I am building an application prototype and try to mock the REST web-services.
Here is my code:
var mock = angular.module('mock', ['ngMockE2E']);
mock.run(function($httpBackend){
users = [{id:1,name:'John'},{id:2,name:'Jack'}];
$httpBackend.whenGET('/users').respond(users);
$httpBackend.whenGET(new RegExp('\\/users\\/[0-9]+')).respond(users[0]);
}
Everything is ok, my resource User.query() returns all users, and User.get({id:1}) and User.get({id:2}) returns the same user (John).
Now to improve my prototype, I would like to return the appropriate user, matching the good id.
I read in the angular documentation I should be able to replace the RegExp URI by a function. The idea is to extract the id from the url to use it in respond method.
I then tried this:
$httpBackend.whenGET(new function(url){
alert(url);
var regexp = new RegExp('\\/users\\/([0-9]+)');
id = url.match(regexp)[1];
return regexp.test(url);
}).respond(users[id]);
The problem is the url parameter is always undefined. Any idea to achieve my goal?
By using new function(url) your app tries to instantiate a new object from your anonymous function and pass that new object as the first argument of the $httpBackend.whenGET() call.
Of course, at the time of calling whenGET() no URL is provided, thus it is always undefined.
You should pass the function itself (and not an object instanciated using the function). E.g.:
$httpBackend.whenGET(function (url) {
...
}).respond(users[id]);
UPDATE:
After some more digging it turned out that the option to pass a function as the first argument to whenGET was added in version 1.3.0-beta.3. The docs you were reading probably referred to the latest beta version, while you were using an earlier version.
(Note that even versions 1.3.0-beta.1 and 2 did not provide this option.)
Without getting into much detail, responsible for verifying a matching URL is MockHttpExpectation's matchUrl method:
function MockHttpExpectation(method, url, data, headers) {
...
this.matchUrl = function(u) {
if (!url) return true;
if (angular.isFunction(url.test)) return url.test(u);
if (angular.isFunction(url)) return url(u); // <<<<< this line does the trick
return url == u;
};
The line if (angular.isFunction(url)) return url(u); is the one that gives the option to directly pass a function and was added in version 1.3.0-beta.3 (as already mentioned).
But, if you still want to pass a function to a previous AngularJS version, you could "trick" angular into believing you passed a RegExp, by providing an object with a test method.
I.e. replace:
.whenGET(function (url) {...})
with:
.whenGET({test: function (url) {...}})
See, also, this short demo.
I found a solution by using a function in the respond part instead of the when part:
$httpBackend.whenGET(new RegExp('\\/users\\/[0-9]+')).respond(
function(method, url){
var regexp = new RegExp('\\/users\\/([0-9]+)');
var mockId = url.match(regexp)[1];
return [200, users[mockId]];
}
});
Related
Hi I'm trying to update my database with function that returns a number
$scope.sum = function()
{
return $scope.inp + $scope.points;
};
this function will update the record in object points, column name and id 1:
$scope.addPoint = function() {
PointService.addPoint($scope.sum, 1)
.then(function(result) {
$scope.inp = 0;
getMyPoints();
});
}
addPoint = function(id,points)
{
return $http.put(getUrlForId(1),points,name);
}
the error is: Error details: Cannot convert type 'int' to 'System.Collections.Generic.Dictionary'
the data type of the field is Float.
Any idea what is wrong with the code?
you are passing function reference to PointService.addPointer(),
use this:
$scope.addPoint = function() {
PointService.addPoint($scope.sum(), 1) // NOT PointService.addPoint($scope.sum, 1)
.then(function(result) {
$scope.inp = 0;
getMyPoints();
});
}
this will execute your function and pass the output (id parameter) to addPoint function, further, for more safe side, you can return Number from $scope.sum() i.e.
$scope.sum = function()
{
return Number($scope.inp + $scope.points);
};
This looks like an issue with how you're contacting Backand. You use the following code to send your points over:
addPoint = function(id,points)
{
return $http.put(getUrlForId(1),points,name);
}
This is an older version of calling the Backand API that is manually constructing a PUT request, and putting "points" and "name" as the "Data" and "config" parameters to $http. With an object update via PUT, you'll need to provide the updates as an object. So if you wanted to update the points and the name of the object (and I'm doing some assuming based upon what I can tell from the code snippet above), you'd need to encapsulate these properties in an object that has the following general format:
{
"field_name_1":"new value_1",
"field_name_2":"new value_2",
etc ...
}
This should then be sent as the body of the request. So, for your code, change it to the following and see if this helps:
addPoint = function(id,points)
{
return $http.put(getUrlForId(1),{points: points, name: name});
}
To give more info on why you're seeing this particular error, Backand is depending on this JSON format in the body. Our platform should definitely do more validation (and I'll create a ticket for the devs to handle non-conforming input more gracefully), but at the moment we simply take the body of the request, convert it to a dictionary object, then begin the requested operation. As your code above sends only "1.0" as the body, this fails the conversion into a dictionary, causing the stack exception and the issue you are seeing.
As a note, we offer a new SDK that encapsulates these HTTP methods, performing the authentication header generation and HTTP messaging for you, providing promises to handle responses. You can find it on our Github page at https://github.com/backand/vanilla-sdk. To make the same call using the new SDK, the code would resemble the following:
backand.object.update("your object name", 1, {name: name, points: points})
.then(function(response){
console.log(response.data);
});
I'm testing a service that uses another service for API calls, let's call this the data service. The data service is tested elsewhere, so I've abstracted it away with a simple implementation that contains empty functions; I'm returning data via a deferred object and Jasmine's spyOn syntax.
The trouble I'm finding with this approach is when the data is returned, it's not immediately available on the calling object, as it would be if I used $httpBackend. Aware I could just use $httpBackend, but I'd like to know if I've missed something (simple or otherwise) in this approach.
Example section of code I'm trying to test:
storeTheData = dataService.getSomeData();
storeTheData.$promise.then(function(data) {
/*this would work*/
console.log(data);
/*but this would not, when testing using $q*/
_.forEach(storeTheData, function(storedData) {
/*do something with each object returned*/
});
});
As a side note, I don't think the situation is helped by the ...$promise.then on another line, but ideally I wouldn't change the code (I'm providing test coverage to something written a while ago...)
Example of the test:
beforeEach(
...
dataService = {
getSomeData: function () { }
};
getSomeDataDeferred = $q.defer();
spyOn(dataService, "getSomeData").and.returnValue({$promise: getSomeDataDeferred.promise});
...
);
it(...
getSomeDataDeferred.resolve([{obj: "obj1"}, {obj: "obj2"}]);
$scope.$apply();
...
);
With the test described above, the console.log(data) would be testable as the data is accessible from being passed into the .then(). But the data is not immediately available from storeTheData, so storeTheData[0].obj would be undefined. On debug, I can see the data if I go through the promise that was attached to storeTheData via storeTheData.$$state.value
Like I said, I know I could use $httpBackend instead, but is there any way to do this with $q without changing the code under test?
I've not found a way to do this with $q.resolve, but I do have a solution that doesn't involve using the data service or changing the code under test. This is as good, because the main things I wanted to avoid were testing the data service as a side effect and changing the code.
My solution was to create a $resource object via $injector...
$resource = $inject.get("$resource");
...then return that in my basic implementation of the data service. This means I could use $httpBackend to respond to the request to an end point that isn't reliant on the data service's definition staying consistent.
dataService = {
getSomeData: function () {
/* new code starts here */
var resource = $resource(null, null, {
get: {
method: "GET",
isArray: true,
url: "/getSomeData"
}
});
return resource.get();
/* new code ends here */
}
};
...
$httpBackend.when("GET", "/getSomeData").respond(...;
I'm having a slight issue with my ability to consume REST data retrieved via Restangular in an angular controller. I have the following code which works fine for a list of accounts:
var baseAccounts = Restangular.all('accounts');
baseAccounts.getList().then(function(accounts) {
$scope.accounts = accounts;
});
This works perfectly for a list. I use similar syntax for a single account:
var baseAccount = Restangular.one('accounts');
baseAccount.getList(GUID).then(function(returnedAccount) {
$scope.currentAccount = returnedAccount;
});
I am using ng-repeat as the handling directive for my first request. I am attempting to bind with {{ account.name }} tags for the single request, but it does not seem to display any data despite the request being made properly. GUID is the parameter I must pass in to retrieve the relevant record.
I have combed through Restangular docs and it seems to me like I am composing my request properly. Any insight would be greatly appreciated.
EDIT: I've tried all of the solutions listed here to no avail. It would seem Restangular is submitting the correctly structured request, but when it returns it through my controller it shows up as just a request for a list of accounts. When the response is logged, it shows the same response as would be expected for a list of accounts. I do not believe this is a scoping issue as I have encapsulated my request in a way that should work to mitigate that. So, there seems to be a disconnect between Request -> Restangular object/promise that populates the request -> data-binding to the request. Restangular alternates between returning the array of accounts or undefined.
Have you looked at:
https://github.com/mgonto/restangular#using-values-directly-in-templates
Since Angular 1.2, Promise unwrapping in templates has been disabled by default and will be deprecated soon.
Try:
$scope.accounts = baseAccounts.getList().$object;
try:
var baseAccount = Restangular.one('accounts', GUID);
baseAccount.get().then(function(returnedAccount) {
$scope.currentAccount = returnedAccount;
});
The problem here is that it's expecting an array to be returned. I'm assuming that you are expecting an account object. Thus we need to use the get function, intead of getList()
The one() function has a second argument that accepts an id e.g. .one('users', 1). You can take a use of it.
CODE
var baseAccount = Restangular.one('accounts', 1); //1 would be account id
baseAccount.getList('account').then(function(returnedAccount) {
$scope.currentAccount = returnedAccount;
});
OR
var baseAccount = Restangular.one('accounts', 1); //1 would be account id
baseAccount.all('account').getList().then(function(returnedAccount) {
$scope.currentAccount = returnedAccount;
});
For more info take look at github issue
Hope this could help you, Thanks.
I'm trying to rewrite the code for http://m.amsterdamfoodie.nl in a more modern style. Basically single page Angular app downloads a set of restaurants with locations and places them on a map. If the user is the Amsterdam area then the user's location is added too, as are the distances to places.
At present I manage the asynchronous returns using a lot of if (relevant object from other async call exists) then do next step. I'd like to make more use of promises would be better.
So, flow control should be:
Start ajax data download, and geolocation call
if geolocation returns first, store coords for later
once ajax data is downloaded
if geolocation available
calculate distances to each restaurant, and pass control to rendering code
else pass control immediately to render code
if geolocation resolves later, calculate distances and re-render
The patterns I find on the internet assume that all async calls must return successfully before continuing, whereas my geolocation call can fail (or return a location far from amsterdam) and that's OK. Is there a trick I could use in this scenario or are the conditional statements really the way to go?
Every time you use .then, you essentially create a new promise based on the previous promise and its state. You can use that to your advantage (and you should).
You can do something along the lines of:
function getGeolocation() {
return $http.get('/someurl').then(
function resolveHandler(response) {
// $http.X resolves with a HTTP response object.
// The JSON data is on its `data` attribute
var data = response.data;
// Check if the data is valid (with some other function).
// By this, I mean e.g. checking if it is "far from amsterdam",
// as you have described that as a possible error case
if(isValid(data)) {
return data;
}
else {
return null;
}
},
function rejectHandler() {
// Handle the retrieval failure by explicitly returning a value
// from the rejection handler. Null is arbitrarily chosen here because it
// is a falsy value. See the last code snippet for the use of this
return null;
}
);
}
function getData() {
return $http.get('/dataurl').then(...);
}
and then use $q.all on both promises, which in turn creates a new promise that resolves as soon as all the given promises have resolved.
Note: In Kris Kowal's Q, which Angular's $q service is based on, you could use the allSettled method, which does almost the same as all, but resolves when all promises are settled (fulfilled or rejected), and not only if all promises are fulfilled. Angular's $q does not provide this method, so you can instead work your way around this by explicitly making the failed http request resolve anyways.
So, then you can do something like:
$q.all([getData(), getGeolocation()])
.then(function(data, geolocation) {
// `data` is the value that getData() resolved with,
// `geolocation` is the value that getGeolocation() resolved with.
// Check the documentation on `$q.all` for this.
if(geolocation) {
// Yay, the geolocation data is available and valid, do something
}
// Handle the rest of the data
});
Maybe I'm missing something... but since you have no dependencies between the two async calls, I don't see why you can't just follow the logic you outlined:
var geoCoordinates = null;
var restaurants = null;
var distances = null;
getRestaurantData()
.then(function(data){
restaurants = data;
if (geoCoordinates) {
distances = calculate(restaurants, geoCoordinates);
}
// set $scope variables as needed
});
getGeoLocation()
.then(function(data){
geoCoordinates = data;
if (restaurants){
distances = calculate(restaurants, geoCoordinates)
}
// set $scope variables as needed
});
I am using AngularJS Services in my application to retrieve data from the backend, and I would like to make a loading mask, so the loading mask will start just before sending the request. but how can I know when the request ends?
For example I defined my servive as:
angular.module('myServices', ['ngResource'])
.factory('Clients', function ($resource) {
return $resource('getclients');
})
.factory('ClientsDetails', function ($resource) {
return $resource('getclient/:cltId');
})
So I use them in my controller as:
$scope.list = Clients.query();
and
$scope.datails = ClientsDetails.get({
date:$scope.selectedId
});
So the question would be, how to know when the query and get requests ends?
Edit:
As a side note in this question I've been using using angularjs 1.0.7
In AngularJS 1.2 automatic unwrapping of promises is no longer supported unless you turn on a special feature for it (and no telling for how long that will be available).
So that means if you write a line like this:
$scope.someVariable = $http.get("some url");
When you try to use someVariable in your view code (for example, "{{ someVariable }}") it won't work anymore. Instead attach functions to the promise you get back from the get() function like dawuut showed and perform your scope assignment within the success function:
$http.get("some url").then(function successFunction(result) {
$scope.someVariable = result;
console.log(result);
});
I know you probably have your $http.get() wrapped inside of a service or factory of some sort, but you've probably been passing the promise you got from using $http out of the functions on that wrapper so this applies just the same there.
My old blog post on AngularJS promises is fairly popular, it's just not yet updated with the info that you can't do direct assignment of promises to $scope anymore and expect it to work well for you: http://johnmunsch.com/2013/07/17/angularjs-services-and-promises/
You can use promises to manage it, something like :
Clients.query().then(function (res) {
// Content loaded
console.log(res);
}, function (err) {
// Error
console.log(err);
});
Another way (much robust and 'best practice') is to make Angular intercepting your requests automatically by using interceptor (see doc here : http://docs.angularjs.org/api/ng.$http).
This can help too : Showing Spinner GIF during $http request in angular
As left in a comment by Pointy I solved my problem giving a second parameter to the get function as following:
$scope.datails = ClientsDetails.get({
date:$scope.selectedId
}, function(){
// do my stuff here
});