I'm wondering how to structure my application. Should I use custom views and one main view that will control them. Or is it better to hold my views in a lightbox. All of the examples I've found are somehow limited of functionality and present a single or a few screens. What is the right way to organize a bigger application?
I'm wondering too.
Starting point:
Famo.us apps are structured in a hierarchical rendering tree.
Famo.us uses RequireJS modules.
Famo.us encourages the use of Views
Views are reusable components.
Views encapsulate functionality (and part of the rendering tree).
Views communicate using events.
View get initialized by an options object.
We need to add structure to manage:
Business logic
Non-UI functionality like REST api calls, audio, local storage, etc.
Data-flow:
Update data on user input
Update view on data change
Modules, events and loose coupling
Goals:
Scalable application structure.
Small, independent, testable modules.
Promote re-use of code.
Easy sharing of modules (just drop a file your project)
No dependence on other Javascript frameworks.
All to often, there is tight coupling between modules:
Module instantiates and keeps a reference to another module
Modules cross their semantic boundries
A view that knows about a specific REST api
A view that uses specific model code such as Backbone (see Taasky example)
Here is to how to avoid this:
Modules emit events when something interesting happens (user input, data change, etc)
A Mediator listens to the event
The Mediator calls the public API of another module.
So, instead of having a View-module know about Backbone model stuff, it emits an user input event like this:
Todo-Edit-View emits "User input" event: "todo-update",{id:1,title:'Code'}
Todo-Mediator listens to the event.
Todo-Mediator calls tasks.find({id:1}).update({title:'Code'}) of Todo module (e.g. using Backbone)
Rules
There are Modules and Mediators
Modules have a public API and emit events
The API and events stay in their semantic boundries; i.e. "updateTitle()" instead of "onBackboneModelChange()"
The Mediator couples the app, i.e. a backbone model change to a todo-item title update.
Mediators are singletons
An application can have multiple mediators.
For example, an e-mail application like GMail could have mediators for
chat function
todo list function
reading e-mail
writing & sending e-mail
File structure:
/src
/lib
/services
/mediators
/layout
/content
/config
/main.js
Types of modules:
Service: An independent module to encapsulate non-UI functions such as: LocalStorage, Ajax, Web Audio, etc.
Layout: Layout, animation and positioning of content, e.g: ScrollView, HeaderFooterView, etc
Content: Actual content of the app: leaf nodes (surfaces) of the rendering tree.
Note the distinction between Layout and Content. By seperating UI-components & layout from actual content, it becomes easy to reuse UI patterns such as side-panels, popups, navigation-bars, sticky-headers, scroll-views, etc.
Also, I would recommend creating a *.css for every Layout containing only structure and minimal theming. All theming can be overriden/extended in config/theme.css, so it's easy to reskin an app.
Other code:
Mediator: Couples modules using events and public APIs.
Config: Contains all options used throughout the app on initialization.
main.js: Bootstraps the app.
Bootstrap app in Main.js
Create mediators
Create services
Construct rendering tree
Module life-cycle
A module must be contained in a single file, i.e. don't depend on external libraries!
When a module is created, it announces its presence to all mediators. We use the Famo.us Engine to emit a global event. This will be the only required dependency!
Engine.trigger('created',this)
When a module is destroyed, it announces its destruction to all mediators.
Engine.trigger('destroyed',this)
The mediator listens to created and destroyed events and glues modules together:
var someDataModule; // Backbone or whatever
Engine.on('create',function(module){
if(module instance of SomeDataModule) {
var someDataModule = module;
}
if(module instanceof TodoView) {
module.on('change-title',function({id:id,title:title}){
someDataModule.find({id:id}).set('title',title);
})
}
})
In simple mediators, you can initialiaze modules in order (i.e SomeDataModule before TodoView). However, in more complex scenarious, you might need to use a Promise to couple everything.
Note on dependencies
There are three exceptions on "self-contained" modules:
Layout and Content modules are allowed to have hierachical dependencies. Parents can initialize children, and expect certain events from these children. A ListView might initialize ItemView and handle ItemRemoved events.
Services can be a Facade/Adapter for another service. For example, a DataService might provide an simplification, abstraction and security layer for a RestApiService.
Of course, mediators have hard-wired dependencies because they couple the app!
Famo.us is focused on UI, so you better look for a MVC pattern to have better structure, specially on large projects, actually as Famo.us is very young it only have an integration with Angular:
http://famo.us/integrations/angular/
But is well known that they will add other MVC integrations in the near future
Try Angular and look if it is what you need, it´s a pretty nice MVC Framework, my recommendation is to first learn Angular at least basics (http://angularjs.org/ and then after Famo.us University (http://famo.us/university) you can understand this integration
Related
I am trying to build a UI with left side bar having filters and right side having actual filtered data.
For loading data into the dynamic part of the UI(right side), which approach is considered better in terms of code quality and app performance ?
Use sub routes (for dynamic part of the UI)
Use separate components that load their own data (for dynamic part of
the UI)
There is not a direct correct answer for that; you can use both ways but here is a few things to consider and in the end I generally prefer to use sub-routes due to the following:
Waiting for UI to load: In case you are using separate components to load their own data; then you need to handle the loading state of the components. What I mean is; if you simply use sub-routes; then model hooks (model, beforeModel, etc.) will wait for the promises to be solved before displaying the data. If you simply provide a loading template (see the guide for details) it will be displayed by default. In case you use components, you might need to deal with displaying an overlay/spinner to give a better UX.
Error Handling: Similarly like loading state management; Ember has already built in support for error handling during route hook methods. You will need to deal with that on your own if you prefer components to make the remote calls. (See guide for details)
Application State: Ember is SPA framework; it is common practice to synchronize application state with the URL. If you use sub-routes; you can simply make use of the query parameters (see the guide for details) and you will be able to share the URL with others and the application will load with the same state. It is a little bit trickier to do the same with components; you still need to use query parameters within the routes and pass the parameters to the components to do that.
Use of component hook methods: If you intend to use the components then you will most likely need to use component hook methods to open the application with default filter values. This means you will need to make some remote call to the server within one or more of init, willRender, didReceiveAttrs component hook methods. I personally do not like remote calling within those methods; because I feel like this should better be done within routes and data should be passed to the components; but this is my personal taste of coding that you should approach the case differently and this is perfectly fine.
Data down, actions up keeps components flexible
In your specific example, I'll propose a third option: separate components that emit actions, have their data loaded by the route's controller, and never manipulate their passed parameters directly in alignment with DDAU.
I would have one component, search-filter searchParams=searchParams onFilterChange=(action 'filterChanged'), for the search filter and another component that is search-results data=searchResults to display the data.
Let's look at the search filter first. Using actions provides you with maximum flexibility since the search filter simply emits some sort of search object on change. Your controller action would look like:
actions: {
filterChanged(searchParams){
this.set('searchParams', searchParams);
//make the search and then update `searchResults`
}
}
which means your search-filter component would aggregate all of the search filter fields into a single search object that's used as the lone parameter of the onFilterChange.
You may think now, "well, why not just do the searching from within the component?" You can, but doing so in a DRY way would mean that on load, you first pass params to the component, a default search is made on didInsertElement which emits a result in an action, which updates the searchResults value. I find this control flow to not be the most obvious. Furthermore, you'd probably need to emit an onSearchError callback, and then potentially other actions / helper options if the act of searching / what search filter params can be applied together ever becomes conditionally dependent on the page in the app.
A component that takes in a search object and emits an action every time a search filter field changes is dead simple to reason about. Since the searchParams are one-way bound, any route that uses this component in it's template can control whether a field field updates (by optionally preventing the updating of searchParams in an invalid case) or whether the search ever fires based of validation rules that may differ between routes. Plus, theres no mocking of dependencies during unit testing.
Think twice before using subroutes
For the subroutes part of your question, I've found deeply nested routes to almost always be an antipattern. By deeply, I mean beyond app->first-child->second child where the first child is a sort of menu like structure that controls the changing between the different displays at the second child level by simple {{link-to}} helpers. If I have to share state between parents and children, I create a first-child-routes-shared-state service rather than doing the modelFor or controllerFor song and dance.
You must also consider when debating using children route vs handlebars {{if}} {{else}} sections whether the back button behavior should return to the previous step or return to the route before you entered the whole section. In a Wire transfer wizard that goes from create -> review -> complete, should I really be able to press the back button from complete to review after already having made the payment?
In the searchFilter + displayData case, they're always in the same route for me. If the search values need to be persistent on URL refresh, I opt for query params.
Lastly, note well that just because /users/:id/profile implies nesting, you can also just use this.route('user-profile', { 'path' : 'users/:id/profile' }) and avoid the nesting altogether.
Our Application has components which consume components with consume components of varying complexity. So i just want the input on the page, to validate when an object is set that the text is correct. The issue is that it is one of these subcomponents.
My colleague told me that there is 2 ways to do this, The first is to use Page Objects, and Chaining annotation to find it on my page, and then find the next id etc until my input is found. It requires me to look through another teams' Component Markup to narrow it down to the input i want to leverage. I dont believe I should have to go into another component definition, or a definition of a definition to get the appropriate chain to get this arbitrary input. It starts to create issues where if a lateral team creates changes unbeknownst to me, my PO will be broken.
The other option my friend asked was to use fixture.query to find the component. This would be as simple as:
fixture.query((el)=> el.attribute["id"] == "description",
(comp){
expect(comp.value, value);
});`
Using Query looks at the markup but then will automatically componentize it as the appropriate SubComponent. In this case, comp.value is the value stored in the HTML. So, if i did something like:
fixture.update((MainComponent comp) {
comp.myinput.value = new Foo();
});
Then I am setting and getting this programmatically, so i am a bit unsure if it properly would reflect what is on the screen.
Whats the best course of action? It seems PO would be better, but im not sure if there is a way around having to deep query for input boxes outside of the component i am testing.
Thanks
I don't think I have a definitive answer for you but I can tell you how we do it at Google. For pretty much any component we provide the page object alongside the component. This is twofold it is for testing that widget, and also so we can have this as a shareable resource for other tests.
For leaf widgets the page objects are a little less fleshed out and are really just there for the local test. For components that are shared heavily the page object is a bit more flushed out for reusability. Without this much of the API for the widget (html, css, etc) we would need to consider public and changes to them would be very hard (person responsible for making the public breaking change needs to fix all associated code.) With it we can have a contract to only support the page object API and html structure changes are not considered breaking changes. At times we have even gone so far as to have two page objects for a widget. One for the local test, and one to share. Sometimes the API you want to expose for a local test is much more than you want people to use themselves.
We can then compose these page objects into higher level page objects that represent the widget. Good page objects support a higher level of abstraction for that widget. For example a calendar widget would let you go to the next/previous month, get the current selected date, etc. rather than directly exposing the buttons/inputs that accomplish those actions.
We plan to expose these page objects for angular_components eventually, but we are currently working on how to expose these. Our internal package structure is different than what we have externally. We have many packages per individual widget (page_objects, examples, widget itself) and we need to reconcile this externally before we expose them.
Here is an example:
import 'package:pageloader/objects.dart';
import 'material_button_po.dart';
/// Webdriver page object for `material-yes-no-buttons` component.
#EnsureTag('material-yes-no-buttons')
class MaterialYesNoButtonsPO {
#ByClass('btn-yes')
#optional
MaterialButtonPO yesButton;
#ByClass('btn-no')
#optional
MaterialButtonPO noButton;
}
My question is: Can someone direct me in moving from controller based application to component base application?
I am building a map application for my dog training club. We are specialized in helping finding missing people.
In order to organize our training, we need an application to draw trails and add items on them etc.
I've started an app using Ember-Cli and OpenLayers-3. The application is working nicely, but I would like to move the code from controller based to component base approach.
I would like also to use more routing as at the moment, I have only one route and all user interactions are handled using actions.
I've setup a repository on github for those who would be kind enough to help me:
https://github.com/mylen/mantrailling
if you want to checkout the code and test the app localy, you'll need to modify the referer using a header mod in your navigator to use http://demo.melard.fr
You can see a beta of the website at that page :
http://recherche.utilitaire.melard.fr/beta/map
Thank you in advance,
First, we should clarify the intended uses of components, controllers and routes in ember.js.
Components are similar to Views, but they are isolated and therefore used to create reusable pieces of code, that handle the visual representation of your models.
Controllers are mainly used to decorate your models, but also to hold application state.
Routes represent you current application state. They are responsible for loading your models and to initialize your controllers.
To solve your first problem (controllers -> components), you only need to move all view related stuff, and only this, into components. Your code that decorate your model, for example the active flag of a way-point, remains in the controller. You only need to bind the data of your models/controllers to the components, via embers data binding. (http://guides.emberjs.com/v1.11.0/components/passing-properties-to-a-component)
Your second problem (use routes) is a bit harder to solve, I think. First you need to find all of the states your app currently have. After that, you should move your model loading and saving stuff into this routes.
Edit
Some references describing the problem.
https://github.com/ef4/rfcs/blob/routeable-components/active/0000-routeable-components.md
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QgycDZjOnIg
Edit 2
Your question is highly related to How to move ember from 1.x to 2.0, because the changes you mentioned will come along with ember 2.0.
Here are some additional links that describe how to prepare best for this upgrade.
https://gist.github.com/samselikoff/1d7300ce59d216fdaf97
https://speakerdeck.com/tomdale/ember-2-dot-0-in-practice
http://discuss.emberjs.com/t/what-is-a-good-way-to-do-this-in-ember-2-0-no-itemcontroller-no-arraycontroller/6649
You can find a lot of resources if you search for ember 2.0.
Edit 3
Here is I think the most informative source for keeping up with new Ember releases:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wsydQzQF4Ww
I seem to be getting more and more confounded at what appears, on the surface at least to be pretty basic architectural questions regarding building ember apps.
Which Controller type?
In the last month or so, I've seen people implement controllers through Ember.Controller, Ember.ArrayController, Ember.ObjectController, and Ember.ArrayProxy. Removing ArrayController and ArrayProxy (due to them being identical), what are common use cases between each type?
So far, i've been able to gather that:
ArrayControllers/Proxies should be used when you have n elements within the view you intend to control
ObjectControllers should be used when the view is simple enough to maintain it's state in a single object, or be a single instance of a model's object.
Controllers --- ? No idea.
What are some basic differences between the controller types? There doesn't seem to be concrete information on when to use which, and for which use case. The API docs are good at telling me the nitty gritty of each of them, but not WHEN to use each.
The relationship between a View and a Controller can be baffling
When a View is connected via a routes ConnectOutlets function call, what exactly happens between the controller and the view?
Are events tied into the view itself (which seems to be the case) and if so, where on earth do you interact with the controller singleton to perform CRUD-esq things on its properties? this.get('controllerName') doesn't seem to do the trick, and nearly each post or tutorial or code sample out there does this a different way.
Models that aren't
I realize that Ember Data looks to help solve some of the more irritating parts of dealing with data and keeping it in sync, but at a larger perspective, in the concept of "MVC", ember doesn't really seem to have a Model of any kind. It's just some object that gets subclassed from a specific thing and then tracked....somewhere? Somehow? Magical?
#trek sufficed that an Ember.Object could manage ajax'ing data and handling state on the client just fine, but if you look at something like the todomvc.com ember app, it uses a localStorage paradigm that is COMPLETELY different in implementation then everything i've looked at.
How EXACTLY should the 'Model' part of the MVC equation be done here?
Views make me want to murder children
There seems to be a significant number of ways to construct a "view" in terms of displaying markup to a user.
ContainerViews, using subviews / childviews
nested outlets
Handlebars templates + an outlet
using #each foo in controller
Injection through literals (template: Ember.Handlebars.compile('<h1>foo</h1>') etc)
With that in mind, what's the 'proper' way to build modular UI components with ember? This more than anything is a major pain point for the adoption of this framework for me.
I love the direction that Ember is going with application development on the web. The concepts seem simple, but the verbosity is that of Objective-C (which makes sense given it's lineage) but I swear to god I feel like i'm fighting the god damned framework more than i'm actually working on my application. The verbosity of the syntax and the lack of structured documentation outside of API documentation (which lets face it, 300k of javascript is a significant amount of code to throw some breakpoints down and try to debug your issues).
I realize the challenge that you guys are up against, but hopefully this at least makes you pause for a minute and think of how you could make life easier for the incoming developer who's worked with other frameworks (or hell, even worked within an MVC framework, like rails or django or backbone or angular) and say "this is how we think ember should be used".
Take some of the opinionated software design decisions and apply them toward the community. We'll do nothing but be cheerleaders for you if you do it, promise.
Please don't hurt any children. AFAIK the ember-core team are all over 18, so any ember-view-related frustration is clearly better directed towards adults. With that in mind...
Which Controller Type?
You've got the "what" right, but maybe missing the "why". Controller can be a little misleading, especially coming from rails. Think of these controller singletons as representing the state (in-memory) of your application.
Which kind of controller to use depends on what is required for that part of your application. For example, a back-of-napkin sketch for any app might have a topnav, postList, postDetails section. In ember, each is represented by one or more view/controller pairs. In this app I would expect to see ApplicationController and NavigationController extending Ember.Controler while postList would extend ArrayController and PostDetails would be an ObjectController.
You could do it all using just Ember.Controller but ObjectController and ArrayController are really useful for wrapping model data. Any non-trivial ember app will probably use all three.
The relationship between a View and a Controller
A controller's job is to provide the context in which the view will be rendered. Ideally you'd like to keep logic out of views, so a typical controller will have lots of computed properties to do things like:
transform data from the underlying model objects
sort/filter/select a list of objects
reflect application state
whats the deal with connectOutlets? This is where you should be using the requested route/context to decide which views/data should be plugged into the outlets of your application. The controller's connectOutlet method has a bunch of magic to make it easy, but maybe too much magic. What happens (afaik) when you call: parentcontroller.connectOutlet 'child' is
Ember creates an instance of ChildView
The {{outlet}} handlebars helper in parentController's view is bound to this childView instance
The childView is rendered with the router.childController singleton as it's context
where to do crud stuff?: Typically in an action on the router. This seems crazy at first. Think of ember router not like rails but as a stateManager that just happens to also handle routing. In near-future router API will change to make this more clear. Anyway, use router actions to do things like create model instances, commit/rollback transactions and trigger state change. This is easy to do if you use the handlebars {{action}} helper for links/buttons as it targets the router by default.
Views on the other hand should have logic for "reacting to browser events" - that means really low-level stuff like show/hide something on mouseover or integrate with 3rd party libraries to do effects and animations.
You might find this screencast helpful in understanding how to do CRUD-esq things:
http://blog.bigbinary.com/2012/09/06/crud-application-in-emberjs.html
Models WTF?
Agreed in Ember any object could be used as a 'Model'. I think #trek does a good job of demonstrating how one might accomplish this via Ember.Object. This works great for a simple app, and six months back maybe would've been your best bet as ember-data was really immature. I'm not clear on the history of ember's todomvc app, but for sure it was written months ago. For sure it should be updated, but meantime I'd not recommend using it to learn about current ember best-practices.
Instead, you should go with ember-data. Over the last few months it has really evolved and should be the default choice for any new, non-trivial ember app. #tomdale just gave a great presentation on this topic, I'd recommend having a look: https://speakerdeck.com/tomdale/ember-data-internals
what's the 'proper' way to build modular UI components with ember?
For building modular UI components:
ContainerViews, using subviews / childviews
Injection through literals (template: Ember.Handlebars.compile ...)
For building an individual application:
nested outlets
Handlebars templates + an outlet
using #each foo in controller
Building modular UI components is a totally different problem than building an application. Ember.View and it's subclasses were designed for this purpose. You can easily extend/combine them to compose widgets with custom behaviors and share those widgets across applications.
At least that's how i've seen it done. If they are for internal use could also reference handlebars templates instead of object literals, but if planning to distribute the object literals approach seems best.
A great real-world example of this is the ember-bootstrap project. I learned a lot about working with ember-views by reading through that project's source. http://emberjs-addons.github.com/ember-bootstrap/
TLDR
Pick controller that maps to type of data being represented
Controllers provide context for the view and remember application state
Use ember data for your models
Use subclasses of Ember.View to make components
Be nice to children
Are controllers in ember.js meant to be tied to main view areas/scenes a la iOS, or more tied to a set of data?
Is it common/wise to have several main views tied to the same controller in ember?
In iOS main portions or sections of the screen are tied to a single controller. If you want to present another main interface, say a modal window to create a new element, you (typically) have an entirely separate controller to manage that view and its data/logic.
In something like Zend Framework, you have controllers that might perform some common spinup steps of ensuring authentication, but largely the actions play the role that controllers do in iOS, handling the logic and providing the data for 1 main section or view (being the web, this usually ends up being the whole page).
What is that typical role or advised pattern for using controllers in ember?
You have a couple different questions here so I'll address them one at a time.
First, you asked if controllers should be data oriented or view oriented. In my experience both behaviors are allowable. Controllers are an excellent way to manage data sets for your application, including things like filtering and searching. Evin Grano wrote a good post about this from the SproutCore perspective and most of the concepts should apply to Ember as well: http://www.itsgotwhatplantscrave.com/2009/07/30/root-controller-paradigm/. Controllers are also well suited for controlling the application state and behavior. For example, you might put a method in a controller that is bound to as a button action elsewhere in your app. However, you should also examine Ember States to see if these might be better suited to your scenario.
Secondly, you asked about tying multiple views to the same controller. Personally, I see no concerns with this as long as the controller maintains a distinct purpose. If the views are logically related and share in the same state or data then a single controller makes sense. If you find the controller growing to cover too many different areas, you should consider splitting it into multiple controllers.
From my limited experience in Ember.js, I have regulate to the following:
The view handles user actions related to changes in the presentation layer, limited to its own instance.
A navigation controller/statemanager handles complex manipulation of what is presented (add multiple views, remove some other, etc.).
The controller responds to user actions related to the data layer.