Ember, Ember-data, and jquery-ui.dialog, "Oh my!" - ember.js

The task:
Open a form in a lightbox to create a new "event"; the opened form should be bookmarkable.
The road blocks:
There are examples of opening a lightbox using {{action}} tags, but could not find one that opened in its own route.
There are many examples using older versions of ember.js.
There is not a lot of documentation related to ember-data and REST (I know, I know...it isn't "production ready").
The problem:
The fields in the form were not being tied to a backing model so "null" was being posted to my servlet (a Spring controller).
My very first iteration was not too far off from the final outcome (jsfiddle). The thing that finally made it works swapping this:
EP.EventsNewRoute = Ember.Route.extend({
...
setupController : function(controller, model) {
controller.set("model", model);
},
...
});
...for this:
EP.EventsNewRoute = Ember.Route.extend({
...
setupController : function(controller, model) {
this.controllerFor("events-new").set("model", model);
},
...
});
The question:
Why does the setupController function need to call controllerFor in order to properly set up the model?
And finally, since I struggled to find a fully-functional example, I wanted to make this accessible (and hopefully discover improvements).
Here's the fiddle: http://jsfiddle.net/6thJ4/1/
Here are a few snippets.
HTML:
<script type="text/x-handlebars">
<div>
<ul>
{{#linkTo "events.new" tagName="li"}}
Add Event
{{/linkTo}}
</ul>
</div>
{{outlet events-new}}
</script>
<script type="text/x-handlebars" data-template-name="events-new">
<form>
<div>
<label>Event Name:</label>
{{view Ember.TextField valueBinding="name"}}
</div>
<div>
<label>Host Name:</label>
{{view Ember.TextField valueBinding="hostName"}}
</div>
</form>
</script>
JavaScript:
...
EP.Router.map(function() {
this.resource("events", function() {
this.route("new");
});
});
EP.EventsNewRoute = Ember.Route.extend({
model : function() {
return EP.Event.createRecord();
},
setupController : function(controller, model) {
//controller.set("model", model); // Doesn't work? Why not?
this.controllerFor("events-new").set("model", model); // What does this do differently?
},
...
});
EP.EventsNewController = Ember.ObjectController.extend({
save : function() {
this.get("content.transaction").commit(); // "content.store" would commit _everything modified_, we only have one element changed, so only "content.transaction" is necessary.
}
});
EP.EventsNewView = Ember.View.extend({
...
});
EP.Event = DS.Model.extend({
name : DS.attr("string"),
hostName : DS.attr("string")
});
Resources:
http://emberjs.com/guides/routing/setting-up-a-controller/
http://emberjs.com/guides/getting-started/toggle-all-todos/ (trying to mimic what I learned, but morph the add-new to a new route)
Writing a LightboxView causes problems / Integrating DOM Manipulating jQuery-Plugins makes actions unusable (lightbox "example")
Dependable views in Ember (another lightbox "example" but doesn't have routes for the lightbox opening)

Why does the setupController function need to call controllerFor in order to properly set up the model?
Ember makes URLs a very integral part of its conventions. This means that the state of your application is represented by the route it is on. You've grokked most of this correctly. But there are couple of subtle nuances, that I will clarify below.
First consider an app with the following URLs,
/posts - shows a list of blog posts.
/posts/1 - shows a single blog post.
And say clicking on a post in the list at /posts takes you to /posts/1.
Given this scenario, there 2 ways a user will get to see the post at /posts/1.
By going to /posts and clicking on the 1st post.
By typing in /posts/1, via bookmarks etc.
In both these cases, the PostRoute for /posts/1 will need the model corresponding to Post id 1.
Consider the direct typing scenario first. To provide a way to lookup the id=1 post model, you would use,
model: function(params) {
return App.Post.find(params.post_id);
}
Your template for post will get the model and it can render using it's properties.
Now consider the second scenario. Clicking on post with id=1 takes you to /posts/1. To do this your template would use linkTo like this.
{{#linkTo 'post' post}} {{post.title}} {{/linkTo}}
Here you are passing in the post model to the linkTo helper. It then serializes the data for the post into a URL, ie:- '/posts/1'. When you click on this link Ember realizes that it needs to render the PostRoute but it already has the post model. So it skips the model hook and directly calls setupController.
The default setupController is setup to simply assign the model on the controller. It's implemented to do something like,
setupController: function(controller, model) {
controller.set('model', model);
}
If you do not need to set custom properties on your controller, you don't need to override it. Note: if you are augmenting it with additional properties you still need to call _super to ensure that the default setupController behaviour executes.
setupController: function(controller, model) {
this._super.apply(this, arguments);
controller.set('customProp', 'foo');
}
One final caveat, If you are using linkTo and the route does not have dynamic segments, then the model hook is still called. This exception makes sense if you consider that you were linking to the /posts route. Then the model hook has to fire else Ember has no data to display the route.
Which brings us to the crux of your question. Nearly there, I promise!
In your example you are using linkTo to get to the EventsNewRoute. Further your EventsNewRoute does not have dynamic segments so Ember does call the model hook. And controller.set("model", model); does work in so much as setting the model on the controller.
The issue is to do with your use of renderTemplate. When you use render or {{render}} helper inside a template, you are effectively getting a different controller to the one you are using. This controller is different from the one you set the model on, hence the bug.
A workaround is to pass the controller in the options, which is why renderTemplate gets this controller as an argument.
renderTemplate: function(controller) {
this.render("events-new", {
outlet : "events-new", controller: controller
});
}
Here's an updated jsfiddle.
Final Note: Unrelated to this question, you are getting the warning,
WARNING: The immediate parent route ('application') did not render into the main outlet and the default 'into' option ('events') may not be expected
For that you need to read this answer. Warning, it's another wall of text! :)

Related

Ember model proxying deprecation confusion

I'm trying to work through deprecations messages in Ember 1.11 about object proxying in templates, and have run into confusion.
On an edit route, for example, I was loading a single record in the model hook. Then, using the setupController hoook, I was setting other collection variables to enable select menus. This provoked deprecation notices about proxying; I attempted to resolve those by setting all data in the model hook using an Ember.RSVP.hash as the model.
I now have a problem where, if I load the page directly, the model is correct, but if I visit from a link-to, the model is incorrect. I found information on similar problems that led me to try using setupController to set the model, based on this.get('model'), hoping that would grab the model from the route's model funtion, but this also did not work. The setupController action is being invoked, but it doesn't seem to be affecting the template for some reason, which is where I've had a roadblock.
show.hbs:
{{link-to model}}
edit.hbs –– data present if direct page load, empty if visiting from show link-to
{{model.foo.name}}
edit route:
renderTemplate: function (controller,model) {
this.render('foo/form');
},
model: function (project) {
return Ember.RSVP.hash({
foo: this.store.find("foo", foo.foo_id),
bar: this.store.find('bar')
});
}
also tried this for edit route:
renderTemplate: function (controller,model) {
this.render('foo/form');
},
model: function (project) {
return Ember.RSVP.hash({
foo: this.store.find("foo", foo.foo_id),
bar: this.store.find('bar')
});
},
setupController: function (controller, model) {
controller.set('model', this.get('model');
}
I've found one simple way around this, not sure if there is a better "Ember way" –– I see that because link-to is passing the model, it is assumed that there is no model hook required; passing model.id instead of model as link-to argument does cause the model hook to be invoked.
{{link-to model.id}}
instead of:
{{link-to model}}

Ember.js Multiple Models for a Modal Dialog Box

I am new to Ember.js, and I am building a web application that is using Ember.js and Ember-Data for its front-end technology. I am trying to understand what would be the best practice for when you might have multiple ember-data bound components on a page that use an independent model.
Here is kind of what I'm trying to do:
https://gist.github.com/redrobot5050/6e775f4c5be221cd3c42
(There's a link on the page to editing it within jsbin this gist. For some reason, I can't get a 'Share' URL off the vanity URL.)
I have a template like so:
<script type="text/x-handlebars" data-template-name="index">
<p>Options for graphics quality: </p>
<ul>
{{#each item in model}}
<li>{{item.setting}}</li>
{{/each}}
</ul>
<p>Currently Selected: {{model.selectedValue}}</p>
<p>Draw Distance Options:</p>
<ul>
{{#each item in dropdown}}
<li>{{item.distance}}
{{/each}}
</ul>
<p>Currently Selected Distance: {{selectedDistance}}
</p>
{{outlet}}
<button {{action 'openModal' 'modal' model}}>Change Settings</button>
</script>
In this template, all the data binds correctly and appears in scope. However, when I attempt to modify it within its modal dialog box, only Quality is bound to its Ember.Select view. I have attempted to force the binding in the IndexController with a controller.set but it does not appear to be working.
My IndexController looks like this:
App.IndexRoute = Ember.Route.extend({
model: function() {
var qualityList = this.store.find('quality');
console.log('qualityList=' + qualityList);
return qualityList;
//return App.Quality.FIXTURES;
},
setupController : function(controller, model) {
controller.set('model', model);
var drawDistanceList = this.store.find('drawDistance');
console.log('distanceList=' + drawDistanceList );
controller.set('dropdown', drawDistanceList);
controller.set('selectedDistance', 1);
//this.controllerFor('modal').set('dropdown', drawDistanceList );
}
});
The JSBin really shows off what I am attempting to do: I want to load/bind each of the drop downs independently from the same controller. The JSBin does not work correctly because I'm not really sure how to do this, just yet. I am posting to stackExchange to see if someone can modify this JSBin and show me what I'm doing wrong, or if someone can point me in the right direction, design-wise on how to solve this problem?
(For example, I think a possible solution could be to create the dropdowns as components, and load the data through their controller or pass it in as properties from the parent controller, but I really want to know what is the "The Ember Way").
App.IndexRoute = Ember.Route.extend({
model: function() {
return Ember.RSVP.hash({
qualityList: this.store.find('quality'),
drawDistanceList: this.store.find('drawDistance')
});
},
setupController: function(controller, model) {
controller.set('model', model.qualityList);
controller.set('dropdown', model.drawDistanceList);
}
});
Documentation for Ember.RSVP.hash used to be here: http://emberjs.com/api/classes/Ember.RSVP.html#method_hash. I'm not sure why it has disappeared.
For the moment, you can find it at: http://web.archive.org/web/20140718075313/http://emberjs.com/api/classes/Ember.RSVP.html#method_hash

Creating a new record not pulling data from template fields

I am attempting to create a new record, however none of the data from the fields is being passed automatically, as I expected Ember to (from what I've read).
My template:
<form {{action save content on="submit"}}>
{{input value=name}}
<button type="submit"}}>Next</a>
From what I've read content is an alias for model and interchanging these makes no difference.
My route:
App.CampaignsNewRoute = Ember.Route.extend({
actions: {
save: function(campaign) {
console.log(campaign.name);
}
},
model: function(controller) {
return this.store.createRecord('campaign');
}
});
And my controller:
App.CampaignsNewController = Ember.ObjectController.extend({
pageTitle: 'New Campaign Setup'
});
When I hit 'Next' it logs undefined. Logging just the campaign shows it's an Ember model, but without the name attribute. name is defined on the campaign model. Setting the input to {{input value=content.name}} places the name attribute within the model returned, but it's still undefined. Am I missing anything in this process? The EmberJS site doesn't show how to do this, from what I can find.
--
As a side note: I was originally using App.CampaignsNewController = Ember.Controller.extend as my model was returning a hash of promises, one of which is an array and Ember didn't like me using either array or object controller. I simplified it to the above to verify it wasn't that which was causing the issue. So any solution taking this into account would be wonderful.
Edit: I can access the template fields by doing this.get('controller').get('name') but surely that is not necessary? Changing my controller to a Ember.Controller.extend also stops that from working, would love to know why. Clarification on best practice here would still be wonderful!
Edit2: this.get('controller.content').get('name') works if the controller is simply an Ember.Controller as opposed to Ember.ObjectController and the template has {{input value=content.name}}. I'll work with but hopefully someone can clarify this is the correct way.
ObjectController is the way to go here. You would have it backed by one particular model, your new model, and you would add additional properties to the controller for use in the template.
Code
App.IndexRoute = Ember.Route.extend({
actions: {
save: function(campaign) {
console.log(campaign.get('color'));
}
},
model: function() {
return Ember.RSVP.hash({
record: this.store.createRecord('color'),
all: this.store.find('color')
});
},
setupController: function(controller, model){
this._super(controller, model.record);
controller.set('allColors', model.all);
}
});
App.IndexController = Em.ObjectController.extend({
});
Template
In the template any time you want to access anything on the model backing the template, you can just access it as if the model is the current scope.
{{name}}
if you want to access any of the properties that exist on the controller you would use the property name that it is on the controller.
{{allColors.length}}
Here's an example:
<form {{action save model on="submit"}}>
Color:{{input value=color}}<br/>
<button type="submit">Next</button>
</form>
<ul>
{{#each item in allColors}}
{{#unless item.isNew}}
<li>{{item.color}}</li>
{{/unless}}
{{/each}}
</ul>
One last tip, always use getters and setters ;)
Ember Data hides the properties, they don't live right on the object, so campaign.name will return undefined forever and ever. If you do campaign.get('name') you'll get a real response.
With the example: http://emberjs.jsbin.com/OxIDiVU/792/edit

emberjs-1.0 problems with link-to- and serialize when router-has-a-dynamic-segment

I have a jsfiddle with nested route where I am nesting one dynamic routes timeSlot inside another dynamic route appointment. Inside the appointment template I have a #link-to 'timeSlot'. When I click that link, the timeSlot template is never rendered and in the console I see:
This link-to is in an inactive loading state because at least one of its parameters presently has a null/undefined value, or the provided route name is invalid.
This is the router. Note that if I changed the timeSlot route from a dynamic route to a normal route, that is to something link this, this.resource('timeSlot'), the error goes away and the template is displayed. The route needs to be dynamic, as it accepts dates passed in via users click from a calendar.
It is a small jsfiddle and 95% of the code in the jsfiddle is pasted in this question:
App.Router.map(function(){
this.resource('appointments', {path: "/"}, function(){
this.resource('appointment', {path: "/:appointment_id"}, function(){
this.resource('timeSlot', {path: '/:day'});
});
});
});
The appointment route
App.AppointmentRoute = Ember.Route.extend({
model: function(params){
},
setupController: function(controller, model){
this._super(controller, model);
controller.set('content', model);
}
});
The TimeSlot route
App.TimeSlotRoute = Ember.Route.extend({
model: function(params){
},
setupController: function(controller, model) {
this._super(controller, model);
controller.set('content', model);
},
serialize: function(dateText) {
/*
return {
day: //this.controllerFor('timeSlot').today.pushObject(dateText)};
*/
}
});
The appointment template
<script type="text/x-handlebars" data-template-name="appointment">
<br/>
{{#link-to 'timeSlot' [2013-07-18]}}click timeSlot{{/link-to}}
{{outlet}}
</script>
The time Slot template
<script type="text/x-handlebars" data-template-name="timeSlot">
<h3> from timeslot template</h3>
{{outlet}}
</script>
update
For this route: this.resource('timeSlot', {path: ':appointment_id/:day'});
Explicitly passing values for each of the dynamic segment to link-to, via {{#link-to 'timeSlot' id=this day=['today'] }}click timeSlot{{/link-to}} in this jsfiddle, has now made it possible to hover over the link and see '#/2/dateText', where each slash segment is meant to be the value for the dynamic segment. Before passing in the value for the dynamic segment, all i saw when I hovered over the link was /#' suggesting the dynamic segment were not being picked.
It is still not working though. Because It using hard-coded values passed in the serialize method and not those passed to link-to.
update 2
This version is working though #linkTo doesn't seem to be calling serialized method.
http://jsfiddle.net/GQdbD/5/
It's kind of hard to tell what you're trying to do since all of your model hooks are empty. (Are they actually empty in your app?) In general, when you call link-to, transitionTo, or transitionToRoute Ember expects you to pass in a live model. In these cases the model hook on your route is skipped and the model that you pass to link-to is used instead.

How to use multiple models with a single route in EmberJS / Ember Data?

From reading the docs, it looks like you have to (or should) assign a model to a route like so:
App.PostRoute = Ember.Route.extend({
model: function() {
return App.Post.find();
}
});
What if I need to use several objects in a certain route? i.e. Posts, Comments and Users? How do I tell the route to load those?
Last update forever: I can't keep updating this. So this is deprecated and will likely be this way. here's a better, and more up-to-date thread EmberJS: How to load multiple models on the same route?
Update: In my original answer I said to use embedded: true in the model definition. That's incorrect. In revision 12, Ember-Data expects foreign keys to be defined with a suffix (link) _id for single record or _ids for collection. Something similar to the following:
{
id: 1,
title: 'string',
body: 'string string string string...',
author_id: 1,
comment_ids: [1, 2, 3, 6],
tag_ids: [3,4]
}
I have updated the fiddle and will do so again if anything changes or if I find more issues with the code provided in this answer.
Answer with related models:
For the scenario you are describing, I would rely on associations between models (setting embedded: true) and only load the Post model in that route, considering I can define a DS.hasMany association for the Comment model and DS.belongsTo association for the User in both the Comment and Post models. Something like this:
App.User = DS.Model.extend({
firstName: DS.attr('string'),
lastName: DS.attr('string'),
email: DS.attr('string'),
posts: DS.hasMany('App.Post'),
comments: DS.hasMany('App.Comment')
});
App.Post = DS.Model.extend({
title: DS.attr('string'),
body: DS.attr('string'),
author: DS.belongsTo('App.User'),
comments: DS.hasMany('App.Comment')
});
App.Comment = DS.Model.extend({
body: DS.attr('string'),
post: DS.belongsTo('App.Post'),
author: DS.belongsTo('App.User')
});
This definition would produce something like the following:
With this definition, whenever I find a Post, I will have access to a collection of comments associated with that post, and the comment's author as well, and the user which is the author of the post, since they are all embedded. The route stays simple:
App.PostsPostRoute = Em.Route.extend({
model: function(params) {
return App.Post.find(params.post_id);
}
});
So in the PostRoute (or PostsPostRoute if you're using resource), my templates will have access to the controller's content, which is the Post model, so I can refer to the author, simply as author
<script type="text/x-handlebars" data-template-name="posts/post">
<h3>{{title}}</h3>
<div>by {{author.fullName}}</div><hr />
<div>
{{body}}
</div>
{{partial comments}}
</script>
<script type="text/x-handlebars" data-template-name="_comments">
<h5>Comments</h5>
{{#each content.comments}}
<hr />
<span>
{{this.body}}<br />
<small>by {{this.author.fullName}}</small>
</span>
{{/each}}
</script>
(see fiddle)
Answer with non-related models:
However, if your scenario is a little more complex than what you described, and/or have to use (or query) different models for a particular route, I would recommend to do it in Route#setupController. For example:
App.PostsPostRoute = Em.Route.extend({
model: function(params) {
return App.Post.find(params.post_id);
},
// in this sample, "model" is an instance of "Post"
// coming from the model hook above
setupController: function(controller, model) {
controller.set('content', model);
// the "user_id" parameter can come from a global variable for example
// or you can implement in another way. This is generally where you
// setup your controller properties and models, or even other models
// that can be used in your route's template
controller.set('user', App.User.find(window.user_id));
}
});
And now when I'm in the Post route, my templates will have access to the user property in the controller as it was set up in setupController hook:
<script type="text/x-handlebars" data-template-name="posts/post">
<h3>{{title}}</h3>
<div>by {{controller.user.fullName}}</div><hr />
<div>
{{body}}
</div>
{{partial comments}}
</script>
<script type="text/x-handlebars" data-template-name="_comments">
<h5>Comments</h5>
{{#each content.comments}}
<hr />
<span>
{{this.body}}<br />
<small>by {{this.author.fullName}}</small>
</span>
{{/each}}
</script>
(see fiddle)
Using Em.Object to encapsulate multiple models is a good way to get all data in model hook. But it can't ensure all data is prepared after view rendering.
Another choice is to use Em.RSVP.hash. It combines several promises together and return a new promise. The new promise if resolved after all the promises are resolved. And setupController is not called until the promise is resolved or rejected.
App.PostRoute = Em.Route.extend({
model: function(params) {
return Em.RSVP.hash({
post: // promise to get post
comments: // promise to get comments,
user: // promise to get user
});
},
setupController: function(controller, model) {
// You can use model.post to get post, etc
// Since the model is a plain object you can just use setProperties
controller.setProperties(model);
}
});
In this way you get all models before view rendering. And using Em.Object doesn't have this advantage.
Another advantage is you can combine promise and non-promise. Like this:
Em.RSVP.hash({
post: // non-promise object
user: // promise object
});
Check this to learn more about Em.RSVP: https://github.com/tildeio/rsvp.js
But don't use Em.Object or Em.RSVP solution if your route has dynamic segments
The main problem is link-to. If you change url by click link generated by link-to with models, the model is passed directly to that route.
In this case the model hook is not called and in setupController you get the model link-to give you.
An example is like this:
The route code:
App.Router.map(function() {
this.route('/post/:post_id');
});
App.PostRoute = Em.Route.extend({
model: function(params) {
return Em.RSVP.hash({
post: App.Post.find(params.post_id),
user: // use whatever to get user object
});
},
setupController: function(controller, model) {
// Guess what the model is in this case?
console.log(model);
}
});
And link-to code, the post is a model:
{{#link-to "post" post}}Some post{{/link-to}}
Things become interesting here. When you use url /post/1 to visit the page, the model hook is called, and setupController gets the plain object when promise resolved.
But if you visit the page by click link-to link, it passes post model to PostRoute and the route will ignore model hook. In this case setupController will get the post model, of course you can not get user.
So make sure you don't use them in routes with dynamic segments.
For a while I was using Em.RSVP.hash, however the problem I ran into was that I didn't want my view to wait until all models were loaded before rendering. However, I found a great (but relatively unknown) solution thanks to the folks at Novelys that involves making use of the Ember.PromiseProxyMixin:
Let's say you have a view that has three distinct visual sections. Each of these sections should be backed by its own model. The model backing the "splash" content at the top of the view is small and will load quickly, so you can load that one normally:
Create a route main-page.js:
import Ember from 'ember';
export default Ember.Route.extend({
model: function() {
return this.store.find('main-stuff');
}
});
Then you can create a corresponding Handlebars template main-page.hbs:
<h1>My awesome page!</h1>
<ul>
{{#each thing in model}}
<li>{{thing.name}} is really cool.</li>
{{/each}}
</ul>
<section>
<h1>Reasons I Love Cheese</h1>
</section>
<section>
<h1>Reasons I Hate Cheese</h1>
</section>
So let's say in your template you want to have separate sections about your love/hate relationship with cheese, each (for some reason) backed by its own model. You have many records in each model with extensive details relating to each reason, however you'd like the content on top to render quickly. This is where the {{render}} helper comes in. You can update your template as so:
<h1>My awesome page!</h1>
<ul>
{{#each thing in model}}
<li>{{thing.name}} is really cool.</li>
{{/each}}
</ul>
<section>
<h1>Reasons I Love Cheese</h1>
{{render 'love-cheese'}}
</section>
<section>
<h1>Reasons I Hate Cheese</h1>
{{render 'hate-cheese'}}
</section>
Now you'll need to create controllers and templates for each. Since they're effectively identical for this example, I'll just use one.
Create a controller called love-cheese.js:
import Ember from 'ember';
export default Ember.ObjectController.extend(Ember.PromiseProxyMixin, {
init: function() {
this._super();
var promise = this.store.find('love-cheese');
if (promise) {
return this.set('promise', promise);
}
}
});
You'll notice that we are using the PromiseProxyMixin here, which makes the controller promise-aware. When the controller is initialized, we indicate that the promise should be loading the love-cheese model via Ember Data. You'll need to set this property on the controller's promise property.
Now, create a template called love-cheese.hbs:
{{#if isPending}}
<p>Loading...</p>
{{else}}
{{#each item in promise._result }}
<p>{{item.reason}}</p>
{{/each}}
{{/if}}
In your template, you'll be able to render different content depending on the state of promise. When your page initially loads, your "Reasons I Love Cheese" section will display Loading.... When the promise is loaded, it will render all the reasons associated for each record of your model.
Each section will load independently and not block the main content from rendering immediately.
This is a simplistic example, but I hope everyone else finds it as useful as I did.
If you're looking to do something similar for many rows of content, you may find the Novelys example above even more relevant. If not, the above should work fine for you.
This might not be best practice and a naïve approach, but it shows conceptually how you would go about having on multiple models available on one central route:
App.PostRoute = Ember.Route.extend({
model: function() {
var multimodel = Ember.Object.create(
{
posts: App.Post.find(),
comments: App.Comments.find(),
whatever: App.WhatEver.find()
});
return multiModel;
},
setupController: function(controller, model) {
// now you have here model.posts, model.comments, etc.
// as promises, so you can do stuff like
controller.set('contentA', model.posts);
controller.set('contentB', model.comments);
// or ...
this.controllerFor('whatEver').set('content', model.whatever);
}
});
hope it helps
Thanks to all the other excellent answers, I created a mixin that combines the best solutions here into a simple and reusable interface. It executes an Ember.RSVP.hash in afterModel for the models you specify, then injects the properties into the controller in setupController. It does not interfere with the standard model hook, so you would still define that as normal.
Example use:
App.PostRoute = Ember.Route.extend(App.AdditionalRouteModelsMixin, {
// define your model hook normally
model: function(params) {
return this.store.find('post', params.post_id);
},
// now define your other models as a hash of property names to inject onto the controller
additionalModels: function() {
return {
users: this.store.find('user'),
comments: this.store.find('comment')
}
}
});
Here is the mixin:
App.AdditionalRouteModelsMixin = Ember.Mixin.create({
// the main hook: override to return a hash of models to set on the controller
additionalModels: function(model, transition, queryParams) {},
// returns a promise that will resolve once all additional models have resolved
initializeAdditionalModels: function(model, transition, queryParams) {
var models, promise;
models = this.additionalModels(model, transition, queryParams);
if (models) {
promise = Ember.RSVP.hash(models);
this.set('_additionalModelsPromise', promise);
return promise;
}
},
// copies the resolved properties onto the controller
setupControllerAdditionalModels: function(controller) {
var modelsPromise;
modelsPromise = this.get('_additionalModelsPromise');
if (modelsPromise) {
modelsPromise.then(function(hash) {
controller.setProperties(hash);
});
}
},
// hook to resolve the additional models -- blocks until resolved
afterModel: function(model, transition, queryParams) {
return this.initializeAdditionalModels(model, transition, queryParams);
},
// hook to copy the models onto the controller
setupController: function(controller, model) {
this._super(controller, model);
this.setupControllerAdditionalModels(controller);
}
});
https://stackoverflow.com/a/16466427/2637573 is fine for related models. However, with recent version of Ember CLI and Ember Data, there is a simpler approach for unrelated models:
import Ember from 'ember';
import DS from 'ember-data';
export default Ember.Route.extend({
setupController: function(controller, model) {
this._super(controller,model);
var model2 = DS.PromiseArray.create({
promise: this.store.find('model2')
});
model2.then(function() {
controller.set('model2', model2)
});
}
});
If you only want to retrieve an object's property for model2, use DS.PromiseObject instead of DS.PromiseArray:
import Ember from 'ember';
import DS from 'ember-data';
export default Ember.Route.extend({
setupController: function(controller, model) {
this._super(controller,model);
var model2 = DS.PromiseObject.create({
promise: this.store.find('model2')
});
model2.then(function() {
controller.set('model2', model2.get('value'))
});
}
});
Adding to MilkyWayJoe's answer, thanks btw:
this.store.find('post',1)
returns
{
id: 1,
title: 'string',
body: 'string string string string...',
author_id: 1,
comment_ids: [1, 2, 3, 6],
tag_ids: [3,4]
};
author would be
{
id: 1,
firstName: 'Joe',
lastName: 'Way',
email: 'MilkyWayJoe#example.com',
points: 6181,
post_ids: [1,2,3,...,n],
comment_ids: [1,2,3,...,n],
}
comments
{
id:1,
author_id:1,
body:'some words and stuff...',
post_id:1,
}
...
I believe the link backs are important so that the full relationship is established. Hope that helps someone.
You could use the beforeModel or afterModel hooks as these are always called, even if model is not called because you're using dynamic segments.
As per the asynchronous routing docs:
The model hook covers many use cases for pause-on-promise transitions, but sometimes you'll need the help of the related hooks beforeModel and afterModel. The most common reason for this is that if you're transitioning into a route with a dynamic URL segment via {{link-to}} or transitionTo (as opposed to a transition caused by a URL change), the model for the route you're transitioning into will have already been specified (e.g. {{#link-to 'article' article}} or this.transitionTo('article', article)), in which case the model hook won't get called. In these cases, you'll need to make use of either the beforeModel or afterModel hook to house any logic while the router is still gathering all of the route's models to perform a transition.
So say you have a themes property on your SiteController, you could have something like this:
themes: null,
afterModel: function(site, transition) {
return this.store.find('themes').then(function(result) {
this.set('themes', result.content);
}.bind(this));
},
setupController: function(controller, model) {
controller.set('model', model);
controller.set('themes', this.get('themes'));
}