Why use scope in directive and how to use it? - angularjs

I see so many examples https://docs.angularjs.org/guide/directive and What is the difference between & vs # and = in angularJS but even I don't understand the scope principe in a directive. It's very confusing to use this. Some examples make use of scope:true; and
scope: {
sourceObj: '=',
lookupSource: '#',
searchRes: '&',
disableSearch: ''
}
What is using a boolean value (scope:true;) doing exactly?

scope:true
If you set scope:true (instead of scope: { ... }) then prototypical inheritance will be used for that directive.
This is not something AngularJS is doing – this is how JavaScript prototypal inheritance works.
example
scope:false (default)
the directive does not create a new scope, so there is no inheritance here. This is easy, but also dangerous because, e.g., a directive might think it is creating a new property on the scope, when in fact it is clobbering an existing property. This is not a good choice for writing directives that are intended as reusable components.
example
scope: {......}
the directive creates a new isolate/isolated scope. It does not prototypically inherit. This is usually your best choice when creating reusable components, since the directive cannot accidentally read or modify the parent scope.
Notice, even the parent scope has a name “Harry”, the textbox inside directive is blank. This is because of the new Isolated scope doesn’t know anything about its parent scope.
example
Notice, even the parent scope has a name “Harry”, the textbox inside directive is blank. This is because of the new Isolated scope doesn’t know anything about its parent scope.
NOTE: I dont want now post diferences between scope properties (#,&,=) , it will be another lesson
from this source

It's all about whether or not you want to create an isolated (new) scope for your directive or you want to inherit the from the parent scope. Specifying scope: true is essentially the same as scope: {}. It just says, 'hey, I want my own private scope here'. The only difference between those two is that you can use the object notation to specify your own scope properties to use in your directive.

Related

Priority between custom and built-in directve

I am reading ng-book-r27.
There are some something i can't understand well.
About 'Scope Option' of The chapter 'Directives Explained'.
First confusion:
If multiple directives on an element provide an isolate scope, only
one new scope is applied. Root elements within the template of a
directive always get a new scope; thus, for those objects, scope is
set to true by default.
I think that mean other directives will use the isolate scope as theirs.
is that right?
Second confusion:
example of inherited scope
ng-init has higher priority than custom directive.
Why the expression of ng-init will use the scope of custom dirctive.
I find a recommendation from offical doc about ng-init:
This directive can be abused to add unnecessary amounts of logic into
your templates. There are only a few appropriate uses of ngInit, such
as for aliasing special properties of ngRepeat, as seen in the demo
below; and for injecting data via server side scripting. Besides these
few cases, you should use controllers rather than ngInit to initialize
values on a scope.
OK, I can ignore the strange behavior of second confusion.
I have not read the book ng-book, but as far as I know, the statement of your first confusion does not conform with the AngularJS documentation regarding inherited and isolated scopes within a directive.
The statement above is simply not possible, having multiple directives that each have their own isolated scope would produce a $compile:multidir error. Here is a DEMO.
.directive('elem1', function($rootScope) {
return {
restrict: 'A',
scope: {}
};
})
.directive('elem2', function() {
return {
restrict: 'A',
scope: {}
}
});
After scanning the AngularJS documentation, there is no supporting statement that validates the statement:
If multiple directives on an element provide an isolate scope, only
one new scope is applied.
The closest statement I see that is similar to the statement above is the scope: true option definition when creating directives:
true: A new child scope that prototypically inherits from its parent
will be created for the directive's element. If multiple directives on
the same element request a new scope, only one new scope is created.
The new scope rule does not apply for the root of the template since
the root of the template always gets a new scope.
The statement above suggests that when multiple directives with scope: true option (not an isolated scope) resides in a single element, it would create one scope and everything else is a shared scope. DEMO
.directive('elem1', function($rootScope) {
return {
restrict: 'A',
scope: true,
link: function(scope) {
console.log(scope.hello);
}
};
})
.directive('elem2', function() {
return {
restrict: 'A',
scope: true,
link: function(scope) {
scope.hello = 'world';
console.log(scope.hello);
}
}
});
You would notice that both directives logs 'world', this obviously supports the statement above.
If you read more in the $compile scope AngularJS documentation, you would see that:
In general it's possible to apply more than one directive to one
element, but there might be limitations depending on the type of scope
required by the directives. The following points will help explain
these limitations. For simplicity only two directives are taken into
account, but it is also applicable for several directives:
no scope + no scope => Two directives which don't require their own scope will use their parent's scope
child scope + no scope => Both directives will share one single child scope
child scope + child scope => Both directives will share one single child scope
isolated scope + no scope => The isolated directive will use it's own created isolated scope. The other directive will use its parent's scope
isolated scope + child scope => Won't work! Only one scope can be related to one element. Therefore these directives cannot be applied to the same element.
isolated scope + isolated scope => Won't work! Only one scope can be related to one element. Therefore these directives cannot be applied to the same element.
Perhaps you're having problems identifying the difference between prototypically inherted scopes and isolated scopes. You might want to read the $rootScope.Scope $new() method, the isolate parameter definition.
First question:
I think that mean other directives will use the isolate scope as
theirs. is that right?
The answer is an absolute no, in reference towards multiple directives with isolated scope, it would produce the $copile:multidir error.
For your second question:
ng-init has higher priority than custom directive. Why the expression
of ng-init will use the scope of custom directive?
As for directives that do not have isolated scopes or directives that don't prototypically inherit from their parent scope, you can directly associate those directives as having a scope property definition with a falsey scope value:
falsy: No scope will be created for the directive. The directive will
use its parent's scope
If a directive is bound to an element with a scope of its own then it simply uses the scope of that element, otherwise it seeks all the scope instances within the scope chain until it reaches the $rootScope.

Scope in Angularjs

I was trying to understand scope in angularjs.
Say while registering a directive in angularjs if we dont provide any scope as the property of the object, what is the scope of the object then?
For example consider the following code:-
app.directive("kid", function() {
return {
restrict: "E",
template: '<input type="text" ng-model="chore"> {{chore}}'
};
});
Now say if i have 2 elements in my html:-
<kid></kid>
<kid></kid>
So how do above end up sharing the same scope? I am not able to find convincing answer yet.
Yes, As you didn't declared any scope option of directive, it will share the same scope.
Here is Demo Plunkr
Now come to the point, what is scope object?
scope object in Angular is nothing having context information and that will available on html, can also be utilized to provide two way binding. Basically scope is binded with some controller.
When things comes to directive scope, if you didn't mention scope property inside directive, that means directive shares the scope of the controller where the directive element has been placed.
To make them treated as a different scope for each directive you could create an an directive with an isolated scope, which can be defined using scope: {} inside a directive, when you define a scope: {} inside a directive, it creates an isolated child scope which is not prototypically inherited from the parent scope using $scope.$new(true) method.
Plunkr with isolated scope
Your question is about scope inheritance and isolate scope.
If you do declare a scope property on a directive object then the directive has its own isolate scope.
If you don't declare a scope property on your directive object the directive inherits the scope of the scope it was instantiated in.
So with your definition of the kid directive that doesn't declare an isolate scope the kid directives in the code example below both inherit the scope of the controller that they are instantiated in.
<div ng-controller="myCtrl">
<kid></kid>
<kid></kid>
</div>
Scope is an object that refers to the application model. It is an execution context for expressions. Scopes are arranged in hierarchical structure which mimic the DOM structure of the application. Scopes can watch expressions and propagate events.
Scope characteristics
Scopes provide APIs ($watch) toenter image description here observe model mutations.
Scopes provide APIs ($apply) to propagate any model changes through
the system into the view from outside of the “Angular realm”
(controllers, services, Angular event handlers).
Scopes provide context against which expressions are evaluated.
For example {{username}} expression is meaningless, unless it is evaluated against a specific scope which defines the username property.Scope is the glue between application controller and the view.

What is Diff between scope and Isolate scope

While implementing directive I came across isolate scope , I am having Confusion why we have to Use isolate scope instead of scope.
When using an isolated scope, the directive's scope does not prototypically inherit from its parent. The directive has no access to the parent scope. This gives you the highest encapsulation. You should use an isolated scope, whenever you're designing reusable components.
Directives have access to the parent scope by default. For example, the following directive relies on the parent scope to write out a user object’s name:
angular.module('myDirective').directive('sharedScope', function () {
return {
template: 'Name: {{user.name}}'
};
});
The problem with this code is that you need to have an information about the parent scope, thus if the parent scope changes? The directive will become not usable anymore. That's when isolated scope comes in handy. Therefore isolated scope is used whenever directive is designed to be reusable. These are some good blog post which explain in depth the topic
AngularJS Directives, Using Isolated Scope with Attributes
Angularjs Sticky Notes
Creating Custom AngularJS
directives

Bind to attributes in prototypically inherited scope

I'd like to create a directive, with a prototypically inherited scope (i.e. scope=true), but also set up scope binding to attributes, similar to following when setting up an isolated scope:
scope = {
'varname':'=attrname'
}
My current solution is to set scope=true and set up the binding to the attributes along the following lines in the link function:
scope.$watch(element.attr('attrname'), function(val) { scope.varname =
val; }); // watch changes scope.varname =
scope.$eval(element.attr('attrname')); // initialize
Although it does the trick it doesn't seem to be very elegant. What approach do you suggest?
I find it surprising angularjs seems to expect that in a directive you wouldn't need attribute binding when setting up a new inherited scope.
I know what you mean and I agree with you. It would be nice if Angular provided a convenient framework for a directive to set-up two-way model binding between a parent scope variable and a child scope variable and still support prototypical scope inheritance.
To achieve the same effect as the following with isolated scope:
scope = {'varname':'=attrname'}
you can set up the two-way model binding within your directive's link function:
scope: true,
link: function(scope, element, attr) {
// when attrname changes in parent scope, update varname in current scope
scope.$parent.$watch(attr.attrname, function(newVal) {
scope.varname = newVal;
});
// when varname changes in current scope, update attrname in parent scope
scope.$watch('varname', function(newVal) {
scope.$parent[attr.attrname] = newVal;
});
}
Given what you want to achieve I consider your solution totaly valid. You could still improve your code if you use $scope.$observe() instead of $scope.$watch():
scope.$observe('attrname', function(val) {
scope.varname = $parse(val)(scope);
});
I think what you're looking for is this code in the directive link function:
var yourVar = $parse(attrs.attrName)(scope); // Parse the attribute with a specific scope context
You'll then pass attributes like you did with isolated scope directive, while still being able to use a prototypically inherited scope.
If you find yourself wanting to observe the changes of the variable, then I believe that you should use isolated scope and not inherited. It's still doable by observing attribute changes like suggested below, however I don't think it's the best practice. (I don't have much to support that claim, only intuition, so pick whatever you think is best)
If you want to know how $parse works, you can find more info here:
https://docs.angularjs.org/api/ng/service/$parse
Please let me know in the comments if you need a plunker also, or if you got the hang of it.

Need some examples of binding attributes in custom AngularJS tags

I am attempting to create a custom tag similar to the following:
<mytag type="Big" />
where type is an attribute that gets bound to the component. in such a way that it sets the text in a label, as shown below:
<label>{{type}}</label>
... (other components)...
As the documentation says, I have a controller that sets a default type:
$scope.type = "Small";
so that if I use my tag without the attribute type still gets set.
I am attempting to do binding using a directive:
angular.module('TestPage',[])
.directive('mytag',function() {
return {
restrict: 'E',
templateUrl: 'component.html',
scope: {
type: '='
}
}
});
Note that I do have the appropriate ng-app settings in my component template (ng-app="TestPage").
My problem is that the binding to type does not appear to be actually binding anything.
I have read the documentation about how to bind a variable to components using directive. According to the documentation, you can do such bindings inside a scope. Scopes apparently can contain an "object-hash" (whatever that is!) which creates something called an "isolate scope" (???). Such scopes can represent "local properties" in the following ways:
# or #attr - bind a local scope property to the DOM attribute. The result is always a string
since DOM attributes are strings. If no attr name is specified then the local name and
attribute name are same. Given and widget definition of scope: { localName:'#myAttr' }, then widget scope property localName will reflect the interpolated value of hello {{name}}. As the name attribute changes so will the localName property on the widget scope. The name is read from the parent scope (not component scope).
Huh??? What has all this to do with the proper syntax for binding?
= or =expression - set up bi-directional binding between a local scope property and the parent
scope property. If no attr name is specified then the local name and attribute name are same.
Given and widget definition of scope: { localModel:'=myAttr' }, then widget scope property localName will reflect the value of parentModel on the parent scope. Any changes to parentModel will be reflected in localModel and any changes in localModel will reflect in parentModel.
Excuse me? What is being said here???
& or &attr - provides a way to execute an expression in the context of the parent scope. If no
attr name is specified then the local name and attribute name are same. Given
and widget definition of scope: { localFn:'increment()' },
then isolate scope property localFn will point to a function wrapper for the increment() expression. Often it's desirable to pass data from the isolate scope via an expression and to the parent scope, this can be done by passing a map of local variable names and values into the expression wrapper fn. For example, if the expression is increment(amount) then we can specify the amount value by calling the localFn as localFn({amount: 22}).
Now I'm totally confused! You have widget tags and some kind of related function that I have to write iin order to do the bind??? All I want is to bind a value to a label tag!
I have copied the above text from the documentation (http://docs.angularjs.org/guide/directive) to make a point: that this doco reads like the old UNIX documentation: really useful to those who already know the system, but not so helpful to beginners who are trying to develop real expertise. With all the tutorials that show how to do simple tasks in AngularJS (great for toy apps but not so good for the kinds of client- side applications I want to build), why aren't there any for the more advanced stuff???
Okay, time for me to be more constructive.
Can someone please provide some nice, simple examples of how to do the various bindings that this documentation is trying so hard to describe??? Examples that show the proper syntax for these scope statements and descriptions (in plain English) of exactly how they go back to the attribute being added to the custom tag???
Thank you for your patience and thanks in advance for any assistance.
I struggled a bit with this documentation too when first getting into angular, but I will make an attempt try to clarify things for you. First, when using this scope property, it creates an "isolated scope." All this means is that it won't inherit any properties from parent scopes, and so you don't have to worry about any collisions within the scope.
Now, the '#' notation means that the evaluated value in the attribute will automatically get bound into your scope for the directive. So, <my-directive foo="bar" /> would end up with the scope having a property called foo that holds the string "bar". You could also do something like <my-directive foo="{{bar}}" And then the evaluated value of {{bar}} will be bound to the scope. Since attributes are always strings, you will always end up with a string for this property in the scope when using this notation.
The '=' notation basically provides a mechanism for passing an object into your directive. It always pulls this from the parent scope of the directive, so this attribute will never have the {{}}. So, if you have <my-directive foo="bar" /> it will bind whatever is in $scope.bar into your directive in the foo property of your directive's scope. Any change's you make to foo within your scope will be refelected in bar in the parent scope, and vice versa.
I haven't used the '&' notation nearly as much as the other too, so I don't know it as well as those two. From what I understand, it allows you to evaluate expressions from the context of the parent scope. So if you have something like <my-directive foo="doStuff()" />, whenever you call scope.foo() within your directive, it will call the doStuff function in the directive's parent scope. I'm sure there's a lot more you can do with this, but I'm not as familiar with it all. Maybe someone else can explain this one in more detail.
If just the symbol is set in the scope, it will use the same name as the attribute to bind to the directives scope. For example:
scope: {
foo1: '#',
foo2: '=',
foo3: '&'
}
When including the directive, there would need to be the attributes foo1, foo2, and foo3. If you want a property in your scope different than the attribute name, you can specify that after the symbol. So, the example above would be
scope: {
foo1: '#bar1',
foo2: '=bar2',
foo3: '&bar3'
}
When including the directive, there would need to be the attributes bar1, bar2, and bar3, and these would get bound in the scope under properties foo1, foo2, and foo3 respectively.
I hope this helps. Feel free to ask questions with which I can clarify my answer.
Youre pretty close..
app.directive('mytag',function() {
return {
restrict: 'E',
template: '<div>' +
'<input ng-model="controltype"/>' +
'<button ng-click="controlfunc()">Parent Func</button>' +
'<p>{{controlval}}</p>' +
'</div>',
scope: {
/* make typeattribute="whatever" bind two-ways (=)
$scope.whatever from the parent to $scope.controltype
on this directive's scope */
controltype: '=typeattribute',
/* reference a function from the parent through
funcattribute="somefunc()" and stick it our
directive's scope in $scope.controlfunc */
controlfunc: '&funcattribute',
/* pass a string value into the directive */
controlval: '#valattribute'
},
controller: function($scope) {
}
};
});
<div ng-controller="ParentCtrl">
<!-- your directive -->
<mytag typeattribute="parenttype" funcattribute="parentFn()" valattribute="Wee, I'm a value"></mytag>
<!-- write out your scope value -->
{{parenttype}}
</div>
app.controller('ParentCtrl', function($scope){
$scope.parenttype = 'FOO';
$scope.parentFn = function() {
$scope.parenttype += '!!!!';
}
});
The magic is mostly in the scope: declaration in your directive definition. having any scope: {} in there will "isolate" the scope from the parent, meaning it gets it's own scope... without that, it would use the parent's scope. The rest of the magic is in the scope's properties: scope: { 'internalScopeProperty' : '=externalAttributeName' }... where the = represents a two way binding scenario. If you change that = to a # you'll see it just allows you to pass a string as an attribute to the directive. The & is for executing functions from the parent scope's context.
I hope that helps.
EDIT: Here is a working PLNKR

Resources