sencha touch 2: binding associations data to existing store - extjs

Question

I have a simple data model that looks something like this (actual code below):
model Game:
fields: id, team_1_id, team_2_id
model GameScore:
fields: id, game_id, team_1_score, team_2_score, is_final, submission_date
model SpiritScore:
fields: id, game_id, team_1_score, team_2_score
What I want seems simple. I already have code that loads Games and GameScores in bulk. I have a 'Game' instance in hand, and can call gameScores(). And I get a store, but it's empty. I have code that will dynamically load it, by placing the store into the model's hasMany definition. But what I would really like is some way to bind the Game.gameScores() call to the my existing GameScores store. Even if it used a normal filter underneath, that gives me a single record that I can bind and use in a view. (Important note: the data does not come in nested form.)
This leads to my second question. Game:GameScores is 1:many, but I only ever display the most recent one (from live score reporting). What is the general approach here? I can also manually build a filter from the game_id, but I can only bind 1 record to a view, so I don't see how I can bring that other information into a view, short of a proper hasMany relationship. Is there another way?
Any and all advice, including telling me to RTFM (with a link to the relevant manual) would be greatly appreciated! I've been pulling my hair out on this (pro bono side project) for the last week.
Cheers!
b
Ext.define('TouchMill.model.Game', {
extend: 'Ext.data.Model',
config: {
fields: [ 'id', 'team_1_id', 'team_2_id' ],
hasMany: {
model: 'TouchMill.model.GameScore',
name: 'gameScores',
},
},
});
Ext.define('TouchMill.model.GameScore', {
extend: 'Ext.data.Model',
config: {
fields: [ 'id', 'game_id', 'team_1_score', 'team_2_score', 'is_final', 'submission_date', ],
},
// belongsTo necessary? Don't think so unless I want parent func?
});
Ext.define('TouchMill.model.SpiritScore', {
extend: 'Ext.data.Model',
config: {
fields: [ 'id', 'game_id', 'team_1_score', 'team_2_score', ],
},
},

Answer 1

I've never used touch, so I'm speaking about Ext4 here (4.2 to be precise)... And, your model definitions seem a bit broken to me (is that working with touch?). But whatever, you'll get the general idea. If my code don't work in touch, please try with Ext4.
Also, I understood that you're loading all your scores at once. If that's not the case, my solution will need to be adapted...
So, my general reasoning is the following: if you've loaded all your scores in memory, then why not use a memory proxy that uses the score store's data as the data source for the store generated for the association? I tried that and, quite to my surprise, it worked without a glitch.
To understand this, you need to know that a proxy is an independant data source, that is a proxy can be shared between multiple stores without problem. On the other hand, a store is expected to be bound to a single view or task. For example, if you bind the same store to two different grids, then filtering the first grid will affect the second as well.
And while most proxies do not "contain" their data, memory proxy do. Here's a relevant excerpt of Ext.data.proxy.Memory#read method:
resultSet = operation.resultSet = me.getReader().read(me.data)
So, enough theory, here's the proof of concept (tested in this fiddle):
// I instantiate this proxy myself in order to have a reference available
var masterScoreProxy = Ext.create('Ext.data.proxy.Memory');
Ext.define('TouchMill.model.GameScore', {
extend: 'Ext.data.Model',
fields: [ 'id', 'game_id', 'team_1_score', 'team_2_score', 'is_final', 'submission_date' ],
// I've used a remote server to ensure this all works even asynchronously
proxy: {
// configure your own
}
});
Ext.define('TouchMill.model.Game', {
extend: 'Ext.data.Model'
,fields: [ 'id', 'team_1_id', 'team_2_id' ]
,hasMany: {
model: 'TouchMill.model.GameScore'
,name: 'gameScores'
// required in order to avoid Ext autogenerating it as 'touchmill.model.game_id'
,foreignKey: 'game_id'
// needed if we don't want to have to call gameRecord.gameScores().load()
,autoLoad: true
// first part of the magic: make the generated store use my own proxy
,storeConfig: {
proxy: masterScoreProxy
}
}
});
// Just mocking a store with two games
var gameStore = Ext.create('Ext.data.Store', {
model: 'TouchMill.model.Game'
,data: [{id: 1}, {id: 2}]
,proxy: 'memory'
});
// Creating the "master" score store (that will use the model's proxy)
var scoreStore = Ext.create('Ext.data.Store', {
model: 'TouchMill.model.GameScore'
// second part's in there
,listeners: {
load: function(store, records, success) {
if (success) {
// 1. replace the data of the generated association stores' proxy
// (I must say I'm quite surprised that I didn't had to extract the data of
// every records, nor to configure a reader and all for my shared proxy...
// But hey, that works!)
masterScoreProxy.data = records;
// 2. update already generated stores
// Alternatively, you could call gameRecord.gameScores().load() individually
// before each usage of gameRecord.gameStores()
gameStore.each(function(record) {
var childStore = record.gameScoresStore;
if (childStore) {
childStore.load();
}
});
}
}
}
});
// test first load
scoreStore.load({
callback: function(records, operation, success) {
if (success) {
// and here's to prove it
gameStore.each(function(record) {
record.gameScores().each(function(score) {
console.log('Game ' + record.id + ': ' + JSON.stringify(score.data, undefined, 2));
});
});
testRefreshedData();
}
}
});
function testRefreshedData() {
// test refreshing
scoreStore.load({
callback: function(records, operation, success) {
if (success) {
console.log('--- Scores have changed ---');
gameStore.each(function(record) {
record.gameScores().each(function(score) {
console.log('Game ' + record.id + ': ' + JSON.stringify(score.data, undefined, 2));
});
});
}
}
});
}
Regarding your other questions...
If you have a 1:n for Game:Score, you've got a 1:1 for Game:MostRecentScore... So, I'd try to use that.
As for the view, there should always be a way -- even if hackish -- to access data nested in your records. The way will depend on what you're calling view here... See, for example this question.