I have a route manager defined like in the following code.
App.routeManager = Ember.RouteManager.create();
I don't want to statically add viewstate to the manager; I want to determine what states there are on load depends on data. How can I do that? I'm looking for something like the following code.
foreach(item in itemArray){
App.routeManager.states.add(Ember.ViewState.create(
route: 'item.route'
));
}
Is it possible?
You basically gave yourself the answer, see http://jsfiddle.net/pangratz666/xNnTP/:
App.stateManager = Ember.StateManager.create({
enableLogging: true,
initialState: 'firstState',
firstState: Ember.State.create({
myEvent: function(manager) {
manager.goToState('addedState');
}
})
});
Ember.run.later(function() {
Ember.setPath(App.stateManager, 'states.addedState', Ember.State.create({
enter: function() {
this._super();
console.log('hello dynamic world');
}
}));
App.stateManager.send('myEvent');
}, 10);
Related
I have written a directive to use the plug in like this
app.directive("ngImageSelect",function(){
return {
link: function($scope,el){
$(el).Jcrop({
onChange: showCoords,
onSelect: showCoords,
onRelease: clearCoords
},function(){
jcrop_api = this;
});
function showCoords(data){
$('#x1').val(data.x);
$('#y1').val(data.y);
$('#x2').val(data.x2);
$('#y2').val(data.y2);
$('#width').val(data.w);
$('#height').val(data.h);
}
function clearCoords(){
$('#coords input').val('');
}
}
}
});
the problem with this is , when we browse image first time it previews correctly, If we try to change the image, it is not changing, still it loads old image.PLease help me.
While my scenario is pretty specific, I think it speaks to a bigger question in Flux. Components should be simple renderings of data from a store, but what if your component renders a third-party component which is stateful? How does one interact with this third-party component while still obeying the rules of Flux?
So, I have a React app that contains a video player (using clappr). A good example is seeking. When I click a location on the progress bar, I want to seek the video player. Here is what I have right now (using RefluxJS). I've tried to strip down my code to the most relevant parts.
var PlayerActions = Reflux.createActions([
'seek'
]);
var PlayerStore = Reflux.createStore({
listenables: [
PlayerActions
],
onSeek(seekTo) {
this.data.seekTo = seekTo;
this.trigger(this.data);
}
});
var Player = React.createClass({
mixins: [Reflux.listenTo(PlayerStore, 'onStoreChange')],
onStoreChange(data) {
if (data.seekTo !== this.state.seekTo) {
window.player.seek(data.seekTo);
}
// apply state
this.setState(data);
}
componentDidMount() {
// build a player
window.player = new Clappr.Player({
source: this.props.sourcePath,
chromeless: true,
useDvrControls: true,
parentId: '#player',
width: this.props.width
});
},
componentWillUnmount() {
window.player.destroy();
window.player = null;
},
shouldComponentUpdate() {
// if React realized we were manipulating DOM, it'd certainly freak out
return false;
},
render() {
return <div id='player'/>;
}
});
The bug I have with this code is when you try to seek to the same place twice. Imagine the video player continuously playing. Click on the progress bar to seek. Don't move the mouse, and wait a few seconds. Click on the progress bar again on the same place as before. The value of data.seekTo did not change, so window.player.seek is not called the second time.
I've considered a few possibilities to solve this, but I'm not sure which is more correct. Input requested...
1: Reset seekTo after it is used
Simply resetting seekTo seems like the simplest solution, though it's certainly no more elegant. Ultimately, this feels more like a band-aid.
This would be as simple as ...
window.player.on('player_seek', PlayerActions.resetSeek);
2: Create a separate store that acts more like a pass-through
Basically, I would listen to a SeekStore, but in reality, this would act as a pass-through, making it more like an action that a store. This solution feels like a hack of Flux, but I think it would work.
var PlayerActions = Reflux.createActions([
'seek'
]);
var SeekStore = Reflux.createStore({
listenables: [
PlayerActions
],
onSeek(seekTo) {
this.trigger(seekTo);
}
});
var Player = React.createClass({
mixins: [Reflux.listenTo(SeekStore, 'onStoreChange')],
onStoreChange(seekTo) {
window.player.seek(seekTo);
}
});
3: Interact with window.player within my actions
When I think about it, this feels correct, since calling window.player.seek is in fact an action. The only weird bit is that I don't feel right interacting with window inside the actions. Maybe that's just an irrational thought, though.
var PlayerActions = Reflux.createActions({
seek: {asyncResult: true}
});
PlayerActions.seek.listen(seekTo => {
if (window.player) {
try {
window.player.seek(seekTo);
PlayerActions.seek.completed(err);
} catch (err) {
PlayerActions.seek.failed(err);
}
} else {
PlayerActions.seek.failed(new Error('player not initialized'));
}
});
BTW, there's a whole other elephant in the room that I didn't touch on. In all of my examples, the player is stored as window.player. Clappr did this automatically in older versions, but though it has since been fixed to work with Browserify, we continue to store it on the window (tech debt). Obviously, my third solution is leveraging that fact, which it technically a bad thing to be doing. Anyway, before anyone points that out, understood and noted.
4: Seek via dispatchEvent
I also understand that dispatching a custom event would get the job done, but this feels way wrong considering I have Flux in place. This feels like I'm going outside of my Flux architecture to get the job done. I should be able to do it and stay inside the Flux playground.
var PlayerActions = Reflux.createActions({
seek: {asyncResult: true}
});
PlayerActions.seek.listen(seekTo => {
try {
let event = new window.CustomEvent('seekEvent', {detail: seekTo});
window.dispatchEvent(event);
PlayerActions.seek.completed(err);
} catch (err) {
PlayerActions.seek.failed(err);
}
});
var Player = React.createClass({
componentDidMount() {
window.addEventListener('seekEvent', this.onSeek);
},
componentWillUnmount() {
window.removeEventListener('seekEvent', this.onSeek);
},
onSeek(e) {
window.player.seek(e.detail);
}
});
5: keep the playing position in state (as noted by Dan Kaufman)
Could be done something like this:
handlePlay () {
this._interval = setInterval(() => this.setState({curPos: this.state.curPos + 1}), 1000)
this.setState({playing: true}) // might not be needed
}
handlePauserOrStop () {
clearInterval(this._interval)
this.setState({playing: false})
}
componentWillUnmount () {
clearInteral(this._interval)
}
onStoreChange (data) {
const diff = Math.abs(data.seekTo - this.state.curPos)
if (diff > 2) { // adjust 2 to your unit of time
window.player.seek(data.seekTo);
}
}
I have a simple question, but I'm not sure how to proceed.
Here is my initial state:
getInitialState: function() {
return {
selector:{
params:{
platform:'BITSTAMP',
currency:'USD',
item:'BTC',
interval:'15m',
range:'1d'
}
},
platforms: [],
pairs: [],
allPlatforms: {},
range: ['12h','1d','3d','1w','2w','1m','3m','6m','1y','Max', 'Custom'],
interval: ['1m','15m','1h','6h','12h','24h']
}
},
Let's say I need to change selector.params.platform. If I write:
this.setState({
selector: {
params: {
platform: "somenewplatform"
}
}
});
It will destroy my other params keeping only platform. So what I'm doing is
var newState = this.state;
newState.selector.params.platform = "newplatform";
Then I setState({selector:newState});
Is it the right way to do this? Knowing that newState.selector.params.platform = "newplatform"; means modifying the state directly without going through setState directly, I'm not sure this is the right thing to do.
So if anyone has a better solution I'll be really curious to read it.
You don't want to do
var newState = this.state;
newState.selector.params.platform = "newplatform";
this.setState({selector:newState});
This will set this.state.selector to be your entire state object. It looks like what you want is this:
var newSelector = this.state.selector;
newSelector.params.platform = "newplatform";
this.setState({selector: newSelector});
I'm using the Angular-Leaflet directive to display a heatmap, and I want the data to evolve through time. My code looks like:
getData().then(function (data) {
$scope.heat.index = 0;
$scope.heat.data = data;
$scope.layers.overlays.heat = {
name: "Heatmap",
type: "heat",
data: $scope.heat.data[$scope.heat.index], // data is a dictionary, not an array
visible: true
};
$scope.$watch('heat.index', function (new_index) {
$scope.layers.overlays.heat.data = $scope.heat.data[new_index];
});
});
However, when I change data.index (through a slider), nothing happens. What could be going on? I know that Angular-Leaflet supports this behavior because of this Github issue where someone added it.
leafletData.getMap().then(function (map) {
map.eachLayer(function (layer) {
if (layer.options.layerName == 'heatmap') {
layer.setLatLngs(newHeatmapData);
}
})
})
This worked for me.
Leaflet.heat provides a redraw() method but that didn't work for me.
First I'd like to say my appreciation for this great website that I rely on rather often but never have used to ask anything.
I'm currently learning AngularJS by reading "Mastering web application development with AngularJS" and going through the provided examples.
I would like to understand how I can switch between different implementations of a provider (service) with minimal code change.
Here is the "notifications" service that I need to configure with different implementations of an "archiver" service, code for both below :
angular.module('notificationsApp', ['archiver'])
.provider('notificationsService', function () {
var notifications = [];
return {
$get : function(archiverService) {
return {
push:function (notification) {
var notificationToArchive;
var newLen = notifications.unshift(notification);
if (newLen > 5) {
notificationToArchive = notifications.pop();
archiverService.archive(notificationToArchive);
}
}
};
}
};
})
.config(function(notificationsServiceProvider){
**How could I make the 'archiverService' be of superConsoleArchiverService or consoleArchiverService ?**
});
I would like to be able to choose between different implementations for my "archiverService", namely "superConsoleArchiverService" or "consoleArchiverService" as defined in the following module.
angular.module('archiver', [])
.provider('consoleArchiverService', function () {
return {
$get : function() {
return {
archive:function (archivedNotification) {
console.log(archivedNotification);
}
};
}
};
})
.provider('superConsoleArchiverService', function () {
return {
$get : function() {
return {
archive:function (archivedNotification) {
console.log('super ' + archivedNotification);
}
};
}
};
});
Thanks a lot for helping me through this !
(also, I hope this question makes sense and has not been answered a gazillion times)
Let's say you have some condition, say a variable to use_super.
Then you could do something like this, by injecting $provide, and both of your providers:
$provide.value('archiver', use_super ? superConsoleArchiverService : consoleArchiverService);
Hope this helped!
Thanks to the answer provided by hassassin I was able to make it work, following is some working version, no code was changed in the 'archiver' module.
angular.module('notificationsApp', ['archiver'])
.provider('notificationsService', function () {
var notifications = [];
return {
$get : function(configuredArchiver) {
return {
push:function (notification) {
var notificationToArchive;
var newLen = notifications.unshift(notification);
if (newLen > 5) {
notificationToArchive = notifications.pop();
configuredArchiver.archive(notificationToArchive);
}
}
};
}
};
})
.config(function(notificationsServiceProvider, superConsoleArchiverServiceProvider, consoleArchiverServiceProvider, $provide){
// Here it is possible to set the 'configuredArchiver to either one of my archivers
//$provide.provider('configuredArchiver',consoleArchiverServiceProvider);
$provide.provider('configuredArchiver',superConsoleArchiverServiceProvider);
});
Some things I still don't fully understand like why can't I inject the 'configuredArchiver' directly in the 'notificationService' provider, but I strongly suspect it is related to my still very small grasp on the life cycle of AngularJS objects. Back to reading !