| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author |
|---|
|
In order to make the behavior compatible with $rootScope.$watch and $rootScope.$on methods, and
make it possible to deregister an attribute observer, Attributes.$observe method now returns a
deregistration function instead of the observer itself.
BREAKING CHANGE: calling attr.$observe no longer returns the observer function, but a
deregistration function instead.
To migrate the code follow the example below:
Before:
```
directive('directiveName', function() {
return {
link: function(scope, elm, attr) {
var observer = attr.$observe('someAttr', function(value) {
console.log(value);
});
}
};
});
```
After:
```
directive('directiveName', function() {
return {
link: function(scope, elm, attr) {
var observer = function(value) {
console.log(value);
};
attr.$observe('someAttr', observer);
}
};
});
```
Closes #5609
|
|
If the first element in a template is a <thead> or a <tfoot>, then
use the existing logic to handle table elements compilation.
Closes #6289
|
|
BREAKING CHANGE: ngClass and {{ class }} will now call the `setClass`
animation callback instead of addClass / removeClass when both a
addClass/removeClass operation is being executed on the element during the animation.
Please include the setClass animation callback as well as addClass and removeClass within
your JS animations to work with ngClass and {{ class }} directives.
Closes #6019
|
|
If the first element in a template is a <tr>, <th>, <td>, or <tbody> tag,
the HTML compiler will ensure that the template is wrapped in a <table>
element so that the table content is not discarded.
Closes #2848
Closes #1459
Closes #3647
Closes #3241
|
|
comment element
This corrects a complicated compiler issue, described in detail below:
Previously, if an element transclusion directive contained an asynchronous directive whose template
contained another element transclusion directive, the inner element transclusion directive would be
linked with the element, rather than the expected comment node.
An example manifestation of this bug would look like so:
```html
<div ng-repeat="i in [1,2,3,4,5]">
<div my-directive>
</div>
</div>
```
`my-directive` would be a replace directive, and its template would contain another element
transclusion directive, like so:
```html
<div ng-if="true">{{i}}</div>
```
ngIf would be linked with this template content, rather than the comment node, and the template element
would be attached to the DOM, rather than the comment. As a result, this caused ng-if to duplicate the
template when its expression evaluated to true.
Closes #6006
Closes #6101
|
|
test helper code for ngAnimate
Closes #5822
Closes #5917
|
|
The flushNext method of testing is difficult and highly coupled with the behavior
of ngAnimate's $animate workflow. It is much better instead to just queue all
$animate animation calls into a queue collection which is available on the $animate
service when mock.animate is included as a module within test code.
|
|
directives
Previously, classes added to asynchronous directive elements during the clone
attach function would not persist after the node is merged with the template, prior
to linking. This change corrects this behaviour and brings it in line with synchronous
directives.
Closes #5439
Closes #5617
|
|
FF 26.0 now throws:
"TypeError: NodeList doesn't have an indexed property setter."
when we try to assign to `childNodes[1]`, since this test still works properly
on Chrome and the issue being tested is not a cross-browser issues, I'm
just making the patchability check more robust instead of trying to figure
out how to make this test fully pass on FF.
|
|
It appears that this exceptional case was only valid for IE<8 and that for IE>=8 it
was actually causing a bug with the `ng-href-attr` directive on `<a>` elements.
Closes #5479
|
|
jQuery's elem.html('') is way slower than elem.empty(). As clearing
element contents happens quite often in certain scenarios, switching
to using .empty() provides a significant performance boost when using
Angular with jQuery.
Closes #4457
|
|
When a component uses an isolate scope reference
and the the component is used with an object literal
a new object is created on every evaluation.
Therefore the compiler needs to compare
the values of the parent and the isolate scope
using object equality and not object reference
equality.
Fixes #5296.
|
|
If an element has a directive whose content is loaded using `templateUrl`,
and the element is cloned using a linking function before the template arrives,
the clone needs to be updated as well.
This also updates `ngIf` and `ngRepeat` to keep the connection to the clone
of a tranclude function, so that they know about the changes a directive with
`templateUrl` does to the element in the future.
Fixes to #4930.
|
|
When using two-way binding with isolate scope, under some circumstances
the lastValue variable captured in the parentValueWatch function can get
out of sync.
Specifically, if both the value in the origin scope as well as the value
in the isolate scope get independently updated to the same value within
one digest cycle, the lastValue is never updated. This potentially causes
the watch to make the wrong decision as to which side to update on subsequent
passes.
This fixes things by ensuring lastValue is always set to the last seen
value even if the watch's logic was short circuited because there was no
difference between the values in the original and isolate scopes.
Closes #5182
|
|
`$sanitize` now uses the same mechanism as `$compile` to validate uris.
By this, the validation in `$sanitize` is more general and can be
configured in the same way as the one in `$compile`.
Changes
- Creates the new private service `$$sanitizeUri`.
- Moves related specs from `compileSpec.js` into `sanitizeUriSpec.js`.
- Refactors the `linky` filter to be less dependent on `$sanitize`
internal functions.
Fixes #3748.
|
|
|
|
Require bindings to form[action] to be $sce.RESOURCE_URL and bindings to
iframe[srcdoc] to be $sce.HTML
Closes #4927
Closes #4933
|
|
Some tests were wrong. However, src/* did not contain problems.
Fixes #5046
|
|
When $compile interpolates a CSS class attribute expression it will
do so by comparing the CSS class value already present on the element.
This may lead to unexpected results when dealing with ngClass values being
added and removed therefore it is best that both compile and ngClass delegate
addClass/removeClass operations to the same block of code.
|
|
Additional API (backwards compatible)
- Injects `$transclude` (see directive controllers) as 5th argument to directive link functions.
- `$transclude` takes an optional scope as first parameter that overrides the
bound scope.
Deprecations:
- `transclude` parameter of directive compile functions (use the new parameter for link functions instead).
Refactorings:
- Don't use comment node to temporarily store controllers
- `ngIf`, `ngRepeat`, ... now all use `$transclude`
Closes #4935.
|
|
A directive with a template with `replace: true` and an interpolated style at the root element should work correctly.
Closes #4882.
|
|
See doc update in the diff for more info.
BREAKING CHANGE: jqLite#scope() does not return the isolate scope on the element
that triggered directive with isolate scope. Use jqLite#isolateScope() instead.
|
|
used multiple times
When an isolate scope directive is also a "replace" directive and at the root of its template
it has other directives, we need to keep track remember to use isolate scope when linking
these.
This commit fixes the leakage of this state when this directive is used again later inside
or outside of the isolate directive template.
|
|
Fixes an issue when we didn't share the isolate scope with the controller
of the directive from the isolate directive's template when this directive
was replaced onto the isolate directive element.
|
|
|
|
isolate directive
I had to fix one unit test, as it assumed the broken behavior, where application template gets the
isolate scope of other (isolate) directive, rather than the regular scope.
BREAKING CHANGE: Child elements that are defined either in the application template or in some other
directives template do not get the isolate scope. In theory, nobody should rely on this behavior, as
it is very rare - in most cases the isolate directive has a template.
|
|
Fixes issue with isolate scope leaking all over the place into other directives on the same element.
Isolate scope is now available only to the isolate directive that requested it and its template.
A non-isolate directive should not get the isolate scope of an isolate directive on the same element,
instead they will receive the original scope (which is the parent scope of the newly created isolate scope).
Paired with Tobias.
BREAKING CHANGE: Directives without isolate scope do not get the isolate scope from an isolate directive on the same element. If your code depends on this behavior (non-isolate directive needs to access state from within the isolate scope), change the isolate directive to use scope locals to pass these explicitly.
// before
<input ng-model="$parent.value" ng-isolate>
.directive('ngIsolate', function() {
return {
scope: {},
template: '{{value}}'
};
});
// after
<input ng-model="value" ng-isolate>
.directive('ngIsolate', function() {
return {
scope: {value: '=ngModel'},
template: '{{value}}
};
});
Closes #1924
Closes #2500
|
|
directives
This is a fix for regression introduced last week by faf5b980.
Closes #4654
|
|
feature
|
|
Recently we changed the priority of attribute interpolation directive to -100
to ensure that it executes early in the post linking phase. This causes issues
with when terminal directives are placed on elements with attribute bindings
because the terminal directive will usually have 0 or higher priority which
results in attr interpolation directive not being applied to the element.
To fix this issue I'm switching the priority back to 100 and making moving the
binding setup into the pre-linking function.
This means that:
- terminal directives with priority lower than 100 will not affect the attribute
binding
- if a directive wants to add or alter bindings it can do so in the pre-linking
phase, as long as the priority of this directive is more than 100
- all post-linking functions will execute after the attribute binding has been
set up
- all pre-linking functions with directive priority lower than 100 will execute
after the attribute bindings have been setup
BREAKING CHANGE: the attribute interpolation (binding) executes as a directive
with priority 100 and the binding is set up in the pre-linking phase. It used
to be that the priority was -100 in rc.2 (100 before rc.2) and that the binding
was setup in the post-linking phase.
Closes #4525
Closes #4528
Closes #4649
|
|
When we re-enter compilation either due to async directive templates or element transclude directive
we need to keep track of controllers to instantiate during linking.
This piece of info was missing when re-entering compilation and that's what this commit fixes.
I also reordered the properties in the previousCompileContext object.
Closes #4434
Closes #4616
|
|
Issue an error and abort compilation when two directives that ask for transclusion are found
on a single element. This configuration is not supported and we previously failed to issue
the error because in the case of element transclusion the compilation is re-started and this
caused the compilation context to be lost.
The ngRepeat directive has been special-cased to bypass this warning because it knows how to
handle this scenario internally.
This is not an ideal solution to the problem of multiple transclusions per element, we are
hoping to have this configuration supported by the compiler in the future. See #4357.
Closes #3893
Closes #4217
Closes #3307
|
|
Objects received from outside AngularJS may have had their `hasOwnProperty`
method overridden with something else. In cases where we can do this without
incurring a performance penalty we call directly on Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty
to ensure that we use the correct method.
Also, we have some internal hash objects, where the keys for the map are provided
from outside AngularJS. In such cases we either prevent `hasOwnProperty` from
being used as a key or provide some other way of preventing our objects from
having their `hasOwnProperty` overridden.
BREAKING CHANGE: Inputs with name equal to "hasOwnProperty" are not allowed inside
form or ngForm directives.
Before, inputs whose name was "hasOwnProperty" were quietly ignored and not added
to the scope. Now a badname exception is thrown.
Using "hasOwnProperty" for an input name would be very unusual and bad practice.
Either do not include such an input in a `form` or `ngForm` directive or change
the name of the input.
Closes #3331
|
|
previously the compile/link fns executed in this order controlled via priority:
- CompilePriorityHigh, CompilePriorityMedium, CompilePriorityLow
- PreLinkPriorityHigh, PreLinkPriorityMedium, PreLinkPriorityLow
- link children
- PostLinkPriorityHigh, PostLinkPriorityMedium, PostLinkPriorityLow
This was changed to:
- CompilePriorityHigh, CompilePriorityMedium, CompilePriorityLow
- PreLinkPriorityHigh, PreLinkPriorityMedium, PreLinkPriorityLow
- link children
- PostLinkPriorityLow, PostLinkPriorityMedium , PostLinkPriorityHigh
Using this order the child transclusion directive that gets replaced
onto the current element get executed correctly (see issue #3558),
and more generally, the order of execution of post linking function
makes more sense. The incorrect order was an oversight that has
gone unnoticed for many suns and moons.
(FYI: postLink functions are the default linking functions)
BREAKING CHANGE: the order of postLink fn is now mirror opposite of
the order in which corresponding preLinking and compile functions
execute.
Very few directives in practice rely on order of postLinking function
(unlike on the order of compile functions), so in the rare case
of this change affecting an existing directive, it might be necessary
to convert it to a preLinking function or give it negative priority
(look at the diff of this commit to see how an internal attribute
interpolation directive was adjusted).
Closes #3558
|
|
Previously we would stop the compilation for both regular and element
transclusion directives which was wrong. Only element transclusion directives
should be terminal.
|
|
|
|
Fix wrong behaviour that didn't allow 'data-on' and 'on' element attributes
to be interpolated by $compile. The regex now accepts any string beginning
with 'on' and with at least one more English letter.
|
|
Closes #3759
|
|
How did compiling a templateUrl (async) directive with `replace:true` work before this commit?
1/ apply all directives with higher priority than the templateUrl directive
2/ partially apply the templateUrl directive (create `beforeTemplateNodeLinkFn`)
3/ fetch the template
4/ apply second part of the templateUrl directive on the fetched template
(`afterTemplateNodeLinkFn`)
That is, the templateUrl directive is basically split into two parts (two `nodeLinkFn` functions),
which has to be both applied.
Normally we compose linking functions (`nodeLinkFn`) using continuation - calling the linking
function of a parent element, passing the linking function of the child elements as an argument. The
parent linking function then does:
1/ execute its pre-link functions
2/ call the child elements linking function (traverse)
3/ execute its post-link functions
Now, we have two linking functions for the same DOM element level (because the templateUrl directive
has been split).
There has been multiple issues because of the order of these two linking functions (creating
controller before setting up scope locals, running linking functions before instantiating
controller, etc.). It is easy to fix one use case, but it breaks some other use case. It is hard to
decide what is the "correct" order of these two linking functions as they are essentially on the
same level.
Running them side-by-side screws up pre/post linking functions for the high priority directives
(those executed before the templateUrl directive). It runs post-linking functions before traversing:
```js
beforeTemplateNodeLinkFn(null); // do not travers
afterTemplateNodeLinkFn(afterTemplateChildLinkFn);
```
Composing them (in any order) screws up the order of post-linking functions. We could fix this by
having post-linking functions to execute in reverse order (from the lowest priority to the highest)
which might actually make a sense.
**My solution is to remove this splitting.** This commit removes the `beforeTemplateNodeLinkFn`. The
first run (before we have the template) only schedules fetching the template. The rest (creating
scope locals, instantiating a controller, linking functions, etc) is done when processing the
directive again (in the context of the already fetched template; this is the cloned
`derivedSyncDirective`).
We still need to pass-through the linking functions of the higher priority directives (those
executed before the templateUrl directive), that's why I added `preLinkFns` and `postLinkFns`
arguments to `applyDirectivesToNode`.
This also changes the "$compile transclude should make the result of a transclusion available to the
parent directive in post- linking phase (templateUrl)" unit test. It was testing that a parent
directive can see the content of transclusion in its pre-link function. That is IMHO wrong (as the
`ngTransclude` directive inserts the translusion in its linking function). This test was only passing because of
c173ca412878d537b18df01f39e400ea48a4b398, which changed the behavior of the compiler to traverse
before executing the parent linking function. That was wrong and also caused the #3792 issue, which
this change fixes.
Closes #3792
Closes #3923
Closes #3935
Closes #3927
|
|
The problem was in keeping the values of `attrNameStart` and `attrNameEnd` between directive loop iterations which lead to the compiler looking for multi-element ranges for any directives that happened to be in the directive list after one that was applied on a range. For instance, having a ng-repeat-start and ng-class on a single element with ng-repeat being resolved first made the compiler look for an ng-repeat-end for both ng-repeat and ng-class because the `attrNameEnd` was not reset to a falsy value before the second iteration. As the result, an exception saying the block end element could not be found and the second directive was not actually applied.
Closes #4002
|
|
It's great that IE11 wants to be compatible enough that it doesn't want
to be special cased and treated differently.
However, as long as one has to have a different code path for IE than
for the other supported browsers, we still need to detect and special
case it. For instance, our URL parsing code still needs the same
workaround the we used for IE10. We still see the same Access denied /
TypeError exceptions when setting certain values. FYI, Angular doesn't
generally blindly test for IE – we also check the version number.
Thanks to modern.ie for the free IE11 test VM.
Closes #3682
|
|
|
|
when the transluded content is being teleported to the translusion point, we should ensure that
the translusion point is empty before appending otherwise we end up with junk before the transcluded
content
|
|
previously the translusion was appended the the ngTranslude element via
$evalAsync which makes the transluded dom unavailable to parent
post-linking functions. By appending translusion in linking phase,
post-linking functions will be able to access it.
|
|
Closes #3566
|
|
This fixes regression introduced by #3514 (5c560117) - this commit is being
reverted here and a better fix is included.
The regression caused the controller to be instantiated before the isolate scope
was initialized.
Closes #3493
Closes #3482
Closes #3537
Closes #3540
|
|
Controllers should be always instantiated after compile fn runs, but before
pre-link fn runs. This way, controllers are available to pre-link fns that
request them.
Previously this was broken for async directives (directives with templateUrl).
Closes #3493
Closes #3482
Closes #3514
|
|
Closes #3459
|
|
|
|
|
