I have a list of accounts and then i have a view link to view an account in detail and this is the account route. When i click the view link the (guid) doesnt update when going through the router, it only updates in the URL but it doesnt seem to be carrying through to the code.
When i do a browser refresh then the (guid) gets carried through to the router... Its not resolving for some reason.
Im not using ember-data but will use it in the future.
Here is my "Accounts" template code with the "View" link:
{{#each accountdata in controller}}
<tr>
<td>{{accountdata.accountnumber}}</td>
<td>{{accountdata.accountname}}</td>
<td>{{accountdata.accounttypestatus}}</td>
<td>{{accountdata.accountuser}}</td>
<td>{{#linkTo account accountdata}}View{{/linkTo}}</td>
</tr>
{{/each}}
accountdata is the context with the "accountguid" which is my id.
Here is my router:
App.Router.map(function() {
this.resource("accounts", { path: '/accounts' });
this.resource("account", { path: "/accounts/:accountguid" });
});
App.AccountsRoute = Ember.Route.extend({
setupController: function(controller, model) {
controller.set('searchfilter','ALL');
controller.search();
}
});
App.AccountRoute = Ember.Route.extend({
setupController: function(controller, model) {
controller.show(controller);
},
model: function(params) {
this.controllerFor('account').set('accountguid',params.accountguid);
},
serialize: function(model) {
return {accountguid: Em.get(model, 'accountguid')}
}
});
My controller.show is where i send the context to call a script to display the account details.
So i just need view to carry through the correct accountguid each time which it isnt and then to call the show(context) method.
Thanks
This is my old router code which worked 100%. When i clicked a link it resolved the :accountguid and when i did a browser refresh it did the same thing. i had no problems, everything just worked.
// //Accounts
// accounts: Ember.Route.extend({
// route: '/accounts',
// index: Ember.Route.extend({
// route: '/',
// connectOutlets: function (router) {
// router.get('applicationController').connectOutlet('accounts');
// router.get('accountsController').set('searchfilter','ALL');
// router.get('accountsController').search();
// }
// }),
// view: Ember.Route.extend({
// route: '/:accountguid',
// connectOutlets: function (router, account) {
// router.get('applicationController').connectOutlet('account', account);
// router.get('accountController').show(account);
// //router.get('accountController').connectOutlet('eventloghistory','eventloghistory');
// }
// })
// }),
I managed to solve my problem with the following code. I am now able to refresh the browser and i am able to click the link and it will carry through the current :accountguid in use to the show() method.
App.AccountRoute = Ember.Route.extend({
model: function(params) {
return {accountguid: params.accountguid};
},
setupController: function(controller, model) {
controller.show(model);
},
serialize: function(model) {
return {accountguid: Em.get(model, 'accountguid')}
}
});
Change your router map to the following and it should work
App.Router.map(function() {
this.resource("accounts", function(){
this.resource('account',{path:':account_id'});
});
});
Please, show us the code behind your AccountsController and AccountController. It would be most useful if you provide a jsfiddle with the whole construction.
In general, you may be unaware of the new flow of things. Here is what happens in the two scenarios:
1. You navigate to the AccountRoute by setting the URL (/account/5 for example).
1.1. the 'model' hook of the AccountRoute is called
model: function(params) {
return your model here...
}
with params = { accountguid: 5 }. Because you are not using ember-data, you should implement this hook and initialise and return the model there.
1.2. the setupController hook is called with the AccountController and the model returned by the model hook. Without the code behind
controller.show(controller);
It is not quite clear what its purpose is, but you should probably do something like
setupController: function(controller, model) {
this._super(controller, model);
controller.set('content', model);
controller.show(model);
}
As you can see, by not implementing the model hook, you URL stays correct, but the route does not know how to build the needed model resource.
You transition to the route via a linkTo call
{{#linkTo account accountdata}}View{{/linkTo}}
Here, linkTo expects accountdata to be the full account model for the route. Meaning it may not carry only partial data like id for example (read this for clearance: In latest Ember, how do you link to a route with just the id/name of a model, rather than providing all of its attributes in the linking page?).
2.1. The model hook of the AccountRoute is NOT called. The AccountRoute model property is set to the object that is passed to linkTo instead (in our case 'accountdata').
2.2. setupController is called with AccountController and the accountdata object.
If you accountdata object is not complete, it would be wise to create a complete instance here and set it to the controller.
As you can imagine, if you accountdata is like { id: 5, accountname: "John", accounttypestatus: "A", ...}, then after a click on linkTo, the URL will update correctly to /account/5, but the account template will receive accountdata, rather than an actual account.
P.P. If none of the above is any help, this might be your issue: https://github.com/emberjs/ember.js/issues/1709
Related
This is my router.js code.
this.route('contact',{'path': '/contact/:chat_id'});
and This is my route.js code.
model(params) {
return this.store.findRecord("chat", params.chat_id)
},
and This is my controller.js code and can i use like this. It shows error as null value
please help me. How to use params in controller
recordChat: function() {
var chat = this.get(params.chat_id)
Ember.RSVP.hash({
offer_id: chat,
})
}
Edited for 2021: There's actually probably a much simpler way to do this now in Ember. See https://guides.emberjs.com/v3.27.0/routing/query-params/
Original Answer
I think the simplest answer is to create a variable in route and then set it in the setupController:
your_route.js
export default Ember.Route.extend({
model(params) {
this.set('myParam',params.my_Params);
// Do Model Stuff...
},
setupController(controller, model) {
// Call _super for default behavior
this._super(controller, model);
// Implement your custom setup after
controller.set('myParam', this.get('myParam'));
}
});
In your route.js, you need to call the setupController function like this:
setupController(controller, model) {
this._super(...arguments);
controller.set('chat', model);
}
Now you have access to it in your controller by calling:
recordChat() {
const chat = this.get('chat');
// if you don't call the setupController function, you could also do:
// const chat = this.get('model') or this.get('model.id') if you want the id only
}
UPDATE:
See working twiddle here
I think you can fetch the id you want from the model because you used the parameter chat_id to find the record and that id is now part of your chat object (which is the route model itself).
So, in your controller you just need to do: this.get('model').id
I have been looking to a solution to this for about a week now with no luck. We have an ember application which has a sidebar that is present on all routes which displays a list of user posts. It is important that the posts update in real-time as they are submitted as well as sort with the newest post at the top of the list, which from what I've read will require an array controller. The problem is, I cant find any way (or rather dont understand) to use an array controller and specific model that is not directly referenced to the current route. I have tried rendering the sidebar with the following code in the application route:
Destination.ApplicationRoute = Ember.Route.extend({
model: function(model) {
var self = this;
return new Em.RSVP.Promise(function (resolve, reject) {
new Em.RSVP.hash({
post : self.store.find('post')
}).then(function (results) {
resolve({
post: results.post
});
});
});
},
renderTemplate: function(controller, model) {
this.render();
this.render('sidebars/postBar', {
outlet: 'postbar',
into: 'application',
controller: 'posts',
model: 'post'
});
}
Then I have the following code for my array controller
Destination.PostsController = Ember.ArrayController.extend({
itemController: 'post',
sortProperties: ['id'],
sortAscending: false
});
However this doesnt work at all and I'm having trouble finding any examples of how to accomplish this.
The approach you can use is to load whatever models you need for the entire application in the ApplicationRoute. You don't have to create the RSVP.Promise as you have done, simply return an RSVP.all or RSVP.hash as follows:
Destination.ApplicationRoute = Ember.Route.extend({
model: function(model) {
return Em.RSVP.Hash({
post : self.store.find('post')
// fetch other models as required
});
}
});
Now there are two options for the controller setup and rendering.
Option 1: Outlets and route based controller setup.
The next thing is to setup the appropriate controller and render the view. Assuming you have defined an {{outlet 'sidebar'}} in your application template, the ApplicationRoute can render the sidebar as follows:
Destination.ApplicationRoute = Ember.Route.extend({
setupController: function(controller, model, transition) {
// perform default application controller setup
this._super(controller, model, transition);
// setup sidebar controller model
this.controllerFor('side-bar').set('model', model.posts);
// setup other controllers as required...
},
renderTemplate: function(controller, model) {
// render `posts` template into `side-bar` outlet with `side-bar` controller.
var c = this.controllerFor('side-bar');
this.render('side-bar', { outlet: 'side-bar, controller: c });
// other top level outlet rendering as required...
}
});
Option 2: View helper based controller setup and rendering.
Instead of using additional outlets, we can avoid the need to override setupController or renderTemplate in the route entirely. We can use the handlebars render helper to specify both the model and controller to use directly from our template.
So given your application controller will be setup with the result of the RSVP hash by default, it will contain a 'posts' property on its model/content. Just add the following to your application template:
{{render 'side-bar', posts}}
The above will render the sidebar template and setup the singleton SideBar controller using the posts model for you. I think this is cleaner than messing about with outlets given it doesn't sound like you going to be rendering different views into the sidebar based on your question.
API documentation on the render helper is here, with an overview of the rendering helpers here.
Note I have used Ember-cli resolver naming conventions which use a dasherized naming convention. If you're not using Ember CLI (which I highly recommend) then you may have to use the PascalCased string names ie 'SideBar' instead of 'side-bar'.
i am trying to build my first emberjs app and i wonder how i can save the state of a nested route to rebuild that state when the top route is revisted in the current session.
To give an example:
Lets Say a user switches from /overview/item1 to /info and then returns to
/overview/ and want to redirect him to /overview/item1
HTML
<div id="navigation">
{{#link-to 'info' class='link' }}Info{{/link-to}}
{{#link-to 'overview' class='link'}} Overview {{/link-to}}
</div>
JS
App.Router.map(function(){
this.route('info');
this.resource('overview', function () {
this.resource('item', { path : '/:item_id'});
});
});
it would be really nice if somebody could give me a hint to the right approach of this.
There are various ways for achieving your goal. Basically, you need to store state of last visited overview/:item_id route in the parent route or controller. Then, you need to check this state before resolving model of overview route. If state is not null (user was selected some item from overview/:item_id), abort current transition and start the new one (to
overview/:selected_item_id).
Schematic solution in code:
// 1st approach
App.OverviewController = Ember.ObjectController.extend({
selectedItem: null
});
App.OverviewRoute = Ember.Route.extend({
beforeModel: function(transition) {
if (this.get('controller.selectedItem')) {
transition.abort();
this.transitionTo('overview.item', this.get('selectedItem'));
}
}
});
App.OverviewItemRoute = Ember.Route.extend({
afterModel: function(model) {
this.controllerFor('overview').set('selectedItem', model);
}
});
// 2nd approach (less code)
App.OverviewRoute = Ember.Route.extend({
beforeModel: function(transition) {
if (this.get('controller.selectedItem')) {
transition.abort();
this.transitionTo('overview.item', this.get('selectedItem'));
}
},
setupController: function(controller) {
controller.reopen({ selectedItem: null });
}
});
App.OverviewItemRoute = Ember.Route.extend({
afterModel: function(model) {
this.controllerFor('overview').set('selectedItem', model);
}
});
It's important to keep the item itself, not it's id, because it'll way more easier to load overview/:item_id route in the future (passing stored model in this.transitionTo('overview.item', item)).
I am trying to implement a controller needing another (CampaignsNew needing AppsIndex), which looks like
App.CampaignsNewController = Ember.Controller.extend({
needs: ['appsIndex']
});
And in my CampaignsNew template I am showing it via
{{#if controllers.appsIndex.content.isUpdating}}
{{view App.SpinnerView}}
{{else}}
{{#each controllers.appsIndex.content}}
{{name}}
{{/each}}
{{/if}}
However controllers.appsIndex.content.isUpdating is never true. I.e. it attempts to show the data before it has been loaded.
My AppsIndex route has the model overridden:
App.AppsIndexRoute = Ember.Route.extend({
model: function(controller) {
var store = this.get('store').findAll('app');
}
...
});
I can get it to work if I put the same code within my CampaignsNew route and modify the template to each through controller.content. Which says to me that needs is not using the route? It also works if I go to the /apps page and it loads the data, and then navigate to the /campaigns/new page.
How do I get this to work? Thanks!
Edit:
As requested, the relevant parts of my router:
App.Router.map(function() {
this.resource('apps', function() {
...
});
this.resource('campaigns', function() {
this.route('new');
});
});
And the AppsIndex is accessed at /apps and CampaignsNew is at /campaigns/new
Edit2:
After implementing the suggestion by #kingpin2k, I've found that Ember is throwing an error. Below are the updated files and the error received.
App.CampaignsNewController = Ember.ObjectController.extend({
pageTitle: 'New Campaign'
});
App.CampaignsNewRoute = Ember.Route.extend({
model: function(controller) {
return Ember.RSVP.hash({
campaign: this.store.createRecord('campaign'),
apps: this.store.find('app')
});
// return this.store.createRecord('campaign');
},
setupController: function(controller, model){
controller.set('apps', model.apps);
this._super(controller, model.campaign);
}
});
Ember throws this error:
Error while loading route: Error: Assertion Failed: Cannot delegate set('apps', <DS.RecordArray:ember689>) to the 'content' property of object proxy <App.CampaignsNewController:ember756>: its 'content' is undefined.
I read online that this is because the content object doesn't exist. If I set it like so:
App.CampaignsNewController = Ember.ObjectController.extend({
content: Ember.Object.create(),
...
});
Then the page loads without error, and when inspecting the Ember Chrome extension, I can see the data has loaded. But it doesn't show on the page. Which I suppose happened because the content object existed and so Ember didn't wait for the model's promise to fulfill before rendering the template. Seems odd that you should have to define content in such a way though. Any insight on how to handle this?
Edit3: Question answered for me in another thread
Based on your router, apps isn't a parent of campaigns/new.
This means someone could hit #/campaigns/new and Ember would hit ApplicationRoute, CampaignsRoute, and CampaignsNewRoute to populate the necessary information for the url requested. Using needs as a way of communicating between controllers really only makes sense in an ancestral pattern (aka communicating with your parents, grandparents etc).
Just as another quick note, AppsIndex is a route of Apps, it won't be hit when your url includes a child. e.g.
Router
this.resource('apps', function() {
this.resource('chocolate', function(){
.....
});
});
Url being hit
#/apps/chocolate
Routes that will be hit
ApplicationRoute
AppsRoute
ChocolateRoute
ChocolateIndexRoute
The index route is only hit when you don't specify a route of a resource, and you are hitting that exact resource (aka nothing past that resource).
Update
You can return multiple models from a particular hook:
App.FooRoute = Em.Route.extend({
model: function(){
return Em.RSVP.hash({
cows: this.store.find('cows'),
dogs: this.store.find('dogs')
});
}
});
If you want the main model to still be cows, you could switch this up at the setupController level.
App.FooRoute = Em.Route.extend({
model: function(){
return Em.RSVP.hash({
cows: this.store.find('cows'),
dogs: this.store.find('dogs')
});
},
setupController: function(controller, model){
controller.set('dogs', model.dogs); // there is a property on the controller called dogs with the dogs
this._super(controller, model.cows); // the model backing the controller is cows
}
});
Check out the second answer here, EmberJS: How to load multiple models on the same route? (the first is correct as well, just doesn't mention the gotchas of returning multiple models from the model hook).
You can also just set the property during the setupController, though this means it won't be available when the page has loaded, but asynchronously later.
Which controller?
Use Controller if you aren't going to back your controller with a model.
App.FooRoute = Em.Route.extend({
model: function(){
return undefined;
}
});
Use ObjectController, if you are going to set the model of the controller as something, that isn't a collection.
App.FooRoute = Em.Route.extend({
model: function(){
return Em.RSVP.hash({
cows: this.store.find('cows'),
dogs: this.store.find('dogs')
});
}
});
Use ArrayController if that something is going to be a collection of some sort.
App.FooRoute = Em.Route.extend({
model: function(){
return ['asdf','fdsasfd'];
}
});
Note
If you override the setupController, it won't set the model of the controller unless you explicitly tell it to, or use this._super.
App.FooRoute = Em.Route.extend({
model: function(){
return Em.RSVP.hash({
cows: this.store.find('cows'),
dogs: this.store.find('dogs')
});
},
setupController: function(controller, model){
controller.set('cows', model.cows);
controller.set('dogs', model.dogs);
// uh oh, model isn't set on the controller, it should just be Controller
// or you should define one of them as the model
// controller.set('model', model.cows); or
// this._super(controller, model.cows); this does the default setupController method
// in this particular case, ArrayController
}
});
I am building a simple CRUD app. I have a list of records fetched from the server, click on the first and I am on the show page for that record with a delete button that ties into this action on the controller:
destroy: function() {
this.content.deleteRecord()
this.store.commit()
this.transitionTo('usersIndex')
}
I know the record is deleted, I can see it deleted on the server. The AJAX request is successful. However, the record still shows up on the index page. If I do a hard refresh from the server it is now gone.
My Router for usersIndex is the following:
App.UsersIndexRoute = Ember.Route.extend({
model: function(params) {
return App.Users.find();
},
setupController: function(controller, model) {
controller.set('content', model);
}
});
After calling deleteRecord you must save it for the ember data.
destroy: function() {
this.content.deleteRecord()
this.content.get('isDeleted');
this.content.save()
this.store.commit()
this.transitionTo('usersIndex')
}
Or alternatively you can sue destroyRecord which deleted thh record from both backend and ember data
destroy: function() {
this.content.destroyRecord()
this.transitionTo('usersIndex')
}
Hope this helps !
The solution I applied on my project was to enhance usersIndex to filter out any isDeleted records e.g.
In the template something like:
{{#unless user.isDeleted}}
{{render 'user' user}}
{{/unless}}
Also one can leverage the afterModel hook to test for isDeleted e.g.:
afterModel: function(model){
if ((!model.get('users').isAny('isDeleted',false)) || model.get('users.length') === 0){
this.send('exitUserIndex');
}
}