Seems like my Angularjs app doesn't fire up in IE browsers (the ng-view is just left blank).The site is located here: https://ext.makenewsmail.com/subscriptionform/#/1398/4878 and works in all other browsers.
I've done all the recommendations (view sourcecode). Manual boostrap doesn't solve the issue.
Quick recap:
ngRoute with just one route (/:listid/:userid), one template and one controller (mainCtrl).
Any ideas? This is going live tomorrow! I need all the help I can get on this one.
Related
The Scenario
I'm developing the front-end (CSS only) of an Angular SPA.
I'm not especially familiar with Angular routing.
I'd like to add a standalone page containing Bootstrap components just for development purposes (yes, I know this means it won't be a single page application anymore). This way I have one unified view with all the components so I don't have to switch back and forth while working on the CSS. It also acts as documentation for the Bootstrap for the other devs to refer to.
What I've tried
I originally added a bootstrap.html page to the app folder, alongside the app's index.html This worked at first, but has now stopped working. What would be the best/standard way to achieve something like this?
Update: I've managed to fix some of the JS errors, so the page is up and running again. My question remains though: "is there a way of adding a standalone page that is considered standard/best practise, or is it literally just add a separate HTML page at the app root?"
If you use a target='_self' in your linking anchor tag, this should force a full page reload, and that will avoid the angular routing - which is where I expect your request is getting hijacked (by design).
e.g.
link
Answering your updated question
Not to my knowledge, since (as you correctly pointed out) this mixes the SPA design pattern.
I'm asking this question coz, the app that I'm testing flows from a non-angular app. I'm my case the whole page is non-angular and it contains a link. On clicking on it opens the new angular view. The problem that I'm facing is that the app is manually bootstrapped. I even added the ng-app under a div and mentioned that as rootElement in the script. However this is throwing an error saying "unable to synchronize with the page. No injector found. The reason maybe that it's not under ng-app. Later when I turn off the synchronization I can't locate elements using their binding values.
I've tried most of the workarounds on net and none of them seems to fix this. Could any of please help
Manually bootstrapped apps are a pain. When you turn off browser synchronization you are telling Protractor that Angular is not and will not ever be present. Because by.binding is Angular-only, and there is no Angular present to bind to, that particular locator isn't going to return an element. I use Protractor for non-Angular apps quite often and it works just fine as long as you don't try to use locators that are Angular-specific. Your options are:
Test all of the non-Angular stuff manually, then the Angular stuff separately
Test everything without the Angular locators
This isn't a problem question, but a theory/possibility question. I have made a polymer portfolio site with a list of image links that points to a html page in my file directory for example /projects/test.html. The problem that I have is that every time I click on the link it loads the new page because I have it as a separate html.
I read AngularJS can provide partial view. So if I can combine angular, I can keep my website header and just load the content of the links into the partial view.
I was wondering if this is doable, and do I have to fully install angular and change the file structure or can I just import AngularJS file and code from there?
Also AngularJS does provide routing which I will love as it make my url cleaner.I am just asking so I don't have to waste time if this attempt will not work.
Yes, all of this is easily achievable with Angular; you will not need to modify Angular. A couple things to get you going. This won't make sense right now but come back once you've dug in a little.
For prettier urls set $locationProvider.html5Mode(true);
You will want your server to serve all 404s for text/html requests to return your Angular application (probably /index.html on your server). This is so that if someone goes to https://mycoolsite.com/projects/neato (which exists in your Angular app, but NOT on the server) your Angular application will load and the router will display the correct route.
Today I saw a tweet from Pawel Kozlowski that controllers will go away in Angularjs 2.0
Is there anyone know how would angularjs be without controllers? Currently I handle almost everything in controller, and I dont know when the next version released how much our code will change.
Yes.You're right.
What will not be in AngularJs 2.0?
Controllers
Directive Definition Object (DDO)
$scope
angular.module
JqLite
Angular 2.0 Core slides from ng-europe talk: Angular 2.0 Core
About Your question : Why do you need to go with AJS 2? If your app is giving what you need with AJS 1.X then why do you need to change it to AJS 2.B'cos AJS 1.X series will continue as it is in future also. So no need to worry about it. But if you'll start a new app then you can start it with AJS 2 (if it'll available at that time). That is my suggestion to you.
What Google says about the AJS 1.X :
If you are building web applications today, this is the version you
should use. This is the tried and true version that we really believe
in. With over 1600 apps at Google built with Angular 1.x, we are
committed to supporting it as the first class AngularJS version for a
long time to come.
The biggest problem is that I even don't really know how to describe the problem I'm asking about. It's the first time in more then a decade of wed development.
I'm working on a Rails 4.1.1 app and using angularjs pretty extensively, though I don't know it well yet. And everything seemed to be working fine up to the moment when I tried to add some browser history manipulation to my app (e.g. changing the displayed url when listing though a paginated list so that that url can be copied and distributed). To do this I added a config to my app.
#app.config ($locationProvider) ->
$locationProvider.html5Mode(true)
And then in my angular controller added the $location binding like this
$scope.$watch 'pagination.cur', (newVal) ->
$scope.loadNews newVal
$location.path("/news").search({page:newVal})
(this is ment to change the url in the browser searchbox when the user goes from one page to another).
That workes well, the url does change appropriately, but all the sudden all the html links on the page got broken. I mean litteraly. I click any link on the page (even outside the controller div), the url in the serchbox changes appropriately, but the turbolinks toes not fire the Ajax request to get the new page content. If I then refresh the page, it loads the correct page.
I know it's really weird. What's weirder, that I don't get any JavaScript errors or anything unusual.
The only way I found to get the links working again - is to remove that initial config.
But when I do it, the $location falls back to hashtag syntax, wich is really not at all what I want.
My only assumption is that there could be some kind of a conflict between angular $location service and turbolinks when handling browser history, but even if that's right, I have no idea how to get around it. And I really need that kind of manipulation, 'cause I'm going to be using it alot in this and other apps.
I really don't know, what other information on this problem may be usefull, don't hasitate to ask for updates. I'll post whatever I can.
P.S. Btw, can this kind of manipulation be done by means of turbolinks? 'Cause it's exactly the same thing turbolinks does when changing the displayed url after page body reload, but I can't find any documentation on its public API for that.
UPDATE
Have no idea what's the source of the problem yet, but it seems to be not related to the turbolinks gem. Removing turbolinks requirements from the application.js file does not change anything.
Using $window.history.pushState instead of $location.path solves the functionality problem, but does not explain the initial bug.