I have a web application that uses Require in order to load dependencies. I have a set of JS libraries that are included using the Require config.shim object.
Two such example libraries are:
require.config({
shim: {
"libs/leaflet": {
exports: "L"
}
"libs/leaflet-dvf": {
deps: ["libs/leaflet"],
exports: "L"
}
}
The second library, leaflet-dvf requires the first, leaflet. The second is a plugin to the first that depends on the global scope variable L that the first library defines.
When I run the application using Require normally, everything works fine. I can include either library from the shim, and everything works great. No problems.
The problem comes when I run this code through the Require r.js Optimizer. The Optimizer, when it builds the single optimized JS file, will incorrectly order the dependencies. In the built file, the leaflet-dvf code will come before the leaflet code. This causes a JS runtime error because the dependant plugin cannot find the L global scope variable that is required.
My build config looks like:
({
baseUrl: "../js",
paths: {
"requireLib": "../js/libs/require"
},
include: ["requireLib"],
name: "Main",
out: "bin/Main-built.js",
optimize: "none",
wrapShim: true
})
When I run the Optimizer, using Rhino, it builds my output file. In the Main-built.js file, the code for the plugin will come before the required library. This causes an L undefined error.
How do I get the Optimizer to respect the dependency order of my Shims, in order to properly order the library files in my Optimized JS file?
I had a similar problem a while back with knockout extensions and shim didn't work correctly. This is how we solved it.
Create a module called: leafletLib
define(["libs/leaflet","libs/leadleft-dvf"],function(leftlet,dvf){
return leaflet;
});
LeafletLib has the main library and all of the extensions. On modules that have leaflet or leaflet-dvf as a dependancy you call leafletLib. It is kind of hacky but it might work for you.
define(["leafletLib"],function(leafletLib){});
Related
I'm working on the project that uses require.js and I was faced with a simple question about declaring libraries as dependencies within every single modules. I saw many examples with require.js and in every of them libraries like Backbone, jquery, underscore etc was declared in every module. And it would be fine if your application consists of only couple of modules. But if your application has 40-50 modules it becomes a bit tedious to define jquery every single time.
On the other hand we can load all libraries into the require() this way:
// Just an example
require.config({
paths: {
jquery: '../bower_components/jquery/jquery',
underscore: '../bower_components/underscore/underscore',
backbone: '../bower_components/backbone/backbone'
}
});
require(['jquery', 'underscore', 'backbone'], function () {
require([
'app',
'bootstrap'
], function (App) {
var app = new App();
document.body.appendChild(app.el);
});
});
And then we can use Backbone, '_' and '$' into the App without declaring them as dependencies.
So I'm trying to understand why we should define them every time. Is it just a strict adherence to the Module pattern or something else?
Thanks.
Having your libraries passed in as arguments to your require factory function is a form of dependency injection. Now, depending on exactly how AMD-friendly your library dependencies are, you may even be able to use several different versions of the library at once in an application. Writing your modules in this way with explicit library dependencies can allow you future flexibility of mixing modules which require jQuery 1.8 and jQuery 2.0, for instance. A different jQuery version can be passed to each module.
When you don’t define all your dependencies explicitly every time, then you’re relying on the global variable (window.$ or window._) created as a side effect of loading the library. In that case, all the modules have to depend on the same version of the library.
I have the following code in Visual Studio, in an MVC application;
/scripts/bin/models/ViewModel.ts
export class ViewModel {
// view model code
}
Now, I have downloaded requirejs, and set the build mode for typescript to AMD type, so that its output looks such as....
define(["require", "exports"], function(require, exports) {
And so on ...
So then I declare my app/config.js file like so;
require.config({
baseUrl: '/scripts/bin'
});
And I try to load this up, I have requirejs loaded into the scripts, and attempt to call it...
require(['models/ViewModel'], function (viewModel) {
console.log("test");
});
And I am simply told that it is an invalid call. No other details. The path that it shows is completely correct, too. Is there some kind of additional configuration required? The requirejs documentation is extremely vague about this.
SOLUTION
This turned out to have nothing to do with requirejs, but instead had to do with IIS.
By default, IIS has a rule known as hiddenSegments. It does not allow you to bring in any code from a folder with bin in the path. I simply renamed the folder from bin to something else, and it worked fine.
Using require.js with TypeScript is a combination of your .html, require.config, module exports and imports.
For a step-by-step guide on moving from CommonJs TypeScript to AMD and require.js, have a look here.
Have fun.
The TypeScript compiler doesn't have any knowledge of your require.config - so when you use paths relative to that baseUrl they look invalid to the compiler.
Until something is done to bridge that slight mismatch (i.e. make the compiler super-clever so it can look for require.config sections and use them to check paths) it is easier not to set a baseUrl and use the full path in your import statements:
import vm = require('./scripts/bin/models/ViewModel');
Are you sure that the require call is done with [] and not just
require('models/ViewModel', function (viewModel) { // this is an error
console.log("test");
});
See : http://requirejs.org/docs/errors.html#requireargs
I am trying to load several RequireJS configs. In my html I am loading my main config via
<script src="../lib/require.js" data-main="../app/requireConfig"></script>
and once the document is ready I want to load all my plugin configs. So I created a new define file which holds a function that calls require.config:
define(['sharedServices/logger'], function (logger) {
function configVideo() {
logger.info('Adding video modules');
require.config({
path: {
Capabilities: 'videoProvider/Capabilities',
VideoProviderEnums: 'videoProvider/VideoProviderEnums',
VideoProviderCommon: 'videoProvider/VideoProviderCommon',
VideoProviderInstance: 'videoProvider/VideoProviderInstance',
DummyVideoInstance: 'videoProvider/DummyProvider/DummyVideoInstance'
}
});
}
return {
configVideo: configVideo
};
})
However, I get the following error:
Uncaught Error: Mismatched anonymous define() module: function (logger) {
The error you're getting isn't directly related to the stated problem (loading multiple configurations), but is caused by the way your code loading is organized. As the manual says:
To avoid the error:
Be sure to load all scripts that call define() via the RequireJS API. Do not manually code script tags in HTML to load scripts that have define() calls in them.
If you manually code an HTML script tag, be sure it only includes named modules, and that an anonymous module that will have the same name as one of the modules in that file is not loaded.
So the problem now is that when loading the module manually (as you state "when the document is ready", could you clarify how the quoted source is actually loaded?) requirejs doesn't know where the module came from, so it can't assign it a name. If the module were loaded via requirejs api (e.g. if it appeared in a dependencies list of a define call) and it were requirejs itself that determined its script path, it would name the module after the file.
In general it is advisable to have just a single script tag loading all the requirejs-managed javascript. This makes the development setup more closely match the eventual optimized situation (where all the scripts are concatenated together). It is still possible to make require.config calls inside individual modules if necessary and make some code execute only after document is ready. As an example, many our apps do something like the following in their main.js (the module loaded by the requirejs script tag):
// sort of bootstrap config
require.config({
packages: [{
name: "our-framework",
location: "../../our-framework/src/"
}],
// here some app-specific requirejs options
waitSeconds: 5
});
// load the framework, the "our-framework/rjs-config" contains
// framework specific requirejs config (another require.config call)
require(["our-framework/rjs-config"], function() {
// in this context both require configs are loaded
require(["application"], function(application) {
application.init().run();
});
});
A am relatively new to JamJS, and struggle to make it work properly.
I've got a very simple project based on Backbone and RequireJS, where I use JamJS to manage dependencies, namely: Backbone, _, Less, $, modernizr, underscore, bootstrap.
I tend to follow the method used by Backbone Boilerplate.
This is the code I use to get the Jam-compiled requireJS config file, together with my application-specific require config:
in html:
< script data-main="/assets/js/app/config" src="/assets/js/jam/compiled.min.js"> < /script>
'Compiled.min.js' is obviously the 600kb minified file generated by Jam.
The '/app/config' file is my Require.js configuration file where I'm planning to include all my project-specific code, not managed by the dependency manager.
Here's app/config.js:
require.config({
baseUrl:'/assets/js/',
deps: ['less','modernizer','bootstrap-jam','app/main'],
paths: {
'homeView': 'app/views/homeView'
// Use the underscore build of Lo-Dash to minimize incompatibilities.
,'lodash': '../jam/lodash/dist/lodash.underscore.min'
},
map: {
},
shim: {
}
});
(the files in deps are the ones I need on every page + my main.js - kind of a router.
The problem is that, in my homeView (which is initialized by main.js), I do this sort of thing:
define(['backbone'], function (Backbone) {
return Backbone.View.extend({
el:$('#homepageWrapper'),
initialize: function () {
this.$('#subTitle').text('This text is generated by homeView - the default Backbone View.');
}
})
});
As you can see I want Backbone to be available in this view. I assume that it's available through the compiled Jam code, however when I look in the Network panel in the Web Inspector, I see that this dependency is pulled in separately- this happens to any resource I try to use, not just Backbone.
I suspect that it might be something to do with the error I get as well, which I haven't been able to figure out. When using the compiled jam config, I get:
Uncaught Error: Module name "underscore" has not been loaded yet for
context: _. Use require([])
I'd really appreciate help with this
Thanks.
If I have a module that requires an application namespace, e.g.:
define(["app"], function(App){
[...]
});
... and the namespace requires libraries used by all of my modules, e.g.:
define(["jquery", "underscore", "backbone"], function($, _, Backbone){
[...]
});
... then all of my modules have access to the libraries required by the namespace, i.e. I can use $, _, and Backbone.
I like this behavior because I can avoid being repetitious, but I suspect that I'm cheating somehow, and that I should require libraries in each module.
Can anyone set me straight here?
Yeah, that's kinda hacky. You only have access to jQuery, underscore and backbone because they're also defined onto the global scope. Backbone and undersocre aren't real AMD module, they have to use a shim config. jQuery declare himself on the global scope and as an AMD module so it works everywhere.
So, yes it work like that, but it's not optimal. Real AMD module (non-shimmed) won't work this way as they need to be passed in the define functions arguments, and you won't be able to pull only one module to test it in a separate environment, etc. This way, you cannot load different versions of a scripts to work with different module/app section/page.
The goal of AMD is to bring modularity to your code so every module declare it's own dependencies and will work out of the box it without relying on the global scope (which is a good thing to prevent name collision and conflict with third party/other dev working on the same project).
If you find it's redundant to redeclare everytime your base dependencie, create a boilerplate file that you just copy/paste when creating another module (it's better than nothing). And, maybe some command line tools can build AMD module wrapper for you.
Soooo, yes it works, but it won't scale if your project ever get bigger or need to be updated pieces by pieces.
Hope this help !
good news for the above answer: underscore 1.6.0 now is wrapped as a amd module :)
see "lib.chartjs" for exporting globals in not amd wrapped "shimmed" javascript libraries
requirejs.config({
paths: {
"moment": "PATH_TO/js/moment/2.5.0/moment.min",
"underscore": "PATH_TO/js/underscore/1.6.0/underscore",
"jquery": "PATH_TO/js/jquery/1.10.2/jquery.min",
"lib.jssignals": "PATH_TO/js/jssignals/1.0.0-268/signals.min",
// WORKAROUND : jQuery plugins + shims
"lib.jquery.address": "PATH_TO/js/jqueryaddress/1.6/jquery-address"
"lib.jquery.bootstrap":"PATH_TO/js/bootstrap/3.0.3/bootstrap",
"lib.chartjs": "PATH_TO/js/chartjs/0.2/Chart.min",
},
shim: {
"lib.jquery.address": {deps: ["jquery"]},
"lib.jquery.bootstrap": {deps: ["jquery"]},
"lib.chartjs": {deps: ["jquery"], exports: "Chart"},
}
});