What's the best practice for using external code, e.g. code found in node modules, in angular?
I'd like to use this https://www.npmjs.com/package/positionsizingcalculator node module in my angular app. I've created an angular service intended to wrap the node module, and now I want to make the service use the node module.
'use strict';
angular.module('angularcalculator')
.service('MyService', function () {
this.calculate = function () {
return {
//I want to call the node module here, whats the best practice?
};
}
});
To do this, I would crack open the package and grab the .js out of it. This package is MIT license, so we can do whatever we want. If you navigate to /node_modules/positionsizingcalculator/ you'll find an index.js. Open that up and you'll see the moudle export, which takes a function that returns an object.
You'll notice this is an extremely similar pattern to .factory, which also takes a function that returns an object (or constuctor, depending on your pattern). So I'd do the following
.factory('positionsizingcalculator', function(){
basicValidate = function (argument) {
... //Insert whole declaration in here
return position;
})
and the inject it where you need it:
.controller('AppController', function(positionsizingcalculator){
//use it here as you would in node after you inject it via require.
})
--
Edit: This is good for one off grabs of the JS, but if you want a more extensible solution, http://browserify.org/ is a better bet. It allows you to transform your requirements into a single package. Note that this could result in pulling down a lot more code that you might otherwise need, if you make one require bundle for your whole site, as this is not true AMD, and you need to to load everything you might want one the client, unless you make page specific bundles.
You'd still want to do the require in a factory and return it, to keep it in angular's dependency injection framework.
Related
I trying to convert a nodejs project to TypeScript and while mostly I did not faced really difficult obstacles during this process, the codebase has few gotchas like this, mostly in startup code:
function prepareConfiguration() {
let cloudConfigLoader = require('../utils/cloud-config');
return cloudConfigLoader.ensureForFreshConfig().then(function() {
//do some stuff
});
}
I may be need just an advice on which approach for refactoring this has less code changes to be made to make it work in TypeScript fashion.
In response to comments, more details:
That require loads the node module, not a JSON file. From that module the ensureForFreshConfig function contacts with a cloud service to load a list of values to rebuild a configuration state object.
Problem is that mdule was made in standard node approach of "module is isngleton object" and its independencies include auth component that will be ready only when the shown require call is made. I know it is not best a way to do so..
Typesript does not allow "mport that module later" except with dynamyc import which is problematic as mentiond in comment.
The "good" approach is to refactor that part of startup and make the ensureForFreshConfig and its dependency to initiate its ntenras on demand via cnstructors.. I just hoped ofr some soluiton to reduce things to be remade durng this transition to the TypeScript
import { cloudConfigLoader } from '../utils/cloud-config'
async function prepareConfiguration() {
await cloudConfigLoader.ensureForFreshConfig()
// do some stuff
// return some-stuff
}
The function is to be used as follows.
await prepareConfiguration()
I got to the point that I'd like to have a factory to manage all my dependencies for the modules in a single place instead of having a lot of statements using require all over the place in my code.
I've looked at some approaches that rely on AMD, but I'd like to know how to do it by using node.js / express combination with the OOB module loader which I think it uses common.js.
I've been thinking of doing something like this:
module.exports = {
lib:[],
load:function(name){
if(this.lib[name]!==undefined && this.lib[name]!==null){
return this.lib[name];
}
switch(name)
{
case 'express':
this.lib[name] = require('express');
break;
case 'morgan':
this.lib[name] = require('morgan');
break;
case 'body-parser':
this.lib[name] = require('body-parser');
break;
}
console.log(this.lib);
return this.lib[name];
}
};
Some people say that's more than a factory its a mediator pattern, so either way I just wanted to illustrate my point.
my basic requirement is to handle all the dependencies from a single place in the system if I need to change a dependency I just change it on this file and automatically updates through the whole system.
so is there a better way to handle this? any Implementation that already have done this approach?
thanks!
Technically this is what require() does internally.
require('foo'); require('foo')
guarantees that it will load and run foo only once. The second call will return a cached copy from its internal array.
You can achieve the same naming indirection (and an API adapter if you'll ever decide to change the implementation without changing callers) by requiring JS files or your node modules that re-export modules you actually use (e.g. require('./my-express-wrapper') instead of require('express')).
if I need to change a dependency I just change it on this file and automatically updates through the whole system.
I'd be concerned that it will cause code to be surprising:
require('factory').load('body-parser'); // loads Formidable!?
I see little benefit in having such layer of indirection:
Even in the best case of drop-in-replacement it saves very little work, because project-global find'n'replace of require('foo') with require('bar') is an easy task in most text editors.
The hard part of replacing module (which is unlikely to be 100% compatible) is getting existing code to correctly work with it. This is not avoided by use of the factory pattern. You'll need to write an adapter either way, and sometimes it may even be better to actually change uses of the module everywhere than to write an emulation layer for an API that probably wasn't good anyway.
I have a node toplevel myapp variable that contains some key application state - loggers, db handlers and some other data. The modules downstream in directory hierarchy need access to these data. How can I set up a key/value system in node to do that?
A highly upticked and accepted answer in Express: How to pass app-instance to routes from a different file? suggests using, in a lower level module
//in routes/index.js
var app = require("../app");
But this injects a hard-coded knowledge of the directory structure and file names which should be a bigger no-no jimho. Is there some other method, like something native in JavaScript? Nor do I relish the idea of declaring variables without var.
What is the node way of making a value available to objects created in lower scopes? (I am very much new to node and all-things-node aren't yet obvious to me)
Thanks a lot.
Since using node global (docs here) seems to be the solution that OP used, thought I'd add it as an official answer to collect my valuable points.
I strongly suggest that you namespace your variables, so something like
global.myApp.logger = { info here }
global.myApp.db = {
url: 'mongodb://localhost:27017/test',
connectOptions : {}
}
If you are in app.js and just want to allow access to it
global.myApp = this;
As always, use globals with care...
This is not really related to node but rather general software architecture decisions.
When you have a client and a server module/packages/classes (call them whichever way you like) one way is to define routines on the server module that takes as arguments whichever state data your client keeps on the 'global' scope, completes its tasks and reports back to the client with results.
This way, it is perfectly decoupled and you have a strict control of what data goes where.
Hope this helps :)
One way to do this is in an anonymous function - i.e. instead of returning an object with module.exports, return a function that returns an appropriate value.
So, let's say we want to pass var1 down to our two modules, ./module1.js and ./module2.js. This is how the module code would look:
module.exports = function(var1) {
return {
doSomething: function() { return var1; }
};
}
Then, we can call it like so:
var downstream = require('./module1')('This is var1');
Giving you exactly what you want.
I just created an empty module and installed it under node_modules as appglobals.js
// index.js
module.exports = {};
// package.json too is barebones
{ "name": "appGlobals" }
And then strut it around as without fearing refactoring in future:
var g = require("appglobals");
g.foo = "bar";
I wish it came built in as setter/getter, but the flexibility has to be admired.
(Now I only need to figure out how to package it for production)
How do you require a file within itself in node.js? E.g. api.js:
var api = require(./api.js);
What is the best practice for doing this?
You can totally do it. Try this, for instance (in a file named a.js):
exports.foo = 'foo';
var a = require('./a');
console.log(a);
exports.bar = 'bar';
console.log(a);
At the point where require executes, it will return the module a as it exists at the point where require runs so the field foo will be defined but not bar.
There's no point to doing this though. You use require to bring into your current scope an object which would otherwise not be available (namely, a module). But you don't need to do this to access the module you are currently in: it is already fully available.
The code above works because Node has rules to handle cyclic dependencies. And here you have a module which is cyclicly dependent on itself. Rather than go into an infinite loop of requires, Node has require return the module as built up to that point: a partial module. And the modules in a cyclic dependency have to be designed to handle the fact that they may get partial modules.
Cyclic dependencies are to be avoided as much as possible. Most of the time this means refactoring the modules to avoid the mutual dependency by moving functionality into one or more new modules.
So, again, the best practice is to not do this in the first place.
I have a requirejs module which is used as a wrapper to an API that comes from a different JS file:
apiWrapper.js
define([], function () {
return {
funcA: apiFuncA,
funcB: apiFuncB
};
});
It works fine but now I have some new use cases where I need to replace the implementation, e.g. instead of apiFuncA invoke my own function. But I don't want to touch other places in my code, where I call the functions, like apiWrapper.funcA(param).
I can do something like the following:
define([], function () {
return {
funcA: function(){
if(regularUseCase){
return apiFuncA(arguments);
} else {
return (function myFuncAImplementation(params){
//my code, instead of the external API
})(arguments);
}
},
funcB: apiFuncB
};
});
But I feel like it doesn't look nice. What's a more elegant alternative? Is there a way to replace the module (apiWrapper) dynamically? Currently it's defined in my require.config paths definition. Can this path definition be changed at runtime so that I'll use a different file as a wrapper?
Well, first of all, if you use Require.js, you probably want to build it before production. As so, it is important you don't update paths dynamically at runtime or depends on runtime variables to defines path as this will prevent you from running r.js successfully.
There's a lot of tools (requirejs plugins) out there that can help you dynamically change the path to a module or conditionnaly load a dependency.
First, you could use require.replace that allow you to change parts (or all) of a module URL depending on a check you made without breaking the build.
If you're looking for polyfilling, there's requirejs feature
And there's a lot more listed here: https://github.com/jrburke/requirejs/wiki/Plugins