead modify the scope argument instead. I propose something like this:
angular.directive('manipulateHeader', function() {
return {
scope: {
myTextVar: '='
},
controller: function($scope, myFilter) {
// you can't use bindToController here because bindToController executes *after*
// this function
this.modifiedText = myFilter($scope.myTextVar);
},
controllerAs: 'ctrl',
// display the modified text in a template
template: '<span ng-bind="ctrl.modifiedText"></span>'
};
})
.filter('myFilter', function() {
return function(inputText) {
// do some text manipulation here
};
});
Usage:
<manipulate-header myTextVar='myTextVar'></manipulate-header>
Or:
<p>{{ myTextVar | myFilter }}</p>
You could, of course, make this an attribute instead, but best practice indicates that directives that have a template should be an element instead.
The above is only if you need this to be a directive. Otherwise, it should almost definitely be a filter.
If you need to change the $scope variable from your controller you need to isolate scope ,
scope:{
myattr='#', // this will provide one way communication , you can define in your template as <p myattr="hello"><p>
message:'&', //This allows you to invoke or evaluate an expression on the parent scope of whatever the directive is inside
message:'=' // sets up a two-way binding expression between the directive's isolate scope and the parent scope.
}
refer https://docs.angularjs.org/guide/directive
As suggested by #DanPantry - you most likely want a filter not a directive
Read this guide about using filters
https://docs.angularjs.org/guide/filter
Here is an example of such a filter (from documentation)
angular.module('myStatefulFilterApp', [])
.filter('decorate', ['decoration', function(decoration) {
function decorateFilter(input) {
//This is the actual modification of text
//That's what you are looking for
return decoration.symbol + input + decoration.symbol;
}
decorateFilter.$stateful = true;
return decorateFilter;
}])
.controller('MyController', ['$scope', 'decoration', function($scope, decoration) {
$scope.greeting = 'hello';
$scope.decoration = decoration;
}])
.value('decoration', {symbol: '*'});
I am not sure whether you defined $scope.myTextVar
in correct scope. Like, if you defined it in any controller, then directive should be under the controller scope.
Here is the updated HTML
<div ng-controller ="MainController">
<div class="myClass" manipulate-header>
<p>{{myTextVar}}</p>
</div>
</div>
JS :
app.controller('MainController', ['$scope', function($scope) {
$scope.myTextVar = "some text here";
}]);
app.directive('manipulateHerader',function(){
return{
restrict: 'A',
link: function(scope, elem){
console.log(angular.element(elem).find('p'));
}
}
});
Here is the plunker
I am new to AngularJs. I have a route configured to a controller and a template. In the template I am calling a custom directive. The custom directive loads a partial file in which I need to fetch the scope which is set by the controller. How can I pass the scope from the directive to the partial so that the partial file can consume the scope data.
Kindly let me know how to get this implemented in AngularJs
Code snippet inside the link function of the directive:
myApp.directive('basicSummary', function() {
return {
restrict: 'E',
replace:'true',
templateUrl: "partials/basicSummary.html",
link: function(scope, elem, attrs) {
console.log(scope.testURL);
}
}
});
Output on the console is : undefined
Update: I found the root cause of why the variable was not getting initialized. The issue, is that the variable is being fetched by making an ajax call in the controller and by the time the ajax call is completed and the variable is put inside the scope inside the controller, the partial file is already loaded and hence I am getting the value of the variable inside the directive as undefined.
How can I make sure that only on success of the http call, I load the partial and the directive?
Adding the jsfiddle link: http://jsfiddle.net/prashdeep/VKkGz/
You could add a new variable to your scope in the definition of your directive to create a two-way binding, that you could safely watch for changes (for use in Javascript once the variable has been populated via ajax), and in your template use ng-show to show/hide based on whether or not the variable is defined. See this JSFiddle for an example of how that would work: http://jsfiddle.net/HB7LU/3588/
Default Template
<div ng-controller="MyCtrl">
<my-test my-test-url="myAjaxProperty"></my-test>
</div>
App Definition
var myApp = angular.module('myApp',[]);
myApp.directive('myTest', function(){
return {
restrict: 'E',
repalce: 'true',
template: '<div ng-show="myTestUrl">{{myTestUrl}}</div>',
scope: { myTestUrl: '=' },
link: function(scope, elem, attrs){
scope.$watch('myTestUrl', function(newVal, oldVal){
if(newVal){
console.log("Watched value is defined as: "+scope.myTestUrl);
}
})
}
}
});
function MyCtrl($scope, $timeout) {
$timeout(function(){
$scope.myAjaxProperty = "My Test Url";
console.log("Ajax returned");
}, 3000, true)
console.log("Default Controller Initialized");
}
as long as you don't isolate your scope with,
scope: {}
in your directive, your scope has access to its parent controller's scope directly.
I'm still new in Angular but i'm doing some progress.. i think :)
I have problem passing json file from controller to directive using isolated scope.
This is my controller which talk to factory "dataArchive":
.controller('graphCtrl', ['$scope', 'dataArchive', function($scope, dataArchive){
dataArchive.get().then(function(data){
$scope.getData = data;
});
}]);
Then i have directive which is using isolated scope.
.directive('dataGraph', function($compile){
return {
restrict: 'AE',
replace: true,
scope: {
getArchiveData: '='
},
template: '<div id="chartdiv"></div>',
link: function (scope, element, attrs){
var dati = scope.getArchiveData;
console.log(dati);
};
};
});
And this is my HTML:
<div ng-controller="graphCtrl">
<data-graph get-archive-data="getData"></data-graph>
</div>
In console i always get 'undefined'.
Where i am wrong and is this a good way?
Thanks you all.
Since this code is async:
dataArchive.get().then(function(data){
$scope.getData = data;
});
The link function will run before the data is set on getData, and therefore the isolated scope variable will not be set at this time. So, I believe you are seeing a timing issue.
To make sure that your directive binding is correct. Try to set $scope.getData to a static value (e.g. $scope.getData = [{ data: 'value'}]). This should work.
Also, Angular checks for changes (to rebind) based on object reference. So, you might need to define $scope.getData in the controller (outside of the async call). Then you might want to push all the data in (instead of replace the entire object with the assignment).
Hope this helps.
I'd like to use a directive, transclude content, and call directive's controller method within the transcluded part:
<mydirective>
<div ng-click='foo()'>
click me
</div>
</mydirective>
app.directive "mydirective", ->
return {
restrict: 'EACM',
transclude: true
template: "<div ng-transclude></div>"
scope: { } #required: I use two way binding on some variable, but it's not the question here
controller: [ '$scope', ($scope)->
$scope.foo = -> console.log('foo')
]
}
plunkr here.
How can I do that please?
I have a different answer, which is not a hack and I hope it will be accepted..
see my plunkr for a live demo
Here is my usage of the directive
<div custom-directive custom-name="{{name}}">
if transclude works fine you should see my name right here.. [{{customName}}]
</div>
Note I am using customName within the directive and I assign it a value as part of the directive's scope.
Here is my directive definition
angular.module('guy').directive('customDirective', function($compile, $timeout){
return {
template : '<div class="custom-template">This is custom template with [{{customName}}]. below should be appended content with binding to isolated scope using the transclude function.. wait 2 seconds to see that binding works</div>',
restrict: 'AC',
transclude: true,
scope : {
customName : '#'
},
link : function postLink( scope, element, attrs, dummy, transcludeFn ){
transcludeFn( scope, function(clone, innerScope ){
var compiled = $compile(clone)(scope);
element.append(compiled);
});
$timeout( function(){
scope.customName = 'this stuff works!!!';
}, 2000);
}
}
});
Note that I am changing the value on the scope after 2 seconds so it shows the binding works.
After reading a lot online, I understood the following:
the ng-transclude directive is the default implementation to transclusion which can be redefined per use-case by the user
redefining a transclusion means angular will use your definition on each $digest
by default - the transclusion creates a new scope which is not a child of the isolated scope, but rather a sibling (and so the hack works). If you redefine the transclusion process you can choose which scope is used while compiling the transcluded content.. -- even though a new scope is STILL created it seems
There is not enough documentation to the transclude function. I didn't even find it in the documentation. I found it in another SO answer
This is a bit tricky. The transcluded scope is not the child of the directive scope, instead they are siblings. So in order to access foo from the ng-click of the transcluded element, you have to assign foo to the correct scope, i.e. the sibling of the directive scope. Be sure to access the transcluded scope from the link function because it hasn't been created in controller function.
Demo link
var app = angular.module('plunker', []);
app.directive("mydirective", function(){
return {
transclude: true,
restrict: 'EACM',
template: "<div> {{ name }} <br/><br/> <div ng-transclude> </div></div>",
scope: { },
link: function($scope){
$scope.name = 'Should change if click below works';
$scope.$$nextSibling.foo = function(){
console.log('foo');
$scope.name = 'it works!';
}
}
}
})
Another way is assigning foo to the parent scope because both prototypally inherits from the parent scope, i.e.
$scope.$parent.foo = ...
Technically, if you remove scope: { }, then it should work since the directive will not create an isolated scope. (Btw, you need to add restrict: "E", since you use the directive as element)
I think it makes more sense to call actions defined in parent scope from directive rather than call the actions in the directive from parent scope. Directive should be something self-contained and reusable. The actions in the directive should not be accessible from outside.
If you really want to do it, you can try to emit an event by calling $scope.$broadcast(), and add a listener in the directive. Hope it helps.