Why my directives don't work in Plunker? - angularjs

I was going to use Plunker to assist me in testing a directive, but first I just wanted to create one to test plunker was working, so I put in some sample code. Guess what, basic directives are not working and I have no idea why.
My directives:
app.directive('attributeDirective', function() {
return {
restrict: 'A',
link: function(scope, iElement, iAttrs) {
iElement.bind('click', function() {
console.log('clicked attributeDirective');
});
iElement.bind('mouseover', function() {
iElement.css('cursor', 'pointer');
});
}
};
});
app.directive('elementDirective', function() {
return {
restrict: 'E',
replace: true,
template: '<h2>this is elementDirective</h2>',
link: function(scope, iElement, iAttrs) {
iElement.bind('click', function() {
console.log('clicked elementDirective');
});
iElement.bind('mouseover', function() {
iElement.css('cursor', 'pointer');
});
}
};
});
My html:
<body ng-controller="MainCtrl">
<p>Hello {{name}}!</p>
<h2 attributeDirective>Here is my attribute directive</h2>
<elementDirective></elementDirective>
</body>
http://plnkr.co/edit/H9vPhV

while calling a directive in html you should replacecamelcase in directives name like this,
<element-directive></element-directive> and not as it is,
<elementDirective></elementDirective>
like you did.
Hope this helps!!!
PLUNKER
see through the custom directives here

You should use
<h2 attribute-directive>Here is my attribute directive</h2>
See http://plnkr.co/edit/2aGGDRw6SdYNc1joSVI1?p=preview

Common problem - you can't use camel case in your HTML element declaration.
Try <element-directive></element-directive>

Use restrict: 'A' in your directive to refer to attribute.
Use restrict: 'E' in your directive to refer to element.
Find the plunkr: "http://plnkr.co/edit/b1cf6l?p=preview"
Also call your directive using:
<h2 attribute-directive>Here is my attribute directive</h2>
<element-directive></element-directive>

Related

Simple isolate scope in directive not working

I'm having trouble with a simple isolated scope, using Angular 1.2.24 (latest stable version).
app.directive('myDirective', function() {
return {
restrict: 'A',
scope: {},
link: function(scope) {
scope.name = 'This is my directive';
}
};
});
<div my-directive>{{ name }}</div>
But name is empty. If I remove the scope: {} it works. Why is that?
http://jsfiddle.net/98f97cyt
Use this way
HTML:
<div ng-app="MyModule">
<div my-directive>
</div>
</div>
JS:
angular.module('MyModule', []).directive('myDirective', function() {
return {
restrict: 'A',
scope: {},
template:'<div>{{ name }}</div>',
link: function(scope) {
scope.name = 'This is my directive';
}
};
});
I found out the answer: AngularJS Scope differences between 1.0.x and 1.2.x
This behaviour is a intended breaking change, that was introduced in Angular 1.2.0 (after rc3).

$compile'ing already compiled elements is not supported, what to do then?

According to lgalfaso on Angular.js repo:
lgalfaso commented 8 hours ago
Recompiling an already compiled element is an abuse and not something
supported. I do not know what you are trying to do, but looks like a
topic for stackoverflow
The presented plunkr http://plnkr.co/edit/Y7FbPm?p=preview with code
angular
.module('app', [])
.controller('Main', function(){
this.label = "Hello";
})
.directive('recompileMe', ['$compile', function($compile){
return {
restrict: 'A',
compile: function(el, attrs){
el.removeAttr('recompile-me');
return function(scope, el){
$compile(el)(scope, function(clone) {
el.replaceWith(clone);
});
};
}
}
}])
.directive('transcludeMe', [function(){
return {
restrict: 'A',
transclude: true,
scope: {},
template: '<div>Transcluded: <div ng-transclude></div></div>',
link: function(scope, el, attr, controller, transclude){
}
}
}]);
if I need to to set other directives to my element, I need to $compile it for the directive to be parsed and applied, or is there any other way? (another case of this https://github.com/angular/angular.js/issues/9169)
In order to compile once, you can detach the children of the directive's element before compilation reaches the element's children. Then, add directives to the children, or manipulate the DOM as much as you like. In the link phase, re-attach the children, and use the $compile service to compile and link the children.
.directive('recompileMe', ['$compile', function($compile){
return {
restrict: 'A',
compile: function(el, attrs){
// save the children
var e2 = angular.element(el.html());
// clear the children so they are not compiled
el.empty();
// add some directives
e2.find('a').attr('my-directive', '');
return function(scope, el){
// reattach to DOM
el.append(e2);
// compile and link children
$compile(e2)(scope);
};
}
}
}])
It seems the only correct way of doing this (even after scavenging angular.js source code), is to use terminal: true. That is, you will have to compile your element manually, and then do your DOM manipulation, like this:
angular.module('app', [])
.controller('main', ['$scope', function($scope){
$scope.inner = 'Inner content';
}])
.directive('recompileMe', ['$compile', function($compile){
return {
restrict: 'A',
terminal: true,
priority: 10,
compile: function(element){
element.removeAttr('recompile-me');
var compiled = $compile(element);
return function(scope, el){
compiled(scope);
};
}
}
}])
.directive('transcludeMe', function(){
return {
restrict: 'A',
transclude: true,
template: '<div>Transcluded: <div ng-transclude></div></div>'
};
});
<!doctype html>
<html>
<head>
<script src="https://ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/jquery/2.1.1/jquery.min.js"></script>
<script src="https://ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/angularjs/1.2.23/angular.min.js"></script>
</head>
<body ng-app="app">
<div ng-controller="main">
<div recompile-me transclude-me><div ng-bind="inner"></div> Outside</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>

Directive with isolated scope and added properties, not available to inner directives

I'd like to have a directive with an isolated scope, and to set properties to this scope from within the directive. That is to create some environment variables, which would be displayed by other directives inside it, like so:
HTML:
<div environment> <!-- this directive set properties to the scope it creates-->
{{ env.value }} <!-- which would be available -->
<div display1 data="env"></div> <!-- to be displayed by other directives (graphs, -->
<div display2 data="env"></div> <!-- charts...) -->
</div>
JS:
angular.module("test", [])
.directive("environment", function() {
return {
restrict: 'A',
scope: {},
link: function(scope) {
scope.env = {
value: "property set from inside the directive"
};
}
};
})
.directive("display1", function() {
return {
restrict: 'A',
require: '^environment'
scope: {
data: '='
},
link: function(scope, elt, attr, envController) {
scope.$watch('data', function(oldV, newV) {
console.log("display data");
});
}
};
})
.directive("display2", function() {
return {/* ... */};
});
But it doesn't work. Here is a Plunker.
If I remove the isolation, it works ok though. What do I do wrong ? Is it a problem of transclusion ? It seems to work if I use a template in the 'environment' directive, but this is not what I want.
Thanks for your help.
Edit: I see this same problem answered here. The proposed solution would be to use a controller instead of a directive. The reason I wanted to use a directive is the possibility to use 'require' in the inner directives, thing that can't be done with ngController I think.
By introducing external templates, I managed to find a working solution to your problem.
I'm quite certain the way you have it set up has worked at some point but I can't be certain about when. The last time I built a directive not reliant on an external markup file, I don't even know.
In any case, the following should work, if you are willing to introduce separate templates for your directives:
app.directive('environment', function () {
return {
restrict: 'A',
templateUrl: 'env.html',
replace: true,
scope: {},
link: function (scope, el, attrs) {
scope.env = {
value: "property set from inside the directive"
};
}
};
});
app.directive('display1', function () {
return {
restrict: 'A',
scope: {
data: '='
},
templateUrl: 'display1.html',
replace: false,
link: function(scope) {
// console.log(scope.data);
}
};
});
And then for your markup (these wouldn't sit in <script> tags realistically, you would more than likely have an external template but this is simply taken from the fiddle I set up).
<script type="text/ng-template" id="display1.html">
<span>Display1 is: {{data}}</span>
</script>
<script type="text/ng-template" id="env.html">
<div>
<h1>env.value is: {{env.value}}</h1>
<span display1 data="env.value"></span>
</div>
</script>
<div>
<div environment></div>
</div>
Fiddle link: http://jsfiddle.net/ADukg/5421/
Edit: After reading that you do not want to use templates (should've done that first..), here's another solution to get it working. Unfortunately, the only one you can go with (aside from a few others, link coming below) and in my opinion it is not a good looking one...
app.directive('environment', function () {
return {
restrict: 'A',
template: function (element, attrs) {
return element.html();
},
scope: {},
link: function (scope, el, attrs) {
scope.env = {
value: "property set from inside the directive"
};
}
};
});
And the markup:
<div environment> {{env.value}} </div>
Fiddle: http://jsfiddle.net/7K6KK/1/
Say what you will about it, but it does do the trick.
Here's a thread off of the Angular Github Repo, outlining your issue and why it is not 'supported'.
I did a small edit to your Plunker
When you create a variable on scope of directive other directives can access it two ways (presented in plunker) either directly or by two-way data binding
HTML:
<body ng-app="test">
<div environment>
{{ env.value }}
<div display1 data="env"></div>
<div display2 data="env"></div>
</div>
</body>
<input type="text" ng-model="env.value"> #added to show two-way data binding work
<div display1 info="env"></div> #changed name of attribute where variable is passed, it's then displayed inside directive template
<div display2>{{env.value}}</div> #env.value comes from environment directive not from display2
</div>
JS
angular.module("test", [])
.directive("environment", function() {
return {
restrict: 'A',
scope: true, #changed from {} to true, each environment directive will have isolated scope
link: function(scope) {
scope.env = {
value: "property set from inside the directive"
};
}
};
})
.directive("display1", function() {
return {
restrict: 'A',
template: '<span ng-bind="info.value"></span>', #added template for directive which uses passed variable, NOTE: dot in ng-bind, if you try a two-way databinding and you don't have a dot you are doing something wrong (Misko Hevry words)
scope: {
info: '=' #set two-way data binding for variable from environment directive passed in 'info' attribute
}, #removed unnecessary watch for variable
};
})
.directive("display2", function() {
return {/* ... */};
});

AngularJS model not updating while typing

In the following AngularJS code, when you type stuff into the input field, I was expecting the div below the input to update with what is typed in, but it doesn't. Any reason why?:
html
<div ng-app="myApp">
<input type="text" ng-model="city" placeholder="Enter a city" />
<div ng-sparkline ng-model="city" ></div>
</div>
javascript
var app = angular.module('myApp', []);
app.directive('ngSparkline', function () {
return {
restrict: 'A',
require: '^ngModel',
template: '<div class="sparkline"><h4>Weather for {{ngModel}}</h4></div>'
}
});
http://jsfiddle.net/AndroidDev/vT6tQ/12/
Add ngModel to the scope as mentioned below -
app.directive('ngSparkline', function () {
return {
restrict: 'A',
require: '^ngModel',
scope: {
ngModel: '='
},
template: '<div class="sparkline"><h4>Weather for {{ngModel}}</h4></div>'
}
});
Updated Fiddle
It should be
template: '<div class="sparkline"><h4>Weather for {{city}}</h4></div>'
since you are binding the model to city
JSFiddle
The basic issue with this code is you aren't sharing "ngModel" with the directive (which creates a new scope). That said, this could be easier to read by using the attributes and link function. Making these changes I ended up with:
HTML
<div ng-sparkline="city" ></div>
Javascript
app.directive('ngSparkline', function ($compile) {
return {
restrict: 'A',
link: function (scope, element, attrs) {
var newElement = '<div class="sparkline"><h4>Weather for {{' + attrs.ngSparkline + '}}</h4></div>';
element.append(angular.element($compile(newElement)(scope)));
}
}
});
Using this pattern you can include any dynamic html or angular code you want in your directive and it will be compiled with the $compile service. That means you don't need to use the scope property - variables are inherited "automatically"!
Hope that helps!
See the fiddle: http://jsfiddle.net/8RVYD/1/
template: '<div class="sparkline"><h4>Weather for {{city}}</h4></div>'
the issue is that require option means that ngSparkline directive expects ngModel directive controller as its link function 4th parameter. your directive can be modified like this:
app.directive('ngSparkline', function () {
return {
restrict: 'A',
require: '^ngModel',
template: '<div class="sparkline"><h4>Weather for {{someModel}}</h4></div>',
link: function(scope, element, attrs, controller) {
controller.$render = function() {
scope.someModel = controller.$viewValue;
}
}
}
});
but this creates someModel variable in scope. that I think isn't necessary for this use case.
fiddle

How to replace the element with ng-transclude

Is it possible to replace the element with ng-transclude on it rather than the entire template element?
HTML:
<div my-transcluded-directive>
<div>{{someData}}</div>
</div>
Directive:
return {
restrict:'A',
templateUrl:'templates/my-transcluded-directive.html',
transclude:true,
link:function(scope,element,attrs)
{
}
};
my-transcluded-directive.html:
<div>
<div ng-transclude></div>
<div>I will not be touched.</div>
</div>
What I am looking for is a way to have <div>{{someData}}</div> replace <div ng-transclude></div>. What currently happens is the transcluded HTML is placed inside the ng-transclude div element.
Is that possible?
I think the best solution would probably be to create your own transclude-replace directive that would handle this. But for a quick and dirty solution to your example you could essentially manually place the result of the transclusion where you want:
my-transcluded-directive.html:
<div>
<span>I WILL BE REPLACED</span>
<div>I will not be touched.</div>
</div>
Directive:
return {
restrict:'A',
templateUrl:'templates/my-transcluded-directive.html',
transclude:true,
link:function(scope,element,attrs,ctrl, transclude)
{
element.find('span').replaceWith(transclude());
}
};
It's easy to create a ng-transclude-replace directive, here is a copycat of the original ng-transclude.
directive('ngTranscludeReplace', ['$log', function ($log) {
return {
terminal: true,
restrict: 'EA',
link: function ($scope, $element, $attr, ctrl, transclude) {
if (!transclude) {
$log.error('orphan',
'Illegal use of ngTranscludeReplace directive in the template! ' +
'No parent directive that requires a transclusion found. ');
return;
}
transclude(function (clone) {
if (clone.length) {
$element.replaceWith(clone);
}
else {
$element.remove();
}
});
}
};
}]);
PS:you can also check this link to see the difference between the ng-transclude
this works in Angular 1.4.9 (and prob earlier too)
return {
restrict: 'E',
replace: true,
template: '<span data-ng-transclude></span>',
transclude: true,
link: function (scope, el, attrs) .........
}
If you don't have to support IE and Edge you can use display:contents in your css. That will destroy the wrapper on the level of css.
You can read more about this new display propertie here:
https://css-tricks.com/get-ready-for-display-contents/
Current browser support (hope to see Edge support in the future):
https://caniuse.com/#feat=css-display-contents

Resources