One Backbone model for several views, who handles the fetch()?

One Backbone model for several views, who handles the fetch()? - javascript

Having a Backbone model shared between several views is a rather common situation. Nevertheless, let's say this model is a UserModel. It handles several methods, allowing a user to register or login for instance.
And when the user is logged, fetch is called to get the user's data. Therefor the model can't fetch itself with this.fetch() in its initialize method.
Where shoud it be fetched from? How?
This is our simple UserModel:
const UserModel = Backbone.Model.extend({
// get url for 'me' (ie connected user)
url() {
return app.endpoint + '/users/me/' + app.conToken;
},
login(email, password, rememberMe, callback) {
…
},
signup(email, password, firstname, lastname, callback) {
…
}
});
Now let's say it's shared by both:
HomeView & CartView
app.HomeView = Backbone.View.extend({
template: app.tpl.home,
initialize() {
// model is passed # instanciation
this.model.fetch();
this.listenTo(this.model, 'sync', this.render);
},
render() {
…
}
});
app.CartView = Backbone.View.extend({
template: app.tpl.cart,
initialize() {
// model is passed # instanciation
this.model.fetch();
this.listenTo(this.model, 'sync', this.render);
},
render() {
…
}
});
Now if I instanciate HomeView, userModel will be fetched. But if at a later point, I instanciate CartView, this same model will be fetched again. And that makes a useless http request.
Basically, the model could fetch istself after a succesfull call to its login method, but user can arrive on a page or reload his browser being already logged in. Furthermore, a user can land on any page, there's no way to say he's going to HomeView prior to CartView.
There are two options I see. Either UserModel smartly handles multiple fetch calls like so:
const UserModel = Backbone.Model.extend({
// get url for 'me' (ie connected user)
url() {
return app.endpoint + '/users/me/' + app.conToken;
},
isSync() {
// an hour ago
let hourAgo = Date.now() - 3600000;
// data has been fetched less than an hour ago
if (this.fetchTime && hourAgo > this.fetchTime) return true;
return false;
},
fetch() {
// has not already fetched data or data is older than an hour
if (!this.isSync()) {
this.fetchTime = Date.now();
this.fetch();
return;
}
// trigger sync without issuing any http call
this.trigger('sync');
},
…
});
That way, I'm able to call this.model.fetch() as many times as needed, being stateless in views.
Or, I can handle that on a view layer:
app.HomeView = Backbone.View.extend({
template: app.tpl.home,
initialize() {
// model is passed # instanciation
// fetch model if empty
if (_.isEmpty(this.model.changed)) this.fetch();
// render directly if already populated
else this.render();
// render on model sync
this.listenTo(this.model, 'sync', this.render);
},
render() {
…
}
});
If needed, Backbone's model.changed doc reference & Underscore's _.isEmpty's.
Which way is cleaner? Is there any other approach I might have missed?

Personal preference would not be to override fetch but to instead implement a wrapper function, like customFetch
const UserModel = Backbone.Model.extend({
// get url for 'me' (ie connected user)
url() {
return app.endpoint + '/users/me/' + app.conToken;
},
isSync() {
// an hour ago
let hourAgo = Date.now() - 3600000;
// data has been fetched less than an hour ago
if (this.fetchTime && hourAgo > this.fetchTime) return true;
return false;
},
customFetch() {
// has not already fetched data or data is older than an hour
if (!this.isSync()) {
this.fetchTime = Date.now();
this.fetch();
return;
}
// trigger sync without issuing any http call
this.trigger('sync');
},
…
});
The code example you provided would end up in a loop (this.fetch calling itself...), so my personal preference is to just wrap the core backbone functionality in another function.
I would even go so far as to have my own custom Model that is extended by all the models I use. Eg:
const MyModel = Backbone.Model.extend({
isSync() {
// an hour ago
let hourAgo = Date.now() - 3600000;
// data has been fetched less than an hour ago
return (this.fetchTime && hourAgo > this.fetchTime);
},
customFetch() {
this.fetch();
},
});
Then UserModel would override customFetch and look like this:
const UserModel = MyModel.extend({
customFetch() {
// has not already fetched data or data is older than an hour
if (!this.isSync()) {
this.fetchTime = Date.now();
this.fetch();
return;
}
// trigger sync without issuing any http call
this.trigger('sync');
},
});
Might not be the best way to do it. For me personally it would be the easy way for it to read and then extend later. I would imagine this customFetch would be used in some/all models so it could be amended as appropriate.

Related

React/Flux and xhr/routing/caching

This is more of a "whats your opinion/Am I correct in thinking this?" question.
Trying to be as strict as possible while understanding Flux, I was trying to figure out where XHR calls are made, websockets/external stimuli handled, routing takes places, etc.
From what I read across articles, interviews and looking through facebook examples there are a few ways of handling these things. Following flux strictly, Action creators are the ones that do all the XHR calls with the possibility of a PENDING/SUCCESS/FAILURE Actions being fired before and after the request completes.
Another was, coming from facebook's Ian Obermiller, all the READ(GETs) requests are handled directly by the Stores(without involvement of an Action creator/dispatcher) and WRITE(POSTs) requests are handled by the Action Creators going through the entire action>dispatcher>store flow.
Some understandings/conclusions we drew/would like to stick to:
Ideally, anything going in/out of the system happens only through Actions.
Async calls leaving/entering the system will have PENDING/PROGRESS(think file uploads)/SUCCESS/FAILURE Actions.
Single dispatcher across the entire App.
Action>Dispatcher>Store calls are strictly synchronous to stick to the dispatches not being able to start another dispatch internally to avoid chaining events/actions.
Stores are persisted across Views(considering its a single page app, you want to be able to reuse data)
A few questions that we came to some conclusion with, but I'm not entirely satisfied with:
If you take the approach where Stores do Reads, and Actions to Writes, how do you handle situations where multiple Stores might be able to use data from a single XHR call?
Example: API calls issued by TeamStore to /api/teams/{id} which returns something like:
{
entities: {
teams: [{
name: ...,
description: ...,
members: [1, 2, 4],
version: ...
}],
users: [{
id: 1
name: ...,
role: ...,
version: ...
},
{
id: 2
name: ...,
role: ...,
version: ...
},
{
id: 3
name: ...,
role: ...,
version: ...
}]
}
}
Ideally, I'd also like to update the MemberStore with the information returned in this API. We maintain a version number for every entity which is updated on updates to the record, which is what we use internally do reject calls on stale data, etc. Using this, I could have an internal logic, where if I as a side effect of some other API call, I know my data is stale, I trigger a refresh on that record.
The solution, it would seem, is that you'd need the store to trigger an action(which would effectively update the other dependent stores). This short circuits the Store>View>Action to Store>Action and I'm not sure if its a good idea. We already have one thing out of sync with Stores doing their own XHR calls. Concessions like these would start creeping into the entire system eventually.
Or Stores that are aware of other stores and be able to communicate with them. But this breaks the Stores have no Setters rule.
A simple solution to the above problem would be that you stick to Actions being the ONLY place external incoming/outgoing stimulus happens. This simplifies the logic of multiple Stores getting updated.
But now, where and how do you handle caching? We came to the conclusion that the caching would happen at the API Utils/DAO level. (if you look at the flux diagram).
But this introduces other problems. To better understand/explain what I mean by example:
/api/teams returns a list of all the teams with which I display a list of all the teams.
On clicking on a team's link, I go its details view which requires data from /api/teams/{id} if it isn't already present in the Store.
If Actions handle all the XHRs, the View would do something like TeamActions.get([id]) which does TeamDAO.get([id]). To be able to return this call immediately(since we have it cached) the DAO would have to do caching but also maintain the relation between collections/items. This logic, by design, is already present in Stores.
Here come the questions:
Do you duplicate this logic in DAOs and Stores?
Do you make DAO's aware of Stores and they can ask the Store if they already have some data and just return a 302 saying, you're good you have the latest data.
How do you handle validation that involves XHR APIs? Something simple like duplicate Team names.
Views directly hit DAOs and do something like TeamDAO.validateName([name]) which returns a promise or do you do you create an Action? If you create an Action through which Store does Valid/Invalid flow back to the View considering its mostly transient data?
How do you handle Routing? I looked through react-router and I'm not sure I like it. I don't necessarily think forcing a react-ish JSX way of providing route mappings/configs are needed at all. Also, apparently, it employs a RouteDispatcher of its own, which ondoes the single dispatcher rule.
The solution I prefer came from some blog posts/SO answers where you have a the route mappings are stored in the RouteStore.
RouteStore also maintains CURRENT_VIEW. The react AppContainer component is registered with RouteStore and replaces its child views with the CURRENT_VIEW on change. Current Views inform the AppContainer when they're fully loaded and AppContainer fires RouteActions.pending/success/failure, possibly with some context, to inform other components of reaching a stable state, show/hide busy/loading indications.
Something that I have not been able to design cleanly was if you were to design routing similar to Gmail, how would you do it? Some observations of Gmail that I'm a big fan of:
URLs don't change until the page is ready to load. It stays on the current URL while its 'Loading' and moves to the new one once the loading has finished. This makes it so that...
On failure, you don't lose you current page at all. So if you're on compose, and the 'Send' fails, you don't lose your mail (i.e. you don't lose your current stable view/state). (they don't do this because auto saving is le pwn, but you get the idea) You have the option of copy/pasting the mail somewhere for safe keeping till you can send again.
Some references:
https://github.com/gaearon/flux-react-router-example
http://ianobermiller.com/blog/2014/09/15/react-and-flux-interview/
https://github.com/facebook/flux

It's my implementation using facebook Flux and Immutable.js that I think responds to many of your concerns, based on few rules of thumb :
STORES
Stores are responsible for maintaining data state through Immutable.Record and maintaining cache through a global Immutable.OrderedMap referencing Record instance via ids.
Stores directly call WebAPIUtils for read operations and trigger actions for write operations.
Relationship between RecordA and FooRecordB are resolved from a RecordA instance through a foo_id params and retrieved via a call such as FooStore.get(this.foo_id)
Stores only expose getters methods such as get(id), getAll(), etc.
APIUTILS
I use SuperAgent for ajax calls. Each request is wrapped in Promise
I use a map of read request Promise indexed by the hash of url + params
I trigger action through ActionCreators such as fooReceived or fooError when Promise is resolved or rejected.
fooError action should certainly contains payloads with validation errors returned by the server.
COMPONENTS
The controller-view component listen for changes in store(s).
All my components, other than controller-view component, are 'pure', so I use ImmutableRenderMixin to only re-render what it's really needed (meaning that if you print Perf.printWasted time, it should be very low, few ms.
Since Relay and GraphQL are not yet open sourced, I enforce to keep my component props as explicit as possible via propsType.
Parent component should only passes down the necessary props. If my parent component holds an object such as var fooRecord = { foo:1, bar: 2, baz: 3}; (I'm not using Immutable.Record here for the sake of simplicity of this example) and my child component need to display fooRecord.foo and fooRecord.bar, I do not pass the entire foo object but only fooRecordFoo and fooRecordBar as props to my child component because an other component could edit the foo.baz value, making the child component re-render while this component doesn't need at all this value !
ROUTING
- I simply use ReactRouter
IMPLEMENTATION
Here is a basic example :
api
apiUtils/Request.js
var request = require('superagent');
//based on http://stackoverflow.com/a/7616484/1836434
var hashUrl = function(url, params) {
var string = url + JSON.stringify(params);
var hash = 0, i, chr, len;
if (string.length == 0) return hash;
for (i = 0, len = string.length; i < len; i++) {
chr = string.charCodeAt(i);
hash = ((hash << 5) - hash) + chr;
hash |= 0; // Convert to 32bit integer
}
return hash;
}
var _promises = {};
module.exports = {
get: function(url, params) {
var params = params || {};
var hash = hashUrl(url, params);
var promise = _promises[hash];
if (promise == undefined) {
promise = new Promise(function(resolve, reject) {
request.get(url).query(params).end( function(err, res) {
if (err) {
reject(err);
} else {
resolve(res);
}
});
});
_promises[hash] = promise;
}
return promise;
},
post: function(url, data) {
return new Promise(function(resolve, reject) {
var req = request
.post(url)
.send(data)
.end( function(err, res) {
if (err) {
reject(err);
} else {
resolve(res);
}
});
});
}
};
apiUtils/FooAPI.js
var Request = require('./Request');
var FooActionCreators = require('../actions/FooActionCreators');
var _endpoint = 'http://localhost:8888/api/foos/';
module.exports = {
getAll: function() {
FooActionCreators.receiveAllPending();
Request.get(_endpoint).then( function(res) {
FooActionCreators.receiveAllSuccess(res.body);
}).catch( function(err) {
FooActionCreators.receiveAllError(err);
});
},
get: function(id) {
FooActionCreators.receivePending();
Request.get(_endpoint + id+'/').then( function(res) {
FooActionCreators.receiveSuccess(res.body);
}).catch( function(err) {
FooActionCreators.receiveError(err);
});
},
post: function(fooData) {
FooActionCreators.savePending();
Request.post(_endpoint, fooData).then (function(res) {
if (res.badRequest) { //i.e response return code 400 due to validation errors for example
FooActionCreators.saveInvalidated(res.body);
}
FooActionCreators.saved(res.body);
}).catch( function(err) { //server errors
FooActionCreators.savedError(err);
});
}
//others foos relative endpoints helper methods...
};
stores
stores/BarStore.js
var assign = require('object-assign');
var EventEmitter = require('events').EventEmitter;
var Immutable = require('immutable');
var AppDispatcher = require('../dispatcher/AppDispatcher');
var ActionTypes = require('../constants/BarConstants').ActionTypes;
var BarAPI = require('../APIUtils/BarAPI')
var CHANGE_EVENT = 'change';
var _bars = Immutable.OrderedMap();
class Bar extends Immutable.Record({
'id': undefined,
'name': undefined,
'description': undefined,
}) {
isReady() {
return this.id != undefined //usefull to know if we can display a spinner when the Bar is loading or the Bar's data if it is ready.
}
getBar() {
return BarStore.get(this.bar_id);
}
}
function _rehydrate(barId, field, value) {
//Since _bars is an Immutable, we need to return the new Immutable map. Immutable.js is smart, if we update with the save values, the same reference is returned.
_bars = _bars.updateIn([barId, field], function() {
return value;
});
}
var BarStore = assign({}, EventEmitter.prototype, {
get: function(id) {
if (!_bars.has(id)) {
BarAPI.get(id);
return new Bar(); //we return an empty Bar record for consistency
}
return _bars.get(id)
},
getAll: function() {
return _bars.toList() //we want to get rid of keys and just keep the values
},
Bar: Bar,
emitChange: function() {
this.emit(CHANGE_EVENT);
},
addChangeListener: function(callback) {
this.on(CHANGE_EVENT, callback);
},
removeChangeListener: function(callback) {
this.removeListener(CHANGE_EVENT, callback);
},
});
var _setBar = function(barData) {
_bars = _bars.set(barData.id, new Bar(barData));
};
var _setBars = function(barList) {
barList.forEach(function (barData) {
_setbar(barData);
});
};
BarStore.dispatchToken = AppDispatcher.register(function(action) {
switch (action.type)
{
case ActionTypes.BAR_LIST_RECEIVED_SUCESS:
_setBars(action.barList);
BarStore.emitChange();
break;
case ActionTypes.BAR_RECEIVED_SUCCESS:
_setBar(action.bar);
BarStore.emitChange();
break;
case ActionTypes.BAR_REHYDRATED:
_rehydrate(
action.barId,
action.field,
action.value
);
BarStore.emitChange();
break;
}
});
module.exports = BarStore;
stores/FooStore.js
var assign = require('object-assign');
var EventEmitter = require('events').EventEmitter;
var Immutable = require('immutable');
var AppDispatcher = require('../dispatcher/AppDispatcher');
var ActionTypes = require('../constants/FooConstants').ActionTypes;
var BarStore = require('./BarStore');
var FooAPI = require('../APIUtils/FooAPI')
var CHANGE_EVENT = 'change';
var _foos = Immutable.OrderedMap();
class Foo extends Immutable.Record({
'id': undefined,
'bar_id': undefined, //relation to Bar record
'baz': undefined,
}) {
isReady() {
return this.id != undefined;
}
getBar() {
// The whole point to store an id reference to Bar
// is to delegate the Bar retrieval to the BarStore,
// if the BarStore does not have this Bar object in
// its cache, the BarStore will trigger a GET request
return BarStore.get(this.bar_id);
}
}
function _rehydrate(fooId, field, value) {
_foos = _foos.updateIn([voucherId, field], function() {
return value;
});
}
var _setFoo = function(fooData) {
_foos = _foos.set(fooData.id, new Foo(fooData));
};
var _setFoos = function(fooList) {
fooList.forEach(function (foo) {
_setFoo(foo);
});
};
var FooStore = assign({}, EventEmitter.prototype, {
get: function(id) {
if (!_foos.has(id)) {
FooAPI.get(id);
return new Foo();
}
return _foos.get(id)
},
getAll: function() {
if (_foos.size == 0) {
FooAPI.getAll();
}
return _foos.toList()
},
Foo: Foo,
emitChange: function() {
this.emit(CHANGE_EVENT);
},
addChangeListener: function(callback) {
this.on(CHANGE_EVENT, callback);
},
removeChangeListener: function(callback) {
this.removeListener(CHANGE_EVENT, callback);
},
});
FooStore.dispatchToken = AppDispatcher.register(function(action) {
switch (action.type)
{
case ActionTypes.FOO_LIST_RECEIVED_SUCCESS:
_setFoos(action.fooList);
FooStore.emitChange();
break;
case ActionTypes.FOO_RECEIVED_SUCCESS:
_setFoo(action.foo);
FooStore.emitChange();
break;
case ActionTypes.FOO_REHYDRATED:
_rehydrate(
action.fooId,
action.field,
action.value
);
FooStore.emitChange();
break;
}
});
module.exports = FooStore;
components
components/BarList.react.js (controller-view component)
var React = require('react/addons');
var Immutable = require('immutable');
var BarListItem = require('./BarListItem.react');
var BarStore = require('../stores/BarStore');
function getStateFromStore() {
return {
barList: BarStore.getAll(),
};
}
module.exports = React.createClass({
getInitialState: function() {
return getStateFromStore();
},
componentDidMount: function() {
BarStore.addChangeListener(this._onChange);
},
componentWillUnmount: function() {
BarStore.removeChangeListener(this._onChange);
},
render: function() {
var barItems = this.state.barList.toJS().map(function (bar) {
// We could pass the entire Bar object here
// but I tend to keep the component not tightly coupled
// with store data, the BarItem can be seen as a standalone
// component that only need specific data
return <BarItem
key={bar.get('id')}
id={bar.get('id')}
name={bar.get('name')}
description={bar.get('description')}/>
});
if (barItems.length == 0) {
return (
<p>Loading...</p>
)
}
return (
<div>
{barItems}
</div>
)
},
_onChange: function() {
this.setState(getStateFromStore();
}
});
components/BarListItem.react.js
var React = require('react/addons');
var ImmutableRenderMixin = require('react-immutable-render-mixin')
var Immutable = require('immutable');
module.exports = React.createClass({
mixins: [ImmutableRenderMixin],
// I use propTypes to explicitly telling
// what data this component need. This
// component is a standalone component
// and we could have passed an entire
// object such as {id: ..., name, ..., description, ...}
// since we use all the datas (and when we use all the data it's
// a better approach since we don't want to write dozens of propTypes)
// but let's do that for the example's sake
propTypes: {
id: React.PropTypes.number.isRequired,
name: React.PropTypes.string.isRequired,
description: React.PropTypes.string.isRequired
}
render: function() {
return (
<li>
<p>{this.props.id}</p>
<p>{this.props.name}</p>
<p>{this.props.description}</p>
</li>
)
}
});
components/BarDetail.react.js
var React = require('react/addons');
var ImmutableRenderMixin = require('react-immutable-render-mixin')
var Immutable = require('immutable');
var BarActionCreators = require('../actions/BarActionCreators');
module.exports = React.createClass({
mixins: [ImmutableRenderMixin],
propTypes: {
id: React.PropTypes.number.isRequired,
name: React.PropTypes.string.isRequired,
description: React.PropTypes.string.isRequired
},
handleSubmit: function(event) {
//Since we keep the Bar data up to date with user input
//we can simply save the actual object in Store.
//If the user goes back without saving, we could display a
//"Warning : item not saved"
BarActionCreators.save(this.props.id);
},
handleChange: function(event) {
BarActionCreators.rehydrate(
this.props.id,
event.target.name, //the field we want to rehydrate
event.target.value //the updated value
);
},
render: function() {
return (
<form onSubmit={this.handleSumit}>
<input
type="text"
name="name"
value={this.props.name}
onChange={this.handleChange}/>
<textarea
name="description"
value={this.props.description}
onChange={this.handleChange}/>
<input
type="submit"
defaultValue="Submit"/>
</form>
)
},
});
components/FooList.react.js (controller-view component)
var React = require('react/addons');
var FooStore = require('../stores/FooStore');
var BarStore = require('../stores/BarStore');
function getStateFromStore() {
return {
fooList: FooStore.getAll(),
};
}
module.exports = React.createClass({
getInitialState: function() {
return getStateFromStore();
},
componentDidMount: function() {
FooStore.addChangeListener(this._onChange);
BarStore.addChangeListener(this._onChange);
},
componentWillUnmount: function() {
FooStore.removeChangeListener(this._onChange);
BarStore.removeChangeListener(this._onChange);
},
render: function() {
if (this.state.fooList.size == 0) {
return <p>Loading...</p>
}
return this.state.fooList.toJS().map(function (foo) {
<FooListItem
fooId={foo.get('id')}
fooBar={foo.getBar()}
fooBaz={foo.get('baz')}/>
});
},
_onChange: function() {
this.setState(getStateFromStore();
}
});
components/FooListItem.react.js
var React = require('react/addons');
var ImmutableRenderMixin = require('react-immutable-render-mixin')
var Bar = require('../stores/BarStore').Bar;
module.exports = React.createClass({
mixins: [ImmutableRenderMixin],
propTypes: {
fooId: React.PropTypes.number.isRequired,
fooBar: React.PropTypes.instanceOf(Bar).isRequired,
fooBaz: React.PropTypes.string.isRequired
}
render: function() {
//we could (should) use a component here but this answer is already too long...
var bar = <p>Loading...</p>;
if (bar.isReady()) {
bar = (
<div>
<p>{bar.get('name')}</p>
<p>{bar.get('description')}</p>
</div>
);
}
return (
<div>
<p>{this.props.fooId}</p>
<p>{this.props.fooBaz}</p>
{bar}
</div>
)
},
});
Let's go through an entire loop for FooList:
State 1:
User hits the page /foos/ listing the Foos via the FooListcontroller-view component
FooListcontroller-view component calls FooStore.getAll()
_foos map is empty in FooStore so FooStore performs a request via FooAPI.getAll()
The FooList controller-view component renders itself as loading state since its state.fooList.size == 0.
Here's the actual look of our list :
++++++++++++++++++++++++
+ +
+ "loading..." +
+ +
++++++++++++++++++++++++
FooAPI.getAll() request resolves and triggers the FooActionCreators.receiveAllSuccess action
FooStore receive this action, updates its internal state, and emits change.
State 2:
FooList controller-view component receive change event and update its state to get the list from the FooStore
this.state.fooList.size is no longer == 0 so the list can actually renders itself (note that we use toJS() to explicitly get a raw javascript object since React does not handle correctly mapping on not raw object yet).
We're passing needed props to the FooListItem component.
By calling foo.getBar() we're telling to the FooStore that we want the Bar record back.
getBar() method of Foo record retrieve the Bar record through the BarStore
BarStore does not have this Bar record in its _bars cache, so it triggers a request through BarAPI to retrieve it.
The same happens for all Foo in this.sate.fooList of FooList controller-view component
The page now looks something like this:
++++++++++++++++++++++++
+ +
+ Foo1 "name1" +
+ Foo1 "baz1" +
+ Foo1 bar: +
+ "loading..." +
+ +
+ Foo2 "name2" +
+ Foo2 "baz2" +
+ Foo2 bar: +
+ "loading..." +
+ +
+ Foo3 "name3" +
+ Foo3 "baz3" +
+ Foo3 bar: +
+ "loading..." +
+ +
++++++++++++++++++++++++
-Now let's say the BarAPI.get(2) (requested by Foo2) resolves before BarAPI.get(1) (request by Foo1). Since it's asynchronous it's totally plausible.
- The BarAPI triggers the BAR_RECEIVED_SUCCESS' action via theBarActionCreators.
- TheBarStore` responds to this action by updating its internal store and emits change. That's the now the fun part...
State 3:
The FooList controller-view component responds to the BarStore change by updating its state.
The render method is called
The foo.getBar() call now retrieve a real Bar record from BarStore. Since this Bar record has been effectively retrieved, the ImmutablePureRenderMixin will compare old props with current props and determine that the Bar objects has changed ! Bingo, we could re-render the FooListItem component (a better approach here would be to create a separate FooListBarDetail component to let only this component to re-render, here we also re-rendering the Foo's details that have not changed but for the sake of simplicity let's just do that).
The page now looks like this :
++++++++++++++++++++++++
+ +
+ Foo1 "name1" +
+ Foo1 "baz1" +
+ Foo1 bar: +
+ "loading..." +
+ +
+ Foo2 "name2" +
+ Foo2 "baz2" +
+ Foo2 bar: +
+ "bar name" +
+ "bar description" +
+ +
+ Foo3 "name3" +
+ Foo3 "baz3" +
+ Foo3 bar: +
+ "loading..." +
+ +
++++++++++++++++++++++++
If you want me to add more details from a non detailed part (such as action creators, constants, routing, etc., use of BarListDetail component with form, POST, etc.) just tell me in the comments :).

A few differences in my implementation:
I like stores employing a flyweight pattern. That is, unless forced
to, all operations are "getOrRetrieveOrCreate"
I've had to forgo promise heavy development in favor of
events/state. Async communication should still use promises, that
is, things in actions use them otherwise communication occurs using
events. If a view always renders the current state, then you need a
state like "isLoading" to render a spinner. Or you need an event to
get fired then update a state on a view. I think responding from an
action with a promise may be an anti-pattern (not entirely sure).
URL changes fire the appropriate action. GET should work and be
idempotent so a URL change should generally not result in a failure.
It may however result in a redirect. I have an "authRequired"
decorator for some actions. If you aren't authenticated then we
redirect you to the login page with the target URL listed as a
redirect path.
For validation we are thinking about starting from an action, firing a "xyzModel:willSaveData", before we start; then firing either "xyzModel:didSaveData" or "xyzModel:failedSaveData" events. The store listening to these events will indicate "saving" to the views that care. It may also indicate "hasValidationError" to views that care. If you want to dismiss an error. You can fire an action from a view that indicates that the error "wasReceived", which removes the "hasValidationError" flag or optionally could do something else like clear out all validation errors. Validations are interesting because of the different styles of validation. Ideally, you could create an app that would accept most any input due the limitations imposed by your input elements. Then again, servers may disagree with those choices :/.

Meteor - how do I make this "reactive" using Deps?

On my client side, I display a list of users and a small chart for each user's points stored in the DB (using jQuery plugin called sparklines).
Drawing the chart is done on Template.rendered method
// client/main.js
Template.listItem.rendered = function() {
var arr = this.data.userPoints // user points is an array of integers
$(this.find(".chart")).sparkline(arr);
}
Now I have a Meteor method on the server side, that is called on a regular basis to update the the user points.
Meteor.methods({
"getUserPoints" : function getUserPoints(id) {
// access some API and fetch the latest user points
}
});
Now I would like the chart to be automatically updated whenever Meteor method is called. I have a method on the template that goes and calls this Meteor method.
Template.listItem.events({
"click a.fetchData": function(e) {
e.preventDefault();
Meteor.call("getUserPoints", this._id);
}
});
How do I turn this code into a "reactive" one?

You need to use reactive data source ( Session, ReactiveVar ) together with Tracker.
Using ReactiveVar:
if (Meteor.isClient) {
Template.listItem.events({
"click a.fetchData": function(e) {
e.preventDefault();
var instance = Template.instance();
Meteor.call("getUserPoints", this._id, function(error, result) {
instance.userPoints.set(result)
});
}
});
Template.listItem.created = function() {
this.userPoints = new ReactiveVar([]);
};
Template.listItem.rendered = function() {
var self = this;
Tracker.autorun(function() {
var arr = self.userPoints.get();
$(self.find(".chart")).sparkline(arr);
})
}
}
Using Session:
if (Meteor.isClient) {
Template.listItem.events({
"click a.fetchData": function(e) {
e.preventDefault();
Meteor.call("getUserPoints", this._id, function(error, result) {
Session.set("userPoints", result);
});
}
});
Template.listItem.rendered = function() {
var self = this;
Tracker.autorun(function() {
var arr = Session.get("userPoints");
$(self.find(".chart")).sparkline(arr);
})
}
}
Difference between those implementation :
A ReactiveVar is similar to a Session variable, with a few
differences:
ReactiveVars don't have global names, like the "foo" in
Session.get("foo"). Instead, they may be created and used locally, for
example attached to a template instance, as in: this.foo.get().
ReactiveVars are not automatically migrated across hot code pushes,
whereas Session state is.
ReactiveVars can hold any value, while Session variables are limited
to JSON or EJSON.
Source
Deps is deprecated, but still can be used.

The most easily scalable solution is to store the data in a local collection - by passing a null name, the collection will be both local and sessional and so you can put what you want in it and still achieve all the benefits of reactivity. If you upsert the results of getUserPoints into this collection, you can just write a helper to get the appropriate value for each user and it will update automatically.
userData = new Meteor.Collection(null);
// whenever you need to call "getUserPoints" use:
Meteor.call("getUserPoints", this._id, function(err, res) {
userData.upsert({userId: this._id}, {$set: {userId: this._id, points: res}});
});
Template.listItem.helpers({
userPoints: function() {
var pointsDoc = userData.findOne({userId: this._id});
return pointsDoc && pointsDoc.points;
}
});
There is an alternative way using the Tracker package (formerly Deps), which would be quick to implement here, but fiddly to scale. Essentially, you could set up a new Tracker.Dependency to track changes in user points:
var pointsDep = new Tracker.Dependency();
// whenever you call "getUserPoints":
Meteor.call("getUserPoints", this._id, function(err, res) {
...
pointsDep.changed();
});
Then just add a dummy helper to your listItem template (i.e. a helper that doesn't return anything by design):
<template name="listItem">
...
{{pointsCheck}}
</template>
Template.listItem.helpers({
pointsCheck: function() {
pointsDep.depend();
}
});
Whilst that won't return anything, it will force the template to rerender when pointsDep.changed() is called (which will be when new user points data is received).

Backbone collection not updating with JSONP request

I just recently started using Backbone.js and I'm working on an app now using Brunch that does a JSONP request to an external API to populate my collection and models. I'm following these previous posts (this and this) on doing JSONP requests with Backbone, but my collection still isn't getting the data for some reason.
My model (app/models/model.js):
module.exports = Backbone.Model.extend({
});
My collection (app/models/collection.js):
var Post = require('./model');
module.exports = Backbone.Collection.extend({
model: Post,
url: "http://somedata.com/api/posts/list/stuff",
sync: function(method, model, options) {
options.timeout = 10000;
options.dataType = "jsonp";
options.jsonp = "JSONPcallback";
return Backbone.sync(method, model, options);
},
parse: function(response) {
if (response) {
var parsed = [];
for(var i = 0; i < response.results.length; i++) {
parsed.push(response.results[i][0]);
}
return parsed;
}
}
});
Then, in the initialize method in app/application.js I'm calling it by:
var Category = require('models/collection');
this.cat = new Category();
this.cat.fetch();
Now, when I look at the parse function in console.log, I see the data being fetched, so the request is going through successfully. However, when my views are rendered and I do console.log(application.cat.models) in app/views/view.js, I get nothing -- why's this happening? Is there anything wrong with the code on my model/collection?
Also, the JSONP data has the following format, which is why looping through for response.results[i][0] and returning an array with all of it, that should do the trick, right?
{"results":[
{"0":{"id":xxx,"title":xxx,"link":xxx},
"description":xxx},
{"0":{"id":xxx,"title":xxx,"link":xxx},
"description":xxx},
{"0":{"id":xxx,"title":xxx,"link":xxx},
"description":xxx},...
]}
Would really appreciate any help...

I have 2 comments here :
I see that you have names both your model and collection as module.exports , a common practice is to make the model as singular (module.export) and make the collection for those models plural module.exports , just common practice , nothing "wrong" otherwise
You can have 2 callbacks in your code , when the collection is done fetching data(asynchronous event) also considering module.exports as your collection here ,
A. You could do this :
module.exports.fetch({
success : function(data){
console.log(JSON.stringiy(data));
//do remaining programming here
}
});
B. you could have a event listener for reset , from the documentation here , the collection fires a reset event when it completes the fetch , so could add an event listener on the collection like this :
module.exports.on('reset',function(data){
console.log(JSON.stringify(data));
//do remaining programming here
},this);

delegateEvents not working as expect when using back button

Below is my backbone view.
define([
'app',
'backbone',
'twig',
'templates/report',
'data/reportViewCollection',
'data/reportViewModel'
], function (app, Backbone, Twig, template, Collection, Model) {
var collection = new Collection();
var fetching;
return Backbone.View.extend({
setParams: function (rlId, viewId, categoryId, depth) {
// reset any possible pending previous repests.
fetching = false;
var model = collection.getModel(rlId, viewId, categoryId, depth);
if (!model) {
model = new Model({
rlId: rlId,
viewId: viewId,
categoryId: categoryId,
depth: depth
});
fetching = model.fetch({
success: function (model) {
collection.add(model);
},
error: function (model) {
alert('error getting report view');
}
});
}
this.model = model;
},
render: function () {
var that = this;
var done = function() {
app.vent.trigger('domchange:title', that.model.get('title'));
that.$el.html(Twig.render(template, that.model.toJSON()));
that.delegateEvents(that.events);
fetching = false;
};
if (fetching) {
app.loading(this);
fetching.done(done);
} else {
done();
}
return this;
},
events: {
'change select.view-select': 'viewSelect',
'click #dothing': function (e) {e.preventDefault(); alert('hi');}
},
viewSelect: function(e) {
var selectedView = $(e.target).val();
var rlId = this.model.get('rlId');
if (!rlId) rlId = 0;
var url = 'report/' + rlId + '/' + selectedView;
console.log(this, e, url);
Backbone.history.navigate(url, {trigger: true});
}
});
});
Description of functionality:
What happens is when a specific url is navigated to, the setParams() function is called to fetch the model from the server. When the render method is called, it checks if we are currently fetching the model and if so, uses sets a deferred callback to render the template when it gets done fetching. When the model is fetch-ed and we are ready to render, renders the template and fills in the view by that.$el.html().
Problem:
What happens is that my events work perfectly the first time I navigate to a url, but when I hit the back button, my events don't get attached.
I've stepped through the code and can't see any differences. The only real difference is that I'm loading the model from the cached collection immediately instead of doing an ajax request to fetch it.
Any clues what is going on?

try to change:
that.$el.html(Twig.render(template, that.model.toJSON()));
to
that.$el.html("");
that.$el.append(Twig.render(template, that.model.toJSON()));
had kind the same problem and this fixed it.

I resolved my issue. The comment by #mu set me in the right direction.
I am using Marionette and my view is contained in a region. In the Region's open function, it is doing this.$el.html(view.el); which wipes out the events in certain circumstances. I'm still not sure why it does in some but on in others.
The Solution proved to be to add an onShow function to my view that call's this.delegateEvents(). Everything is working smoothly now!
I eventually figured it out by stepping through the code and watching the events registered on the view's div.

Backbone set collection attribute (for the url)

I need to pass an id to a collection for use in the url (e.g. /user/1234/projects.json) but am not sure how to do this, an example would be wonderful.
The way my application is structured is on launch a collection of 'users' is pulled and rendered, I then want when a user is clicked their 'documents' are pulled from the server into a new collection and rendered in a new view. The issue is getting the user id into the documents collection to give the relevant URL for the documents.fetch().
think I've got it, here is an example:
//in the the view initialize function
this.collection = new Docs();
this.collection.project_id = this.options.project_id;
this.collection.fetch();
//in the collection
url: function() {
return '/project/api/' +this.project_id+'/docs';
}

Your user collection url should be set to /user. Once that's set, your models should utilize that url in order to do their magic. I believe (not completely positive) that if a model is in a collection, calling the 'url' method will return /user/:id. So all your typical REST-ish functionality will be utilized on '/user/:id'. If you are trying to do something with a relationship (a user has many documents) it's kind of rinse and repeat. So, for your documents collection (which belogs to user correct?) you'd set the url to 'user_instance.url/documents'.
To show a one to many relationship with a backbone model, you'd do something like this (upgrade to backbone 0.5.1 for urlRoot):
var User = Backbone.Model.extend({
initialize: function() {
// note, you are passing the function url. This is important if you are
// creating a new user that's not been sync'd to the server yet. If you
// did something like: {user_url: this.url()} it wouldn't contain the id
// yet... and any sync through docs would fail... even if you sync'd the
// user model!
this.docs = new Docs([], {user_url: this.url});
},
urlRoot: '/user'
});
var Doc = Backbone.Model.extend();
var Docs = Backbone.Collection.extend({
initialize: function(models, args) {
this.url = function() { args.user_url() + '/documents'; };
}
});
var user = new User([{id: 1234}]);
user.docs.fetch({ success: function() { alert('win') });

Why do you need to override the URL property of the collection with a function?.. you could do:
this.collection = new Docs();
this.collection.project_id = this.options.project_id;
this.collection.url = '/project/api/' + this.options.project_id + '/docs';
this.collection.fetch();

I like the answer from Craig Monson, but to get it working I needed to fix two things:
Binding the User url method before passing it to the Docs
A return statement from the url function in Docs
Updated example:
var User = Backbone.Model.extend({
initialize: function() {
// note, you are passing the function url. This is important if you are
// creating a new user that's not been sync'd to the server yet. If you
// did something like: {user_url: this.url()} it wouldn't contain the id
// yet... and any sync through docs would fail... even if you sync'd the
// user model!
this.docs = new Docs([], { user_url: this.url.bind(this) });
},
urlRoot: '/user'
});
var Doc = Backbone.Model.extend();
var Docs = Backbone.Collection.extend({
initialize: function(models, args) {
this.url = function() { return args.user_url() + '/documents'; };
}
});
var user = new User([{id: 1234}]);
user.docs.fetch({ success: function() { alert('win') });

We Keep Coding

JavaScript is the programming language of the Web.