I'm creating a custom control. I'm thinking of using Angular Directives.
But I see that directives require you to initialize your widget with html for example:
<mywidget></mywidget>
And in order to pass variables you also do this in html:
<mywidget title="my widget"></mywidget>
But I don't want this. I want to the initialization of my object programatically. Think jQuery widgets:
$('#container').mywidget({
title: 'my widget',
somecallback: function(event, ui){
// do stuff
}
});
Basically, I'd like to set options and set callbacks programatically. Is this available using angular directives or am I barking up the wrong tree?
Yes. You can not only pass just a string to a directive, but any kind of object or functions that are "programmatically" defined in a controller. For instance:
Your HTML:
<mywidget callback="someFunction()"></mywidget>
Your directive:
directive('mywidget', function() {
return {
scope: { callback: '&' }
};
});
Your upper controller:
$scope.someFunction = function() {
// programatically do something
}
Angular is declarative not imperative by nature which means you don't get to do that in an easy way and is for a good reason(separation of concerns)
making your directives clearly bound to your html helps readbility, maintenability and testability, now, you still get to configure your directive using the different binding types in your directives scope definition you can do this inside your directive
scope:{
configs:'='
}
which will create 2 way data binding with the config object which you can use to configure your directive and comunicate with the config object owner, or you can do
scope:{
configs:'&'
}
and then on your direcitves controller or link function do
scope.configs=scope.configs();
to get the object and then you can use it to configure, notice this doesn't create a 2way binding wit the object but it returns and object representation instead some thing similar goes to callback functions or events callback using the 2 way biding operator '='(not recommended but possible) or you can set it using the evaluation operation '&'
scope:{
onClick:'&'
}
and then on your controller/link function do
scope.onClick=scope.onClick();
and use it as
scope.onClick(params)
then when you declare your directive you do
more on this you can find here
https://docs.angularjs.org/guide/directive
https://docs.angularjs.org/api/ng/service/$compile
Related
I know if I have two directives that are nesting I can communicate throw controller, require and pass it as the fourth parameter of the link function.
<my-first-div>
<my-seconded-div></my-seconded-div>
</my-first-div>
and every thing will work fine.
but I could do the same thing when they weren't nesting.
<my-first-div></my-first-div>
<my-seconded-div></my-seconded-div>
why ?
and how do I make them communicate ?
It happens since both of the directives have watchers on the same variable reference. So the changed value is being 'noticed' in all the relevant directives.
You could mimic this "communication" by passing the same variable (By Reference) (varName:'=') for both directives and place watchers on that variable inside each of these directives.
Then, the DOM hierarchy won't matter
For example:
Directive 1:
app.directive('directive1', function () {
return {
restrict: 'E',
scope: {
myVar: '='
}
link: function (scope, element, attrs) {
// do something with main directive
console.log("directive1", scope.myVar);
$scope.$watch("scope.myVar", function (value) {
console.log("directive1", "value changed to:" + scope.myVar)
});
}
}
});
The same for the second directive..
For both directives pass the same variable
And the magic will happen
I assume by saying communicating, you mean sharing data, state and events between two directives. I will list basic ways that I have in mind here:
The reason why you can pass data/state between two nested directives is because in AngularJS a child directive (nested one in your example) inherits the scope of it parents. As the results, two sibling directives can share same data from its parent controller.
<div ng-controller="ParentCtrl">
<ng-sibling></ng-sibling>
<ng-another-sibling></ng-another-sibling>
</div>
In the above piece of code, ng-sibling and ng-another-sibling will inherit the same data that is defined in their parent ParentCtrl
AngularJS support emitting/broadcasting event/data using $broadcast, $emit and $on function, document can be found here: https://docs.angularjs.org/api/ng/type/$rootScope.Scope.
$emit can be used to sent event upward the tree's hierarchy, while $broadcast's downward, and the direction is essential.
So one of your directive can dispatch the event, while the other listen to it. It's pretty similar to the way jQuery trigger events.
// In link function or controller of one directive
$scope.$broadcast("EVENT_A",my_data);
// Listen to EVENT_A on another directive
$scope.$on("EVENT_A",function($event,data){
....
})
While two-way binding or firing event arbitrarily can be useful at first, they can also lead to the situation when it's really difficult to keep track of the application's event and data flow. If you find this situation, maybe consider using Flux architecture with AngularJS not a bad idea. Redux fully supports AngularJS and all of your directives can be built as single-state components. The Github repo can be found here: https://github.com/angular-redux/ng-redux, and a simple tutorial on how to run AngularJS with Redux can be found here: http://blog.grossman.io/angular-1-using-redux-architecture/
I am looking for advice on how to implement a hierarchical structure in Angular, where a directive (<partition>) can call a method on a child directive's controller (<property-value>).
I have put together a detailed example here:
https://jsfiddle.net/95kjjxkh/1/
As you can see, my code contains an outer directive, <partition>, which displays one or more <property-value> directives within.
The <property-value> directive offers an editing method, editItem(), which allows the user to change the value of a single entry. (To keep my example short, I simply assign a random number here, but in my production app, a modal will appear, to query the user for a new value.)
This works fine. However, in the outer directive, <partition>, I would like to add the ability to create a new, blank <property-value> directive and then immediately call its editing method so that the user can enter an initial value. If no initial value is entered, the new item would be discarded.
I have seen examples of inner directives calling methods on enclosing directives, but not the other way around.
Is there a way to do this? Alternatively, is there a better way for me to build this kind of view?
You can always use $broadcast to talk both ways. To your parent as well as to your childrens.
In your Child controller you can do the following
app.directive('propertyValue', function() {
return {
require : '^partition'
restrict: 'E',
scope: {
item: '='
},
with this you will get the parent controller in child directive's link function like this
link:function(scope,element,attrs,partitionCtrl){
partitionCtrl.getChildCtrl(element)
}
in partition controller create getChildCtrl function and with that call "propertyvalue" controller function
controller: function ($scope, ItemFactory) {
// your code
var propValueCtrl =undefined;
this.getChildCtrl =function(elem)
{
propValueCtrl = elem.controller();
}
this.callChildFunction = function()
{
propValueCtrl.Edit();// whatever is the name of function
}
call this function when needed in property link function.
Hope this helps.
I have an Angular app where I'm using ui-grid. I want to have a custom action on a cell of the grid that calls a method from my app. So basically, this means calling a method that's somewhere up in the parent hierarchy, from a directive.
This would be achieved by calling something like: $scope.$parent.$parent.$parent.$parent.foo(). But that doesn't seem too nice.
One option would be to create a recursive function that goes up the ancestry of the $scope. That's nicer, but still seems a bit weird.
Also... Is it good practice to try to achieve something like this?
You're correct that $parent.$parent.$parent is definitely not a good practice.
If the method you're calling is another directive, you can require that directive in your child directive and then, the parentDirective's controller function will be injected as the fourth parameter to your link function:
In your DDO:
return {
require : '^parentDirective',
restrict : 'E',
link : function (scope, elem, attrs, parentDirectiveController) {}
}
If what you're trying to call is on a factory/service, you can inject that factory/service into your directive, although this sometimes is a code smell, depending on what you're trying to inject.
Finally, another way to do it is to use event propagation. From your directive, you can use $scope.$emit to send information up to parent controllers:
From the directive:
$scope.$emit('directiveDidStuff', {
data : 'blah'
});
In the parent controller:
$scope.$on('directiveDidStuff', function (evt, params) {
this.data = params.data; // equals blah
});
You can achieve the same by using "&" through one of the scope variable in directive.Like this, you can bind your event to the controller method and from the method, you could do your desired things or if the original business logic which you wants to achieve on onClick of the grid is used across many modules than you can bisect it in service and make it reusable and call the service from the event method. Let me know if you do have any doubts with the approach.
Key Code of example:
Html
<my-component attribute-foo="{{foo}}" binding-foo="foo" isolated-expression- foo="updateFoo(newFoo)" >
Directive
var myModule = angular.module('myModule', [])
.directive('myComponent', function () {
return {
restrict:'E',
scope:{
/* NOTE: Normally I would set my attributes and bindings
to be the same name but I wanted to delineate between
parent and isolated scope. */
isolatedAttributeFoo:'#attributeFoo',
isolatedBindingFoo:'=bindingFoo',
isolatedExpressionFoo:'&'
}
};
})
I'm a bit confused with the use of $scope in controllers and of scope in directives. Please verify if my understanding is correct (and also provide some alternative ways how to do this).
Let's say I have an html:
<div ng-controller="app1_Ctrl">
.
.
.
<input type="text" ng-model="value"/>
<input type="checkbox" />
<button ng-click="submit()"></button>
</div>
And my main.js
(function() {
angular.module('mainApp', ['app1']);
})();
And my app1 looks like this (based on official AngularJS documentation here)
(function() {
var app = angular.module('app1', []);
app.controller('app1_Ctrl', ["$scope", function($scope) {
.
.
.
}]);
app.directive('app1_Dir1', [function() {
function link(scope, element, attr) {
scope.$watch(attr.someAttrOfCheckBox, function() {
// some logic here
});
function submit() {
// some logic here
}
}
return link;
}]);
})();
How does $scope.value passed in scope in directive so that I can do some manipulations there? Will ng-click fire the function submit() in the directive link? Is it correct to use scope.$watch to listen for an action (ticked or unticked of course) in checkbox element?
Many thanks to those who can explain.
By default, directive scope is controller $scope; but it means the directive is directly dependent on your controller and you need a different controller for each instance of the directive you want to use. It is usually considered a best practice to isolate your directive scope and specifically define the variables you wish to pass it from your controller.
For this, you will need to add a scope statement to your directive :
scope {
label :'#',
context : '=',
function : '&'
}
and update your view :
<my-directive label="labelFromController" context="ctxtFromController" function="myFunction()" ></my-directive>
The symbols denote the kind of thing you wish to pass through : # is for one-way binding (as a string in your directive), = is for two-way binding of an object (which enables the directive to update something in your controller), and & is for passing a function.
There are a lot of additional options and subtleties that are best explained by the Angular doc https://docs.angularjs.org/guide/directive. There are also some nice tutorials out there (e.g. http://www.sitepoint.com/practical-guide-angularjs-directives/)
Your submit() function is not attached to anything, so you won't be able to call if from your viewer. You need to define it as scope.submit = function() ... in your link function if you wish to access it.
You can use $watch for this kind of thing, but there are usually other more elegant ways to achieve this by leveraging the fact that angular already "watches" the variables it is aware of and monitors any changes he can (this can be an issue when some external service changes data for exemple, because angular cannot listen to events it is not made aware of). Here, you can probably simply associate the ng-model directive to your input checkbox to store its true/fale (checked/unchecked) value, and the ng-change or ng-click directives to act on it. The optimal solution will mostly depend on the exact nature of your business logic.
Some additional thoughts :
The HTML insides of your directive should be packaged in an inline template field, or in a separate HTML file referenced by the templateUrl field in your directive.
In your HTML code above, your directive is not referenced anywhere. It should be an element, attribute or class (and your directive definition should reflect the way it can be called, with the restrict field). Maybe you have omitted the line containing the directive HTML, but as it stands, your directive doesn't do anything.
To my knowledge, you don't need to return link. Think of it as the "body" of your directive, where you define the variables and functions you will call in the HTML.
Your directive doesn't actually need HTML code and the above thoughts might be irrelevant if you are going in a different direction, but encapsulating some kind of view behaviour that you want to reuse is probably the most common use of directives.
I need to perform some operations on scope and the template. It seems that I can do that in either the link function or the controller function (since both have access to the scope).
When is it the case when I have to use link function and not the controller?
angular.module('myApp').directive('abc', function($timeout) {
return {
restrict: 'EA',
replace: true,
transclude: true,
scope: true,
link: function(scope, elem, attr) { /* link function */ },
controller: function($scope, $element) { /* controller function */ }
};
}
Also, I understand that link is the non-angular world. So, I can use $watch, $digest and $apply.
What is the significance of the link function, when we already had controller?
After my initial struggle with the link and controller functions and reading quite a lot about them, I think now I have the answer.
First lets understand,
How do angular directives work in a nutshell:
We begin with a template (as a string or loaded to a string)
var templateString = '<div my-directive>{{5 + 10}}</div>';
Now, this templateString is wrapped as an angular element
var el = angular.element(templateString);
With el, now we compile it with $compile to get back the link function.
var l = $compile(el)
Here is what happens,
$compile walks through the whole template and collects all the directives that it recognizes.
All the directives that are discovered are compiled recursively and their link functions are collected.
Then, all the link functions are wrapped in a new link function and returned as l.
Finally, we provide scope function to this l (link) function which further executes the wrapped link functions with this scope and their corresponding elements.
l(scope)
This adds the template as a new node to the DOM and invokes controller which adds its watches to the scope which is shared with the template in DOM.
Comparing compile vs link vs controller :
Every directive is compiled only once and link function is retained for re-use. Therefore, if there's something applicable to all instances of a directive should be performed inside directive's compile function.
Now, after compilation we have link function which is executed while attaching the template to the DOM. So, therefore we perform everything that is specific to every instance of the directive. For eg: attaching events, mutating the template based on scope, etc.
Finally, the controller is meant to be available to be live and reactive while the directive works on the DOM (after getting attached). Therefore:
(1) After setting up the view[V] (i.e. template) with link. $scope is our [M] and $controller is our [C] in M V C
(2) Take advantage the 2-way binding with $scope by setting up watches.
(3) $scope watches are expected to be added in the controller since this is what is watching the template during run-time.
(4) Finally, controller is also used to be able to communicate among related directives. (Like myTabs example in https://docs.angularjs.org/guide/directive)
(5) It's true that we could've done all this in the link function as well but its about separation of concerns.
Therefore, finally we have the following which fits all the pieces perfectly :
Why controllers are needed
The difference between link and controller comes into play when you want to nest directives in your DOM and expose API functions from the parent directive to the nested ones.
From the docs:
Best Practice: use controller when you want to expose an API to other directives. Otherwise use link.
Say you want to have two directives my-form and my-text-input and you want my-text-input directive to appear only inside my-form and nowhere else.
In that case, you will say while defining the directive my-text-input that it requires a controller from the parent DOM element using the require argument, like this: require: '^myForm'. Now the controller from the parent element will be injected into the link function as the fourth argument, following $scope, element, attributes. You can call functions on that controller and communicate with the parent directive.
Moreover, if such a controller is not found, an error will be raised.
Why use link at all
There is no real need to use the link function if one is defining the controller since the $scope is available on the controller. Moreover, while defining both link and controller, one does need to be careful about the order of invocation of the two (controller is executed before).
However, in keeping with the Angular way, most DOM manipulation and 2-way binding using $watchers is usually done in the link function while the API for children and $scope manipulation is done in the controller. This is not a hard and fast rule, but doing so will make the code more modular and help in separation of concerns (controller will maintain the directive state and link function will maintain the DOM + outside bindings).
The controller function/object represents an abstraction model-view-controller (MVC). While there is nothing new to write about MVC, it is still the most significant advanatage of angular: split the concerns into smaller pieces. And that's it, nothing more, so if you need to react on Model changes coming from View the Controller is the right person to do that job.
The story about link function is different, it is coming from different perspective then MVC. And is really essential, once we want to cross the boundaries of a controller/model/view (template).
Let' start with the parameters which are passed into the link function:
function link(scope, element, attrs) {
scope is an Angular scope object.
element is the jqLite-wrapped element that this directive matches.
attrs is an object with the normalized attribute names and their corresponding values.
To put the link into the context, we should mention that all directives are going through this initialization process steps: Compile, Link. An Extract from Brad Green and Shyam Seshadri book Angular JS:
Compile phase (a sister of link, let's mention it here to get a clear picture):
In this phase, Angular walks the DOM to identify all the registered
directives in the template. For each directive, it then transforms the
DOM based on the directive’s rules (template, replace, transclude, and
so on), and calls the compile function if it exists. The result is a
compiled template function,
Link phase:
To make the view dynamic, Angular then runs a link function for each
directive. The link functions typically creates listeners on the DOM
or the model. These listeners keep the view and the model in sync at
all times.
A nice example how to use the link could be found here: Creating Custom Directives. See the example: Creating a Directive that Manipulates the DOM, which inserts a "date-time" into page, refreshed every second.
Just a very short snippet from that rich source above, showing the real manipulation with DOM. There is hooked function to $timeout service, and also it is cleared in its destructor call to avoid memory leaks
.directive('myCurrentTime', function($timeout, dateFilter) {
function link(scope, element, attrs) {
...
// the not MVC job must be done
function updateTime() {
element.text(dateFilter(new Date(), format)); // here we are manipulating the DOM
}
function scheduleUpdate() {
// save the timeoutId for canceling
timeoutId = $timeout(function() {
updateTime(); // update DOM
scheduleUpdate(); // schedule the next update
}, 1000);
}
element.on('$destroy', function() {
$timeout.cancel(timeoutId);
});
...