ember.js - view is ignoring contentBinding -

-

i'm building playlist. have 2 models describing json response server

app.chartsmodel = em.model.extend({   playlist: em.belongsto('app.playlistmodel', { key: 'playlist', embedded: true }) })  app.playlistmodel = em.model.extend({   description: em.attr()   uc_date: em.attr() })

the instances of these models loaded controller in route. have primary template:

#playlists   app.playlistview controllerbinding="controllers.playlist" contentbinding="content.playlist" p {{content.playlist}}

then app.playlistview template looks like:

#playlist   p {{this}}   p {{model}}

here renders:

<div id="playlists">   <div id="playlist">     <p>       <app.playlistcontroller:ember456>     </p>   </div>   <p>     <app.playlistmodel:ember454>   </p> </div>

i expected "#playlist" div have p-tag set instance of app.playlistmodel. not sure why contentbinding isn't taking effect.

any ideas?

  • update * appears setting controllerbinding nullifies contentbinding. there way set controller , content in view?

i think loading models controller right approach. assume it's playlistcontroller, model playlist , have property called 'charts' charts instance.

for view, however, should use controller context (not content) , access models through context. not mess controller or context bindings directly nor think of them different. if need specify things in binding, might try using unique name e.g. chartsbinding="controllers.playlist.charts". contentbinding may working. access in template {{content}}, not {{this}}.

anyway, may want try specifying controller view's context like:

#playlists   app.playlistview contextbinding=controller

then, in app.playlistview template:

#playlist   p {{this}}   p {{charts}}   p {{model}}

should give you: playlist controller (the context), charts instance, , playlist instance.


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

c# - How Configure Devart dotConnect for SQLite Code First? -

-
can configure following sample code ? when run following code, error : no entity framework provider found ado.net provider invariant name 'devart.data.sqlite' setting in machine.config <system.data> <dbproviderfactories> <add name="dotconnect sqlite" invariant="devart.data.sqlite" description="devart dotconnect sqlite" type="devart.data.sqlite.sqliteproviderfactory, devart.data.sqlite, version=4.6.287.0, culture=neutral, publickeytoken=09af7300eec23701" /> </dbproviderfactories> </system.data> after add below block code in app.config <?xml version="1.0"?> <configuration>   <configsections> <!-- more information on entity framework configuration, visit http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?linkid=237468 --> <section name="entityframework" type="system.data.entity.internal.configfile.entityframeworksection, entit...
Read more

java - Copying object fields -

-
what best way of copying classes when need have 2 independent variables? have simple class: public class myclass { boolean = false; string b= "not empty"; } do need make method : assign(myclass data ) { a= data.a; b= data.b; } is there automatic method copy (duplicate) objects in java? do need make method : pretty close. instead of making method, should make constructor. such constructors called copy constructor , , create them this: myclass(myclass data) { = data.a; b = data.b; } and create copy of instance, use constructor this: myclass obj1 = new myclass(); myclass obj2 = new myclass(obj1); copy constructor can tedious : using copy constructor create deep-copy can tedious, when class has mutable fields. in case, assignment create copy of reference, , not object itself. have create copy of fields (if want deep copy). can go recursive. a better way create deep copy serialize , deserialize object. why not use clone()? ...
Read more

c++ - Clear the memory after returning a vector in a function -

-
i have function processes , stores lot of data in , returns results vector of class. amount of data stored in function tremendous , want clear storage memory of function after finished job. necessary (does function automatically clear memory) or should clear memory function? update: vector<customers> process(char* const *filename, vector<int> id) { vector<customers> list_of_customers; (perform actions) return list_of_customers; } variables defined locally within function automatically released @ end of function scope. destructors objects called, should free memory allocated objects (if objects coded correctly). example of such object std::vector . anything you've allocated new must have corresponding delete release storage. try avoid doing own allocation , use raii instead, i.e. containers or smart pointers.
Read more