Support passing the tracker object to $http

[JohannesRudolph]

I was wondering whether we could somehow get rid of using string ids all over the place with promise tracker and use references to the actual tracker objects instead. Like

//Create / get our tracker with unique ID
  $scope.loadingTracker = promiseTracker.register();

  //use `tracker:` shortcut in $http config to link our http promise to a tracker
  $scope.fetchSomething = function(id) {
    return $http.get('http://httpbin.org/delay/2', {
      tracker: $scope.loadingTracker
    }).then(function(response) {
      alert('Fetched something!\n' + JSON.stringify(response.data, null, 2));
    });
  };

Is there any technical reason why we have to use string ids at the moment?

[ajoslin]

I wanna do this too. We discussed this, check out the last comments on this issue: #37

It would make it even simpler, but it would be backwards incompatible. Which might be OK... things like angular-busy can just keep using angular-promise-tracker 1.x

[ajoslin]

..and the technical reason is when I made this a year ago I knew a lot less what I was doing, I guess.

[JohannesRudolph]

I am just dabbling with a fork, because it will definately break the API and is a great opportunity for me to learn how to work with grunt, karma et.al.

The build/dev setup for the project is really sweet, a big kudos!

[JohannesRudolph]

https://github.com/JohannesRudolph/angular-promise-tracker/tree/no-ids

[JohannesRudolph]

Ok, I think I'm done removing the ids and the registry. Feel free to take a look.

[ajoslin]

Looks good! But you can go even further: you don't need .register and .deregister.

You can just do var myTracker = new PromiseTracker() and myTracker.destroy().

But the unit tests will be annoying to fix from that :-)

[JohannesRudolph]

That might be an option. I think that in order to keep the $http.config
integration working, the promiseTracker would need to be injected. Makes
the controllers more tesable as well.

Am 06.02.2014 21:18 schrieb "Andy Joslin" notifications@github.com:

Looks good! But you can go even further: you don't need .register and
.deregister.

You can just do var myTracker = new PromiseTracker() and
myTracker.destroy().

But the unit tests will be annoying to fix from that :-)

Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com//issues/39#issuecomment-34365873
.

[ajoslin]

Well, if you wanted a global tracker you could put it on rootScope or in the service.

Here is the proposed syntax.

Just-in-a-controller example:

angular.module('myApp', ['promiseTracker'])
.controller('Ctrl', function($scope, PromiseTracker, $http) {
  $scope.ctrlTracker = new PromiseTracker();
  $scope.fetch = function() {
    return $http.get('/stuff', {
      tracker: $scope.ctrlTracker
    });
  };
});

$rootScope example:

angular.module('myApp', ['promiseTracker'])
.run(function(PromiseTracker, $rootScope) {
  $rootScope.loadingTracker = new PromiseTracker({ activationDelay: 250, minDuration: 500 });
})
.controller('Ctrl', function($scope, $rootScope, $http) {
  $scope.fetch = function() {
    return $http.get('/stuff', {
      tracker: $rootScope.loadingTracker 
    });
  };
});

Service example:

angular.module('myApp', ['promiseTracker'])
.factory('loadingTracker', function(PromiseTracker) {
  return new PromiseTracker({ activationDelay: 250, minDuration: 500 });
})
.controller('Ctrl', function($scope, loadingTracker, $http) {
  $scope.fetch = function() {
    return $http.get('/stuff', {tracker: loadingTracker});
  };
  $scope.delay = function() {
    var promise = $timeout(function() { alert('delay done!'); }, 1000);
    loadingTracker.addPromise(promise);
  };
});

What do you think?

/cc @JohannesRudolph @tlvince (tlvince, we discussed this earlier but I still want to do it) @jtammen

[ajoslin]

Done in 2.0.0.