I am new to Knockout and struggling with having multiple instances of a component on a single page.
Background. Component gets an array of objects from a data service dynamically. Depending on user action, the component might need to re-render the array (new objects provided), therefore the array is an observable one.
Problem. There have to be multiple instances of the component on the page, however they have to work independently. Even though initially they receive the same array of objects.
I've created a simple example that would illustrate the problem.
HTML.
Emulate data service call:
<button data-bind="click: getData">PULL</button><br>
Component 1:
<item-picker params="items: itemsArray"></item-picker>
Component 2:
<item-picker params="items: itemsArray"></item-picker>
JavaScript.
ko.components.register("item-picker", {
viewModel: function(params) {
var self = this;
self.items = params.items;
self.addPerson = function() {
self.items.push({
name: "New at " + new Date()
});
};
},
template: "<button data-bind='click: addPerson'>Add</button><div data-bind='foreach: items'><p data-bind='text: name'></p></div>"
});
// top level viewmodel
var vm = function() {
var self = this;
self.itemsArray = ko.observableArray([]);
self.getData = function(){
self.itemsArray([]);
self.itemsArray.push({name: 'Bert'}, {name: 'Charles'}, {name: 'Denise'});
};
};
ko.applyBindings(new vm());
The example is also available on JSFiddle: https://jsfiddle.net/ignas/14jgksj0/6/
EDIT
I should have mentioned that data service call is async, and data may be received later than the page load, and also user is able to force data re-retrieval (using different parameters for example). I've updated code snippets and the example on JSFiddle accordingly.
Question. In the JSFiddle example, how can I make components work independently?
I.e. Adding a new name to "Component 1" should not add a name to "Component 2"
Create a new observable array wrapper and inner array in your constructor:
self.items = ko.observableArray(params.items().slice(0));
https://jsfiddle.net/dx6b6nvy/
There's two layers in your current structure:
An observableArray instance inside vm.itemsArray
An underlying, regular, array
Currently, all your components are modifying (2) via (1). To make sure each component holds its own, independent, selection, you'll have to create new arrays.
To create a new observableArray, you call ko.observableArray again. To create a copy of the original list, (note that the object references are still the same!), I've used slice.
edit:
The approach above decouples the component from the original array. If you want to keep the relation but not modify the source, here's what you can do:
In your component:
self.myItems = ko.observableArray([]);
self.items = ko.pureComputed(function() {
return params.items().concat(self.myItems());
});
You push to myItems, which will trigger an update of the computed. Any changes to the source observable array also trigger updates. You can even add a sort, if you like.
Related
What is the correct approach when working with an "new object" that is to be saved in a collection. Say I have a collection Cars. I have a /cars/new-car
url and then a form with:
name: __
parts: list of parts here
If I want to make this form "reactive" in the sense that if I add a new part in the parts array it shows a rerender is the best approach to make the whole "Car" a reactive object. Or should one just add a new row in the dom?
I dont want to automatically insert the whole thing into the "Cars" collection until It has a name and a list of parts.
Most examples shows very simple of adding to collection -> rerender of DOM which is very straightforward.
Edit: The same concept may apply to when editing a car. Fetching the car from a collection, setting up so the returned object is reactive(so I can add/remove parts) when done get all values and store the edited car information.
Start out by initializing an "empty" car as a reactive variable.
Template.cars.onCreated(function () {
this.car = new ReactiveVar({}); // empty car
});
Say your dom has some sort of attribute on each field describing which key it is:
<input data-key="name" placeholder="Car name"/>
Then you can bind an event that will use the data from this to update the reactive variable.
Template.cars.events({
'change input': function (e, template) {
template.car.set(_.extend(template.car.get(), {
[$(e.target).data('key')]: $(e.target).val()
}));
}
});
This will construct the object as you fill in your inputs.
Consider using Session for your /cars/new-car page
When the page first loads
Session.set('parts', []});
Session.set('name', '');
When the user saves a part
var addedPart = getPart();
var update = Session.get('parts').push(addedPart);
Session.set('parts', update);
Then your template helper functions can get everything it needs to render the view by calling Session.get().
Template.view.helpers({
currentParts: function() {
return Session.get('parts');
}
});
What do you think? I'm fairly new to Meteor myself, so there maybe even more clever ways to do batch updates on the session. But this is general gist.
Given the following models:
(note: these are simplified for illustration purposes)
App.CustomerOrder = DS.Model.extend({
deliveries: DS.hasMany('delivery'),
total: DS.attr('number')
});
App.Delivery = DS.Model.extend({
orderlines: DS.hasMany('orderline')
});
App.OrderLine = DS.Model.extend({
productid: DS.attr('string'),
qtyordered: DS.attr('number')
});
When the app first loads I'm querying an API that sends me information about which dependencies should trigger an update. So for example it'll send me something like:
CustomerOrder: ["deliveries", "deliveries.orderlines", "deliveries.orderlines.qtyordered"...]
..means, if deliveries are added/deleted from a customerorder or if lines are added/deleted from a delivery attached to a customer order or if the qtyordered on an orderline on a delivery attached to a customer order, then what the API expects is for me to serialize CustomerOrder (along with the entire chain of relationships) and sent to an 'update' service (i.e. server/customerorder/updates type thing) that will run various routines and fill-in pieces of data and send the entire chain of objects back.
For illustration purposes I've put a simple example on here of an ordertotal (I realize this is easily calculated client-side but there's a bunch of other stuff that would be duplication of code from the server). So, if the qtyordered on an orderline changes, I need to send the customerorder instance to the server, where it will update my total field.
One of the challenges is that I can't hard code that dependency list by setting up observer functions with .observes() type stuff, it has to be done dynamically after that dependency data is loaded (presumably using addObserver). The other is that observers wont dig multiple layers deep like that.
I've tried using a mix-in to the models that overrides the init function and does exactly that.
clientchangeset: DS.attr('raw'),
init: function() {
this._super.apply(this, arguments);
var className = this.auth.camelizedModelString(this.constructor.toString());
var watchlist = this.auth.dependencies[className] || null;
var self = this;
watchlist.forEach(function(watch) {
if(watch.hasOwnProperty('attributeName') && watch.hasOwnProperty('collectionFlag')) {
// {attributeName: attributeName, collectionFlag: collectionFlag}
if(watch['collectionFlag']) {
console.log(className+'.addObserver('+watch['attributeName']+'.#each.clientchangeset)');
self.addObserver(watch['attributeName']+'.#each.clientchangeset', null, 'updateChangelist');
} else {
console.log(className+'.addObserver('+watch['attributeName']+')');
self.addObserver(watch['attributeName'], null, 'updateChangelist');
}
}
});
},
This appears to work, but only one layer deep. For completeness, heres the updateChangelist function:
updateChangelist: function(src, field, value) { //jshint ignore:line
if(this.get('pauseUpdates')) {
return;
}
var className = this.auth.camelizedModelString(this.constructor.toString());
var oldclientchangeset = this.get('clientchangeset') || [];
console.log('Before: '+className+'.[clientchangeset]= '+oldclientchangeset);
oldclientchangeset.pushObject(field);
this.set('clientchangeset', oldclientchangeset);
console.log('After: '+className+'.[clientchangeset]= '+oldclientchangeset);
}
So in general the way I got this to work was to create the observers as indicated, but the handlers simply update a property called '_needsUpdate' on each level of the relationships whenever they are triggered. '_needsUpdate' is just a date so when triggered I do:
this.set('_needsUpdate', +new Date());
Then when setting up observers at each level for that level's children, I just set up a single observer to look at child.#each._needsUpdate.
(I know there are other questions here asking the same thing; I've tried them and they don't apply here)
I have a collection being displayed by a Knockout JS foreach. For each item, the visible binding is set by call a method, based on something external to the item itself. When the externality changes, I need the UI to be redrawn.
A striped down version can be seen in this Fiddle: http://jsfiddle.net/JamesCurran/2us8m/2/
It starts with a list of four folder names, and displays the ones starting with 'S'.
<ul data-bind="foreach: folders">
<li data-bind="text: $data,
visible:$root.ShowFolder($data)"></li>
</ul>
<button data-bind="click:ToA">A Folders</button>
Clicking the button should display the ones starting with 'A' instead.
self.folders = ko.observableArray(['Active', 'Archive', 'Sent', 'Spam']);
self.letter = 'S';
// Behaviours
self.ShowFolder = function (folder)
{
return folder[0] === self.letter;
}
self.ToA = function ()
{
self.letter = 'A';
}
UPDATE:
After Loic showed me how easily this example could be fixed, I reviewed the differences between this example and my actual code. I'm using an empty object as a dictionary to toggle if an item is selected self.Selected()[item.Id] = !self.Selected()[item.Id];
The object being changed is already an observable. I assumed that Knockout didn't realize that the list is dependent on the external observable, but it does. What Knockout was missing was that the observable was in fact changing. So, the solution was simply:
self.Selected()[item.Id] = !self.Selected()[item.Id];
self.Selected.notifySubscribers();
Here's what I came up with:
What you have to understand is that Knockout is only "answering" to data changes in observables. If an observable changes, it will trigger every object that uses it. By making your self.letter an observable. You can simply change it's value and uses it somewhere like self.letter() and it will automagically redraw when needed.
http://jsfiddle.net/2us8m/3/
function WebmailViewModel() {
// Data
var self = this;
self.folders = ko.observableArray(['Active', 'Archive', 'Sent', 'Spam']);
self.letter = ko.observable('S');
// Behaviours
self.ShowFolder = function (folder)
{
return folder[0] === self.letter();
}
self.ToA = function ()
{
self.letter('A');
}
};
ko.applyBindings(new WebmailViewModel());
In case you have complex bindings, like storing an object inside an observable. If you want to modify that object you have multiple possible choices.
self.Selected()[item.Id] = !self.Selected()[item.Id];
You could change it to this by making everything "observables" but if my memory is right, it can become complicated.
self.Selected()[item.Id](!self.Selected()[item.Id]());
I remember I had one similar issue where I had dependency problem where I had to update a country, region, city. I ended up storing it as list inside an observable to prevent update on individual element change. I had something like this.
var path = PathToCity();
path[0] = 'all';
path[1] = 'all';
PathtoCity(path);
By doing this, the change would be atomic and there will be only one update. I haven't played a lot with knockout for a while. I'm not sure but I do believe that the last time I worked with knockout, it was able to "optimize" and prevent to redraw the whole thing. But be careful because if it is not able to guess that you didn't change many thing, it could redraw the whole observable tree (which could end up pretty bad in term of performance)
In your example, we could use the same behaviour with my modified example:
http://jsfiddle.net/2us8m/4/
I'm using ember.js RC1 + ember-data rev 11 (but I also need some plain ajax for configuration like models). I want to loop over a simple objects list and display the records (note -here I create just a basic array)
The content I have bound has the following custom find method defined
App.Foo = DS.Model.extend({
name: DS.attr('string')
}).reopenClass({
records: [],
all: function() {
return this.records;
},
find: function() {
var self = this;
$.getJSON('/api/foo/', function(response) {
response.forEach(function(data) {
//say I want to kill everything in the array here for some strange reason...
self.records = [];
//the template still shows the record ... not an empty list ?
}, this);
});
return this.records;
}
});
My other model uses this directly
App.Related = DS.Model.extend({
listings: function() {
return App.Foo.find();
}.property()
});
Now inside my template
{{#each foo in related.listings}}
{{foo.name}}<br />
{{/each}}
The list loads up with whatever I put in the array by default (say I add a simple object using createRecord like so)
add: function(record) {
this.records.addObject(App.Foo.createRecord(record));
},
and when the template is rendered I see anything listed here... but as I put in the comments above, if I decide to remove records or null out the list that is bound it doesn't seem to reflect this in any way.
Is it possible to bind a simple array as I have and yet remove items from it using something basic such as splice? or even a drastic self.records = []; ?
self.records.splice(i, 1);
Even when I query the client manually after the splice or empty work it returns 0
console.log(App.Foo.all().get('length'));
Initially I see records, but then I see they are gone (yet the html doesn't change)
I understood your question this way, that the following remark is the point your are struggling with:
response.forEach(function(data) {
//say I want to kill everything in the array here for some strange reason...
self.records = [];
//the template still shows the record ... not an empty list ?
}, this);
You are wondering, why your template is showing no empty list? It's because you did not tell Ember when to update the template. You can tell Ember this way:
App.Related = DS.Model.extend({
listings: function() {
return App.Foo.find();
}.property("App.Foo.records.#each")
});
Now Ember knows, whenever something is added or removed from your array, it should update the listings property of your model. And therefore it knows that your view needs rerendering.
One additional remark to the orignal question regarding "simple javascript arrays". When you use Ember, you actually do not instantiate simple js arrays. When you declare:
var a = []; // is the same as -> var a = Ember.A();
Ember does some magic and wraps in an enhanced ember version of an array (Ember.NativeArray), which enables you to use such property dependency declarations mentioned above. This enables Ember to use ArrayObservers on those arrays, although they may feel like a plain JS Array.
You need to use the set method when you modify properties and get when you return them, or else Ember won't be able to do its magic and update the template.
In your case, there is an additional problem, which is that in find(), you return a reference to records before your asynchronous getJSON call replaces it with a new empty array. The calling method will never see the new array of records. You probably want to use clear() instead.
Your model should look something like this:
App.Foo = DS.Model.extend({
name: DS.attr('string')
}).reopenClass({
records: [],
all: function() {
// can't use 'this.get(...)' within a class method
return Ember.get(this, 'records');
},
findAll: function() {
var records = Ember.get(this, 'records');
$.getJSON('/api/foo/', function(response) {
records.clear();
// in this case my json has a 'foos' root
response.foos.forEach(function(json) {
this.add(json);
}, this);
}, this);
// this gets updated asynchronously
return records;
},
add: function(json) {
// in order to access the store within a
// class method, I cached it at App.store
var store = App.get('store');
store.load(App.Foo, json);
var records = Ember.get(this, 'records');
records.addObject(App.Foo.find(json.id));
}
});
Note that the addObject() method respects observers, so the template updates as expected. removeObject() is the corresponding binding-aware method to remove an element.
Here's a working jsfiddle.
Issue:
I'm still learning knockoutJS, please guide me if my approach is wrong.
Here is my fiddle: http://jsfiddle.net/amitava82/wMH8J/25/
While onclick of edit, I receive the json model which is represented in the view and I want to remove certain items (child array) or actions (parent array) from the model (I removed add UI to add more Actions from the fiddle for simplicity) and then finally pass the model back to server.
Now, deleting from root level is easy. I'm stuck with deleting individual item which is ActionParamaters in ActionItems array.
Question:
How do I remove an item from a child array?
You can pass the clicked actionItem and the containing action array to deleteActionItem function as follows:
<!-- /ko -->
remove item
In your model you need to make every actionItem array observable using ko.mapping plugin (see edit function)
var viewModel = function() {
var self = this;
self.data = ko.observable();
self.edit = function() {
self.data ( ko.mapping.fromJS(editData) );
}
self.log = function() {
console.log(self.data())
}
self.deleteAction = function(data) {
//delete root node
self.data().remove(data)
}
self.deleteActionItem = function(data,actionItem) {
//delete items
data.ActionItems.remove(actionItem);
}
}
Then you will be able to remove the item from array in the deleteActionItem function and since the array is observable now, the result will reflect to binded dom element.
Sam, your fiddle data was too complicated. When asking questions, you will improve your chance of getting help if you distill your fiddle down to the relevant elements. I have cooked up a simple fiddle that illustrates nested arrays, and removal.
Here is the HTML, note that the remove function is inside the context of the array, so it calls a function on $parent instead of $root. This lets us target the context directly above, instead of the root.
<ul data-bind="foreach: editData">
<li>
<span data-bind="text: name"></span>
<button data-bind="click: $parent.removeParent">Remove Parent</button>
...
<!-- This line is on the child context -->
<button data-bind="click: $parent.removeChild">Remove Child</button>
</ul>
Here is the parent model. Note the removal function here is for removing children. When the removeChild function is called, it is from the child context asking for $parent, which will call this remove.
var Parent = function(name, children) {
var self = this;
self.name = ko.observable(name);
self.children = ko.observableArray(children);
self.removeChild = function(child) {
self.children.remove(child);
};
};
Your fiddle also makes no use of models, which are an important aspect of MVVM development. You should consider going through the tutorials on the knockout site to get a better understanding of how to structure knockout applications. It will help you deal with problems like this much easier.