My code looks something like this
App.ItemRoute = Em.Route.extend({
setupController: function(controller) {
var model = this.modelFor('item');
controller.setProperties({
name : model.get('name'),
title: model.get('title')
});
}
});
App.ItemController = Em.ObjectController.extend({
saveOnChange: function() {
console.log('saveOnChange');
}.observes('name', 'title'),
});
From my understanding because i am using setProperties the observe should only fire once , but it fire two times
also wrapping the setProperties with beginPropertyChanges & endPropertyChanges still fires twice
what i ultimately is for it to not fire at all, so what i ended up doing was changing the controller code to be like this
App.ItemController = Em.ObjectController.extend({
load: false,
saveOnChange: function() {
if(!this.get('load')) {
this.set('load', true);
return;
}
console.log('saveOnChange');
}.observes('name', 'title'),
});
this code would work if the change is only fired once, but it won't work if its fired multiple times (that's my case)
The setProperties function doesn't coalesce your observers (unfortunately there's no way to do that), it just groups them into one operation. The source might help you to better see what it does:
Ember.setProperties = function(self, hash) {
changeProperties(function() {
for(var prop in hash) {
if (hash.hasOwnProperty(prop)) { set(self, prop, hash[prop]); }
}
});
return self;
};
So, back to your problem. The best way that I can think of is to debounce your function.
App.ItemController = Em.ObjecController.extend({
load: false,
saveOnChange: function() {
Em.run(this, 'debouncedSave', 150);
}.observes('name', 'title'),
debouncedSave: function() {
if(!this.get('load')) {
this.set('load', true);
}
}
});
If you're not familiar with debouncing, you can read about it here. There are probably some other solutions involving direct manipulation of the properties, but I'm not sure if that's a road you want to go down.
Related
I have a controller handling a list of models. These models are of two different types (e.g. Message and Comment). In order to use an ArrayController I would have to merge both lists into one. Is there a way to do this ?
Class-based polymorphism, as proposed in this thread, would solve my problem, but they are not likely to be implemented soon.
In my current solution, I use an ObjectController reveiving both comments and messages. I then merge them using a computed property:
App.SomeRoute = Ember.Route.extend({
model: function (params) {
return Em.Object.create({
comments: this.store.find('comment'),
messages: this.store.find('message'),
});
},
});
App.SomeIndexController = Ember.ObjectController.extend({
merged: Em.computed.union('messages', 'comments'),
});
It works, but I don't benefit from all the niceties of an ArrayController (like sortProperties for example).
What I would like to do is something like:
App.SomeRoute = Ember.Route.extend({
model: function (params) {
var comments = this.store.find('comment');
var messages = this.store.find('message');
return merge(comments, messages);
},
});
where merge returns something similar to what is returned by this.store.find('model').
I asked a similar question recently, here is how I solved the issue.
App.SomeIndexController = Ember.ObjectController.extend({
sortProperties: ['some field'],
sortAscending: false, // false for descending
merged: function() {
var comments = this.get('comment') || [], // This gets wherever you've stored the comments array
messages = this.get('message') || [];// This gets wherever you've stored the messages array
var stream = Ember.A();
stream.pushObjects(comments.toArray());
stream.pushObjects(messages.toArray());
return Em.ArrayProxy.createWithMixins(Ember.SortableMixin, {
content: stream,
sortProperties: this.sortProperties,
sortAscending: this.sortAscending
});
}.property('messages.#each', 'comments.#each')
});
Hope this works for you as well. Just an FYI, for my example, my controller is actually one that is rendered, so I do not set up the model for it in the route. I simply have properties on my controller, lets say, commments and messages that constantly updated themselves as RecordArrays.
So for your example you may need to observe .property('model.messages.#each', 'model.comments.#each')
Inspired by #bmeyers' answer, and after exploring ember-data's source a little bit, I came up with a solution that is reusable and not too terrible. It is probably not optimal, but it does the work.
App.Store = DS.Store.extend({
findMultiple: function (types) {
var self = this;
var recordsByType = types.map(function (type) {
return self.find(type);
});
return self.mergeArrayPromises(recordsByType);
},
mergeArrayPromises: function (promises) {
var promise = Ember.RSVP.all(promises).then(function(arrays) {
var mergedArray = Ember.A();
arrays.forEach(function (records) {
mergedArray.pushObjects(records.toArray());
});
return mergedArray;
});
return DS.PromiseArray.create({
promise: promise,
});
},
});
App.SomeRoute = Ember.Route.extend({
model: function (params) {
return this.store.findMultiple(['comment', 'message']);
},
});
This might help. I stumbled upon this a while back and your question reminded me
https://gist.github.com/sebastianseilund/6096696
I wanna create a property that depends on a global attribute:
App.Test= Em.Object.extend();
App.Test.reopenClass({ all: Em.A() });
App.Other = Em.object.extend({
stuff: function() {
return "calculated stuff from this.get('foo') and App.Test.all";
}.property('foo', 'App.Test.all.#each.bar')
});
As a workarround I could create a observer and always set a dummy property with a new random value to trigger the property change, but is there a better way to do this?
I need this for some caching. I've a really crazy, and single threaded backend. So I write my own Model classes. So I try to reimplement a bit of the logic in the client for a better caching.
Ive an Item class (App.Item) and another class where each instance has a calculated reduced list of Items.
App.Model = Em.Object.extend({
});
App.Model.reopenClass({
all: Em.A(),
load: function(hash) {
return this.get('all').pushObject(this.create(hash));
}
});
App.Item = App.Model.extend({
});
App.List = App.Model.extend({
loadedInitItems: false,
items: function() {
if(!this.get('loadedInitItems')) { this.set('loadedInitItems', true); Backend.call('thelist', function(item) { App.Item.load(this); }); }
return App.Item.all.filter(function(item) {
// heavy filter stuff, depends on a lot of propertys on the current list instance
});
}.property('someprops', 'App.Item.all.#each.foo')
});
Backend.call represents some AJAX stuff
the point is, that now any item could change so that the filter will return something diffrent. And there are other places om the application, where the user can add Items. I dont want to call the backend again, because its very slow! And I know that the backend will not modify the list! So I wanna cache it.
This is just a reduced example of my use case, but I think've described the point. In reallity I have this dozend of times, with over 25000 objects.
have you tried adding 'Binding' to your property and then the value you want to bind to ?, something like this:
App.PostsController = Em.ArrayController.extend({
nameOfYourVariableBinding: "App.SomeObject.propertyYouWantToBindTo"
})
It looks like the problem is the double uppercase letter. So App.test ist working, but not App.Foo.test.
But I was able to find a Solution with the ArrayProxy.
Its about this:
App.Model = Em.Object.extend({
});
App.Model.reopenClass({
all: Em.A(),
load: function(hash) {
return this.get('all').pushObject(this.create(hash));
}
});
App.Item = App.Model.extend({
});
App.List = App.Model.extend({
loadedInitItems: false,
items: function() {
var self = this;
if(!this.get('loadedInitItems')) {
this.set('loadedInitItems', true);
Backend.call('thelist', function(item) {
App.Item.load(this);
});
}
return Em.ArrayProxy.extend({
content: App.Item.all,
arrangedContent: function() {
return this.get('content').filter(function(item) {
// heavy filter stuff, depends on a lot of propertys on the current list instance
// use self.get('someprops')
})
}.property('content.#each.foo')
});
}.property('someprops')
items: function() {
if(!this.get('loadedInitItems')) { this.set('loadedInitItems', true); Backend.call('thelist', function(item) { App.Item.load(this); }); }
return App.Item.all.filter(function(item) {
// heavy filter stuff, depends on a lot of propertys on the current list instance
});
}.property('someprops', 'App.Item.all.#each.foo')
});
Given I have this:
App.SomeController = Ember.ObjectController.extend({
autosave: function(){
//stuff
}.observes('content.text', 'content.colour', 'content.webfont')
});
How can I set SomeController's model in a route WITHOUT triggering autosave?
Emberjs doesn't have suport to suspend observers at least in public api.
My approach to that problems is to create a flag:
App.SomeController = Ember.ObjectController.extend({
_suspendAutosave: false,
suspendAutosave: function(fn) {
this.set('_suspendAutosave', true);
fn();
this.set('_suspendAutosave', false);
},
autosave: function(){
if (this.get('_suspendAutosave')) { return; }
// some code ...
}.observes('content.text', 'content.colour', 'content.webfont')
});
At some place:
controller.suspendAutosave(function() {
controller.set('content.text', 'foo');
});
This isn't cool, but is the only way that I know. I hope it helps.
Alternatively you can use: Ember.removeObserver() and Ember.addObserver() methods.
In my Application I have the following rawNodes property, which I am using as an application-wide cache:
var App = Ember.Application.createWithMixins({
...
/**
The rawNodes property is a nodes deposit to be used
to populate combo boxes etc.
**/
rawNodes: null,
getNodes: function () {
if (!this.rawNodes) {
this.rawNodes = this.Node.find();
}
},
...
});
In some of my controllers I am modifying data which should also be updated in this generic cache. I would like to implement a couple of functions, to update a given node, and to delete a given node. Something like:
updateNode: function(node_id, node) {
this.rawNodes.update(node_id, node);
},
deleteNode: function(node_id) {
this.rawNodes.delete(node_id);
}
But I do not really know how to work with an ArrayController, not even if those operations are at all possible. I see no examples of this kind of procedures in the ArrayController documentation. Could somebody offer an example, or point me in the right direction?
Rather than using a rawNodes property, I think it might be more useful to
maintain a Node model and a NodesController. Assign the model property
with setupController so you can be sure that nodes are always fetched.
Since this is an application-wide cache, use needs in ApplicationController so it can delegate to its methods.
App.ApplicationRoute = Em.Route.extend({
setupController: function() {
this.controllerFor("nodes").set("model", App.Node.find());
}
});
App.ApplicationController = Em.Controller.extend({
needs: "nodes",
});
App.NodesController = Em.ArrayController.extend({
getNodes: function() {
// ...
}
});
App.NodeController = Em.ObjectController.extend({
updateNode: function() {
// ...
},
deleteNode: function() {
// ...
}
});
I'm running RC-3 and want to setup the content of an arraycontroller without the model hook. This is because I need to add some filtering and don't want to reload the content with every transition.
I found that this.get('content') is sometimes undefined. I'm not sure why this is. Here's the code:
App.StockRoute = Em.Route.extend({
setupController: function(controller) {
if (controller.get('content') === undefined) {
controller.set('content', App.Stock.find());
}
}
});
What is the equivalent code in the setupController for the model hook?
Update
I've included this as a fuller description.
I took the ember guide of the todo app, and built off that. Currently I'm building a screen to mangage/view stock levels. What I'm trying to do is have a screen on which I can toggle all/specials/outofstock items (as per the todo, each has its own route), but then on the screen I need to filter the list eg by name or by tag. To add a challenge, I display the number of items (all, on special and out of stock) on the screen all the time, based on the filter (think name or tag) but not on the toggle (think all/on special/ out of stock)
Since its essentially one screen, I've done the following in the route code
App.StockIndexRoute = Em.Route.extend({
model: function() {
return App.Stock.find();
},
setupController: function(controller) {
// if (controller.get('content') === undefined) {
// controller.set('content', App.Stock.find());
// }
// sync category filter from object outside controller (to match the 3 controllers)
if (controller.get('category') != App.StockFilter.get('category')) {
controller.set('category', App.StockFilter.get('category'));
controller.set('categoryFilter', App.StockFilter.get('category'));
}
// a hack so that I can have the relevant toggle filter in the controller
if (controller.toString().indexOf('StockIndexController') > 0) {
controller.set('toggleFilter', function(stock) { return true; });
}
}
});
App.StockSpecialsRoute = App.StockIndexRoute.extend({
setupController: function(controller) {
this._super(controller);
controller.set('toggleFilter', function(stock) {
if (stock.get('onSpecial')) { return true; }
});
}
});
App.StockOutofstockRoute = App.StockIndexRoute.extend({
setupController: function(controller) {
this._super(controller);
controller.set('toggleFilter', function(stock) {
if (stock.get('quantity') === 0) { return true; }
});
}
});
You'll see that the only difference in the routes is the definition of the toggle filter, which needs to be applied to the model (since stock is different to stock/special or to stock/outofstock)
I haven't yet figured out how to link one controller to multiple routes, so I have the following on the controller side
App.StockIndexController = Em.ArrayController.extend({
categoryFilter: undefined,
specialCount: function() {
return this.get('content').filterProperty('onSpecial', true).get('length');
}.property('#each.onSpecial'),
outofstockCount: function() {
return this.get('content').filterProperty('quantity', 0).get('length');
}.property('#each.quantity'),
totalCount: function() {
return this.get('content').get('length');
}.property('#each'),
// this is a content proxy which holds the items displayed. We need this, since the
// numbering calculated above is based on all filtered tiems before toggles are added
items: function() {
Em.debug("Updating items based on toggled state");
var items = this.get('content');
if (this.get('toggleFilter') !== undefined) {
items = this.get('content').filter(this.get('toggleFilter'));
}
return items;
}.property('toggleFilter', '#each'),
updateContent: function() {
Em.debug("Updating content based on category filter");
if (this.get('content').get('length') < 1) {
return;
}
//TODO add filter
this.set('content', content);
// wrap this in a then to make sure data is loaded
Em.debug("Got all categories, lets filter the items");
}.observes('categoryFilter'),
setCategoryFilter: function() {
this.set('categoryFilter', this.get('category'));
App.StockFilter.set('category', this.get('category'));
}
});
// notice both these controllers inherit the above controller exactly
App.StockSpecialsController = App.StockIndexController.extend({});
App.StockOutofstockController = App.StockIndexController.extend({});
There you have it. Its rather complicated, perhaps because I'm not exactly sure how to do this properly in ember. The fact that I have one url based toggle and a filter that works across those 3 routes is, I think, the part that makes this quite compicated.
Thoughts anybody?
Have you tried to seed your filter with some data?
App.Stock.filter { page: 1 }, (data) -> data
That should grab the materialized models from the store, and prevent making any more calls to the server.