I understand how to use Restangular in a controller, however my thoughts are that Restangular is essentially an ORM on steroids.
The ORM shouldn't have any knowledge of the state of the application. That is the job of the controller.
I also want to re-use queries to the ORM, and as such, I believe that Restangular should be used inside a service.
My problem is that I am a js / angularjs and restangular noob, having only about 2-3 months exp with anything front-end.
My Controllers:
app.controller('AdminSupplierIndexController',
['$scope', '$stateParams', '$state', 'Supplier',
function ($scope, $stateParams, $state, Supplier) {
$state.reload();
Supplier.getAll.then(function (suppliers) {
$scope.suppliers = suppliers;
});
}]);
app.controller('AdminSupplierDetailController',
['$scope', '$stateParams', 'Supplier',
function ($scope, $stateParams, Supplier) {
Supplier.getOne({ supplierId : $stateParams.supplierID}).then(function(supplier) {
$scope.supplier = supplier;
});
}]);
My Factory
app.factory('Supplier', ['Restangular', function (Restangular) {
return {
getAll: Restangular.all('supplier').getList(),
getOne: Restangular.one('supplier', supplierId).get()
};
}]);
My Supplier.getAll method works fine - I can list all the suppliers from the Supplier factory.
My problem is with my Supplier.getOne method.
Question 1: How do I inject the supplierId into the factory? I am getting ReferenceError: supplierId is not defined
Question 2: Am I trying to over-engineer things considering that I would have to create individual methods for C-R-U-D for every single factory when these methods are already provided by Restangular?
I know this is old, but an alternate way would just be to wrap it within a function. This way, you can keep any other logic within the service/method.
app.factory('Supplier', ['Restangular', function (Restangular) {
return {
getAll: Restangular.all('supplier').getList(),
getOne: function(supplierId) {
return Restangular.one('supplier', supplierId).get()
}
};
}]);
Found the solution in https://github.com/mgonto/restangular#decoupled-restangular-service
Essentially, the way I have solved this problem is as follows:
app.js
$stateProvider
...
.state('admin.supplier', {
url : "/supplier",
templateUrl : 'templates/admin/supplier/index.html',
controller: "AdminSupplierIndexController",
resolve: {
suppliers: ['Supplier', function(Supplier) {
return Supplier.getList();
}]
}
})
.state('admin.supplier.detail', {
url : "/:supplierId",
templateUrl : "templates/admin/supplier/detail.html",
controller: "AdminSupplierDetailController",
resolve: {
supplier : ['Supplier', '$stateParams', function(Supplier, $stateParams) {
return Supplier.one($stateParams.supplierId).get();
}]
}
})
...
Supplier.js
app.factory('Supplier', ['Restangular', function(Restangular) {
return Restangular.service('supplier');
}]);
SupplierControllers.js
app.controller('AdminSupplierIndexController', ['$scope', '$stateParams', '$state', 'suppliers',
function ($scope, $stateParams, $state, suppliers) {
$state.reload();
$scope.suppliers = suppliers;
}]);
app.controller('AdminSupplierDetailController', ['$scope', 'supplier',
function ($scope, supplier) {
$scope.supplier = supplier;
}]);
Related
I've a very simple app in AngularJS that use a full REST (sails) backend.
In my services.js I've declared a resource like
MyServices.factory('Post', ['$resource',
function($resource){
return $resource('/post/:PostId', {}, {
//query: { isArray:true }
});
}]);
then in my controller view I've got
MyControllers.controller('PostEditCtrl', ['$scope', '$routeParams', 'Post', '$location', 'flash', '$http', '$rootScope', function($scope, $routeParams, Post, $location, flash, $http, $rootScope ) {
$scope.post = Post.get({PostId: $routeParams.PostId});
When I save the post, If not present, I want to add a field ($scope.post.owner) to add a relationship in my model, so I use this function:
$scope.savePost = function () {
if ($rootScope.currentUser) {
$scope.post.owner = $rootScope.currentUser;
}
$scope.post.$save({ PostId: $scope.post.id });
$location.path("/post/"+$routeParams.PostId);
};
I've got no errors but, I don't see the new field in the post requests.
So far I try also to use $scope.post.push() but without luck.
I would like to know if it is possible (if it is, so how? :)), to inject a dependency to a controller called by a directive.
I have a controller controller called MyCtrl. Here is his signature:
app.controller('MyCtrl', function ($scope, dataService, aDependency){...}
This Controller is usually defined in my route:
.segment('myPage', {
templateUrl: templatesUrl + 'mypage.html',
resolve: {
aDependency: ['$q', 'dataService', '$location', function ($q, dataService, $location) {
var defer = $q.defer();
dataService.retrieveCCData(defer, $location);
return defer.promise;
}],
},
controller: 'MyCtrl'
})
But now, I would also like to call this controller from a directive.
Problem is that I don't know How to inject the aDependency.
It said that the provider is unknown.
Here's my directive:
app.directive('gettingStarted1', ['dataService', function (dataService) {
return {
restrict: 'E',
templateUrl: templatesUrl + 'mypage.html',
controller: 'MyCtrl',
//resolve: {
//datasources: ['dataService', function (dataService) {
//return null;
//}]
//}
};
}]);
Resolve is impossible in directive.
Some help will be appreciate
Thank you
Make aDependency a separate service.
app.provider('aDependency', function () {
this.$get = ['$q', 'dataService', '$location', function ($q, dataService, $location) {
var defer = $q.defer();
dataService.retrieveCCData(defer, $location);
return defer.promise;
}];
});
You can resolve it with
resolve: {
'aDependency': 'aDependency',
}
or
resolve: ['aDependency'];
you could use the controller Function from the directive
.directive("sampledirective", function (dependancy1, dependancy2, ....) {
return {
scope: '=',
controller: function ($rootScope, $scope) {
//DO your controller magic here where you got your scope stuff
}
}
})
One thing i learned it seems the $scope values arent immediatly updated from directive to Controller. If you use objects like
$scope.smth.smth = 'test'
It gets updated immediatly else you would need to $apply
I use routeProvider in Angular JS:
.when('/profile/personal', {
templateUrl: 'personal.html',
controller: 'EditProfileController'
})
How I can pass param to controller EditProfileController and here call Ajax method that returns data. This data must be display in template of route in personal.html.
Example:
.controller('EditProfileController', ['$scope', '$http', function ($scope, $http) {
// If was click on `/profile/personal` from route, must get patam `personal` and call method GetAjax(param);
$scope.GetAjax = function (param){
//here return data put it in template HTML from route
}
}]);
My links are located in page by path:
http://wd.tk/profile
When I click to link route I get URL:
http://wd.tk/profile#/profile/personal/1
Id do:
.controller('EditProfileController', ['$scope', '$http', function ($scope, $http, $routeParams) {
console.log($routeParams);
}]);
I get error:
TypeError: Cannot read property 'idProfile' of undefined
First, in your url configuration, you must put the parameter of url:
when('/profile/personal/:idProfile', {
templateUrl: 'personal.html',
controller: 'EditProfileController'
})
Now, in your EditProfileController, you should get the parameter and call to ajax request:
Inject the $routeParams object and get the parameter with
$routeParams.idProfile:
.controller('EditProfileController',
function ($scope, $http, $routeParams) {
var idProfile = $routeParams.idProfile;
$http.get("service url").then(setData, setError);
function setData(data) {
$scope.data = data;
}
function setError() {
alert("error on get data profile");
}
}]);
In your html, you will show your data profile in the correct format.
But I recommend that all the ajax calls should groups in angular services.
PD:
Check It out angular ui router:
What is the difference between angular-route and angular-ui-router?
hope this helps.
You you need to change your $routeProvider, that should have /profile/:type instead of /profile/personal that means you are going to provide value for :type which can be accessible by injectin $routeParams service inside controller.
.when('/profile/:type', {
templateUrl: 'personal.html',
controller: 'EditProfileController'
})
Controller
.controller('EditProfileController', ['$scope', '$http', '$routeParams', function ($scope, $http, $routeParams) {
$scope.profileType = $routeParams.type;
$scope.GetAjax = function (){
//here you have profile type in $scope.profileType
//you can pass it to ajax by simply accessing scope variable.
$http.get('/getprofiledata?type='+ $scope.profileType)
.success(function(data){
$scope.profileData = data;
})
.error(function(error){
console.log('error occured')
})
}
$scope.GetAjax(); //calling it on controller init
}]);
Update
YOu had missed one of dependency $routeParams in array annotation.
.controller('EditProfileController', ['$scope', '$http', '$routeParams',function ($scope, $http, $routeParams) {
console.log($routeParams);
}]);
I can't seem to wire this up properly. I'll list the appropriate pieces. My issue is accessing the injected resources. All of the dependent pieces are undefined when I try to reference them.
var app = angular.module('app', ['ngResource','ui.bootstrap', 'ngGrid','app.services', 'app.directives', 'app.controllers'
])
.config(['$routeProvider', function ($routeProvider) {
return $routeProvider.
when('/', { templateUrl: 'partials/transaction.view.html', controller: 'TransactionCtrl' }).
when('/about', { templateUrl: 'partials/about.view.html', controller: 'AboutCtrl' }).
when('/transaction', { templateUrl: 'partials/transaction.view.html', controller: 'TransactionCtrl' }).
otherwise({ redirectTo: '/' });
}])
.config(['$httpProvider', function ($httpProvider) {
return $httpProvider.responseInterceptors.push(['logger', '$rootScope', '$q',
function (logger, $rootScope, $q) {
var error, success;
success = function (response) {
$rootScope.$broadcast("success:" + response.status, response);
logger.log("success:" + response.status);
return response;
};
error = function (response) {
var deferred;
deferred = $q.defer();
$rootScope.$broadcast("error:" + response.status, response);
logger.log("error:" + response.status);
return $q.reject(response);
};
return function (promise) {
return promise.then(success, error);
};
}
]);
}])
.run(['$rootScope', 'logger', function ($rootScope, logger) {
return $rootScope.$on('$routeChangeSuccess', function (event, currentRoute, priorRoute) {
return $rootScope.$broadcast("" + currentRoute.controller + "$routeChangeSuccess", currentRoute, priorRoute);
});
}]);
...the controllers are here:
angular.module('pennyWatch.controllers', ['$scope', '$location','logger', 'ngGrid', 'transactionService']).
controller('TransactionCtrl', [function ($scope, logger, ngGrid, transactionService) {
//code here
}]).
controller('AboutCtrl',[function ($scope, logger) {
$scope.logEntries = logger.logEntries;
}]);
So none of the resources I specified are available (all undefined): '$scope', '$location','logger', 'ngGrid', 'transactionService'
Any light shed on this would be greatly appreciated!
Thanks
I'm pretty sure the syntax for a controller is:
.controller('TransactionCtrl', ['$scope', 'logger', 'ngGrid', 'transactionService', function ($scope, logger, ngGrid, transactionService) {
//code here
}]);
You first list what to inject, then as the last element of the array to define a function with parameters that will represent what's injected.
For instance you could even have:
.controller('TransactionCtrl', ['$scope', 'logger', 'ngGrid', 'transactionService', function ($s, logr, ngGrid, transServ) {
//code here
}]);
This is to allow for easy minification.
The alternative controller syntax uses the parameter names when choosing what to inject. And since minification usually involves shortening variable names, it's suggested you use the syntax above.
Alternative syntax:
.controller('TransactionCtrl', function ($scope, logger, ngGrid, transactionService) {
//code here
});
I think you are swapping module-loading with service-injection
when declaring the pennywatch.controllers module, you should invoke the angular.module function passing the module dependencies in brackets, not the services. many of the services you cannot access are in the ng module, for instance
service injection is applied at the controller level
My style of writing angular controllers is like this (using controller name instead of function)
angular.module('mymodule', [
])
.controller('myController', [
'$scope',
function($scope) {
// Some code here
}
]);
What I need now is when providing i routes I want to define resolve part:
$routeProvider.when('/someroute', {
templateUrl: 'partials/someroute.html',
resolve: myController.resolve}) // THIS IS THE CRITICAL LINE
Since controller is defined as a name how to accomplish resolve part bellow?
To clarify more in details I want to load some data from server before route is resolved and then use these data in controller.
UPDATE: To be more precise I want each module has its "resolve" function that will be called before root with that controller is executed. Solution in this post (answered by Misko Hevery) does exactly what I want but I don't have controllers as functions but as a names.
The controller definition and resolve parts are to be specified separately on the route definition.
If you define controllers on a module level you need to reference them as string, so:
$routeProvider.when('/someroute', {
templateUrl: 'partials/someroute.html',
controller: 'myController',
resolve: {
myVar: function(){
//code to be executed before route change goes here
};
});
The above code also shows how to define a set of variables that will be resolved before route changes. When resolved those variables can be injected to a controller so taking the example from the snippet above you would write your controller like so:
.controller('myController', ['$scope', 'myVar', function($scope, myVar) {
// myVar is already resolved and injected here
}
]);
This video might help as well: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P6KITGRQujQ
#pkozlowski.opensource 's answer works, but I don't really want to mess up my routing and and controllers, because I always keep it separated (from Yo Generator). Actually, we can also have controller and resolve(r) all as string/name (NOT function).
angular.module('mymodule', [
])
.controller('myController', [
'$scope', 'myModelCombination'
function($scope, myModelCombination) {
// myModelCombination[0] === (resolved) myModel
// myModelCombination[1] === (resolved) myModel2
}
])
.controller('myController2', [
'$scope', 'myModel'
function($scope, myModel) {
// Some code here
}
])
.factory('myModel', [
'$scope',
function($scope) {
// return a promise
}
])
.factory('myModel2', [
'$scope',
function($scope) {
// return a promise
}
])
.factory('myModelCombination', [
'$scope', 'myModel', 'myModel2'
function($scope) {
return $q.all(['myModel', 'myModel2']);
}
]);
Then in your routing file this should be added
$routeProvider.when('/someroute', {
templateUrl: 'partials/someroute.html',
resolve: ['myModel'] //ALWAYS IN ARRAY)
});
$routeProvider.when('/myModelCombination', {
templateUrl: 'partials/someroute2.html',
resolve: ['myModel'] //ALWAYS IN ARRAY)
});
http://docs.angularjs.org/api/ng.$routeProvider
This would work too
var MyController = myApp.controller('MyController', ['$scope', 'myData', function($scope, myData) {
// Some code here
}]);
MyController.resolve = {
myData: ['$http', '$q', function($http, $q) {
var defer = $q.defer();
$http.get('/foo/bar')
.success(function(data) {
defer.resolve(data);
})
.error(function(error, status) {
defer.reject(error);
});
return defer.promise;
}]
};
#TruongSinh answer worked for me and is way nicer than having additional functions in the router. I tweaked it a little as it was returning the deferred object instead of the actual resolved data.
$routeProvider.when('/someroute', {
templateUrl: 'partials/someroute.html',
controller: 'SomeController',
resolve: {
myModel: 'myModel'
}
});