Thanks for your help in first.
For a project, I need to create a dynamic table with JavaScript on a FormView but I'm stuck ... I don't know how I can access to the view and update the table, files are correctly read by Odoo (Js, CSS). I tried a lot of things like use console.log for look in the object but nothing seem good to me :( .
For now i have this code :
odoo.define('ms_contract.view_form_intervention', function (require){
"use strict";
var form_widget = require('web.form_widgets');
var core = require('web.core');
var _t = core._t;
var QWeb = core.qweb;
var Widget = require('web.Widget');
var View = require('web.View');
console.log(Widget);
console.log(form_widget);
console.log(core);
console.log(_t);
console.log(QWeb);
console.log(View);
});
You can define odoo widget to call any javascript code. Explore more about it. If you try to be more specific about your need then. May be I can help in a better way.
Based on instruction from this question, I have added the following code to my application within the config stage:
$provide.decorator('formDirective', function($delegate) {
var directive = $delegate[0];
directive.controller.prototype.inputs = {};
console.log(directive.controller);
return $delegate;
});
All I want to do is create another field and a few methods to the existing angular form object. All of that appears to be defined within the formDirective controller but when I prototype new fields and methods into that controller they are not available after my application is completed bootstrapping. Is there something I'm missing, is this even possible without modifying the source?
Thanks in advance!
EDIT Code Pen of Design Patterns Here
http://codepen.io/anon/pen/EadRBo
Thanks for your help. I did get this working and if your curious, this is why it was so important:
$provide.decorator('formDirective', function($delegate) {
var directive = $delegate[0];
directive.controller.prototype.$validate = function () {
var form = this;
var p;
for(p in form) {
if(form.hasOwnProperty(p) && p.indexOf('$') < 0) {
form[p].$setTouched();
}
}
};
A simple way to mark every element as touched causing the fields to be invalidated and error logic to kick in. I wanted this when a form was attempted to be submitted so that the user could see all the fields that were required. This also helps to keep my controllers slim without the extra overhead of an additional service.
I have a complex jQuery plugin to write, It does have a lot of html to show on screen and I am supposed to create them. Well, what is the best way to do the job. I can already hard code them for sure , but is there any other elegant method? is there a way to use some kind of templating?. definitely I don't want to have lot more dependency either.
You can put them in an external file(s) and load them when you need but this means plugin users will have to download all your files, instead of a single js file. Another option I used before (not for a plugin though) is to have an object inside your plugin which holds all the html you want. This makes it easier to write the plugin as the html doesn't clutter the plugin code. Also when you need to edit the html, it's in a single place. You can also put your templating code inside this object.
var pi = function() {
var self = this;
self.getNewDiv = function(){
return repo.getDiv();
}
//..... all your plug in code goes here and at the bottom
var htmlRepository = function() {
var divCode = "<div></div>";
this.getDiv = function(){
return divCode;
};
this.getSpan = function(){
return "Span Content";
}
this.getDivWithSpan = function(){
return getSpan().wrap(divCode); //etc
}
};
var repo = new htmlRepository();
}
So basically, I'm trying to introduce modifications in OpenERP's POS inteface from version 6.1. I see that the layout of this view can be found at /static/src/xml/pos.xml. What I want is to modify this view from my own addon (thus, not altering the original pos addon) and as far as I know, there is no way of inheriting this view to add changes (or is there?). So after studying the module, I'm trying to override its js function to slip in my own pos.xml with all my modifications (a copy of the original pos.xml, but with name 'PointOfSale_Mine' and other modifications). So far, I have added my own .js as follows:
openerp.my_pos = function(db) {
db.point_of_sale.PointOfSale = db.point_of_sale.PointOfSale.extend({
render: function() {
this._super.apply(this,arguments);
return qweb_template("PointOfSale_Mine")();
//return this._super.qweb_template("PointOfSale_Mine")();
//return db.point_of_sale.qweb_template("PointOfSale_Mine")();
}
})
};
And of course, I'm getting the error "qweb_template is not defined" as my JS skills and my knowledge regarding OpenERP6.1's new web framework is quite limited. I would really like to know how can I call the same method that the original 'render' function calls (You can see my useless attempts commented in the code above). Or is my whole approach wrong and there is a better way of introducing my changes to the template?
Thanks in advance. Any help will be appreciated.
Ok. After some trial and errors I came up with this code to do the trick:
openerp.my_pos = function(db) {
db.point_of_sale.PointOfSale = db.point_of_sale.PointOfSale.extend({
render: function() {
var rend = this._super();
var jdoc = $(rend);
jdoc.find('.pos-payment-container').prepend('<input type="text" value=""/>')
return jdoc[0].outerHTML;
}
})
};
It does not replace the entire pos.xml template as I was initially attempting, but it is probably better as you inherit the current template and introduce your modifications only (even if you have to .prepend() a big chunk of html code)
tl;dr: How does one implement MVC in JavaScript in a clean way?
I'm trying to implement MVC in JavaScript. I have googled and reorganized with my code countless times but have not found a suitable solution. (The code just doesn't "feel right".)
Here's how I'm going about it right now. It's incredibly complicated and is a pain to work with (but still better than the pile of code I had before). It has ugly workarounds that sort of defeat the purpose of MVC.
And behold, the mess, if you're really brave:
// Create a "main model"
var main = Model0();
function Model0() {
// Create an associated view and store its methods in "view"
var view = View0();
// Create a submodel and pass it a function
// that will "subviewify" the submodel's view
var model1 = Model1(function (subview) {
view.subviewify(subview);
});
// Return model methods that can be used by
// the controller (the onchange handlers)
return {
'updateModel1': function (newValue) {
model1.update(newValue);
}
};
}
function Model1(makeSubView) {
var info = '';
// Make an associated view and attach the view
// to the parent view using the passed function
var view = View1();
makeSubView(view.__view); // Dirty dirty
// Return model methods that can be used by
// the parent model (and so the controller)
return {
'update': function (newValue) {
info = newValue;
// Notify the view of the new information
view.events.value(info);
}
};
}
function View0() {
var thing = document.getElementById('theDiv');
var input = document.getElementById('theInput');
// This is the "controller", bear with me
input.onchange = function () {
// Ugly, uses a global to contact the model
main.updateModel1(this.value);
};
return {
'events': {},
// Adds a subview to this view.
'subviewify': function (subview) {
thing.appendChild(subview);
}
};
}
// This is a subview.
function View1() {
var element = document.createElement('div');
return {
'events': {
// When the value changes this is
// called so the view can be updated
'value': function (newValue) {
element.innerHTML = newValue;
}
},
// ..Expose the DOM representation of the subview
// so it can be attached to a parent view
'__view': element
};
}
How does one implement MVC in JavaScript in a cleaner way? How can I improve this system? Or is this the completely wrong way to go, should I follow another pattern?
There are at least a couple of established and usable MVC frameworks for JavaScript JavaScriptMVC and pureMVC. There are probably more. I've used JavaScriptMVC for browser based and Air apps and keep coming back to it - it has its problems but I've found it to be quite useful.
There are other solutions too, have a look at Sammy, a new thing I've heard good things about. I haven't used myself but intend to try soon. I don't know enough about it to describe it properly, but to me it seems like a front controller which works on routes, a templating system and ReSTful data stores. I'm not sure if it is MVC but has similar ingredients.
I have to disagree with mway's answer. MVC may be a bit diferent to implement in JavaScript but its benefits are very important to organising this mess. The design patterns usually associated with OO languages don't go out the window just because js isn't class based.
I would say that MVC is more suitable for JavaScript apps than for request based (server side) applications. Those objects can hang around for a while in a one page JavaScript app - minutes if not hours - and having a well organised way of organising their interaction will make your code much more robust and easy to deal with. There are books on the subject.
A couple of other points regarding the code you posted.
The view objects have responsibility for applying event listeners to DOM elements. This is the controller's job. The view just renders the HTML - the controller listens for the events and acts accordingly.
Your models seem to know your views. The model layer should have minimal knowledge of the view layer (perhaps being registered as observers). Keep your model clean and to the point, I mean the business point - business logic. In js apps you may just be proxying for a sever side model layer but it is important for your sanity to keep your model to the business logic and nothing else. Application logic is the controllers job
To be honest, MVC isn't well-suited for Javascript. It can support the basic fundamentals of the design, sure - you can create pseudoclasses to act as controllers or models, support basic inheritance, and you can have it manipulate or create any number of DOM elements, but there's a price that you pay for that - in overhead, accessibility, and usability.
In my opinion, I consider Javascript more of an augmentation - the KISS mentality exists for a good reason. If you're interested in better ways to organize your code, there's always the option of packaging related functionality into modules (sic) and abstracting out portions as appropriate. For example, creating a factory to do more complex AJAX request management, or a pseudoclass to handle processing of similar types of data. Using a standard base function for controllers, another for models, etc, as prototypes for new instances of those objects can accomplish similar functionality... but again, it's sort of going against the grain of Javascript.
However, if you're stuck on the MVC idea just for the sake of structure, consider something like the following:
;(function(window, $) {
/**
* Event Object
* A quick description goes here.
**/
var Events = window.Events = {
'bindTrackables': function() {
$('a.trackable').live('click', function() {
if(!_gaq)
_gaq = [];
_gaq.push(['_trackPageview', '/ajax/foobar']);
});
},
'bindSomeEvent': function() {
// etc
}
};
/**
* Data Cache
* I'll need to remember stuff later, so I store it here
**/
var Cache = window.Cache = {
'data': {},
'store': function(key, value) {
Cache.data[key] = value;
},
'fetch': function(key) {
return Cache.data[key];
}
};
/**
* Request Object
* Stores native AJAX requests for later use
**/
var Request = window.Request = {
'current_requests': [],
'send': function(url, type, data, callback) {
Request.current_requests.push($.ajax({
'url': url,
'type': type,
'data': data,
'callback': callback
}));
},
}
// add some private logic here
})(window, jQuery);
It's extremely basic, but you get the idea. Modular code is key... in JS, this is more important than forcing your application (or the language) to fit a certain style.