Extra digest required if Angular >= 1.1.4

[mokesmokes]

Same bug (unless it's an undocumented "feature") as $http/$resource.
Lots of reports on Angular issue list due to this.
http://plnkr.co/edit/DZmWNi?p=preview
See that the XHR is not sent if Angular version >= 1.1.4 unless a digest cycle performed.
Change Angular and angular-resource to 1.0.7 and all is good.

[mgonto]

Hey,

I agree that this sucks, but Angular's best practices do recommend that when you're getting a callback from an "unknown" event to Angular, you should actually call $scope.$apply to perform a new digest cycle. If you do that, you wouldn't have this error, and if you're using Angular 1.0.7 you wouldn't have this error either when doing the $apply as it checks wether there's already a $$phase running.

So I think there's an easy solution for this. I do agree that this is not a "feature", but it does make sense to call the $apply after any callback that angular doesn't know about, don't you agree?

If they do change this in Angular >= 1.1.4, it'll work here as well. I could check for Angular's version with some hacky thing and call the $apply to perform an extra digest before your callback but I don't know if this makes sense to do it. What do you think?

Thanks for the report!

[mokesmokes]

Well, to be honest I don't share this view. What I have believed was that you should $apply when you want to update bindings outside the Angular context. BUT in the case of $http and $resource you care about the bindings only when the data comes back from the server! (And in that case, both of them don't fail of course, regardless of when they were called). I find it incredibly weird that we need to call $apply just to get the request out to the server.

So the implications for Restangular? I don't have an easy answer, actually. I definitely don't think that the developer should call $apply to send a request to the server - there is no sense in that, and if $resource persists with this "feature"/"bug" then it would be great if you can do away with this for the rest of us, somehow. In either case, for all of $http, $resource, and Restangular none of this is documented behavior - so in my eyes it's a bug either way - of documentation or design/code.

So even if you just wanted to document it - I'm not sure what you should write, to be honest.

[mgonto]

Hey,

Thanks for the input.

I agree that this is kind of weird. I'll try to make a fix that doesn't break 1.0.7 and that's not to hacky.

[mgonto]

For now added to the documentation.

I've not found a clean way of fixing this unfourtenately, which sucks.

Please reopen if you have any recommendation on how to fix this without changing Angular's code.

[sujoy18]

'_' is undefined from restangular I am getting this error while using it in my application. Any help?

[mgonto]

Include lodash or underscore before

—
Mobile mail. Excuse brevity and typos.

On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 12:58 AM, sujoy18 notifications@github.com wrote:

'_' is undefined from restangular I am getting this error while using it in my application. Any help?

Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
#71 (comment)

[sujoy18]

Thanks for your reply. I am very new in angular js. Could you please explain exactly where to add. I am getting this error while loading the application.

[julien-rodrigues]

Include it like any other javascript files using script tag but before calling the restangular service file

[willmruzek]

Is this still an issue with AngularJS 1.2.1?

[sujoy18]

I didn't use it in project so cant tell whether it is working with 1.2.1 or not.

On Monday, November 18, 2013 5:21 AM, Will Mruzek notifications@github.com wrote:

Is this still an issue with AngularJS 1.2.1?
—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

[mgonto]

@mruzekw I don't know either unfortunately, but if it's it's an issue for $http, $resource an Restangular.

[Sarabadu]

i solved whit this for now:

i change this:

var foo= Restangular.all('foo');
$scope.foo= foo.getList();

to this:

var foo= Restangular.all('foo');
foo.getList().then(function(result){
   $scope.foo= result;
});

but this keep your $scope.foo not restangularizer so...

[mgonto]

You need to do that in Angular > 1.2 because promise unwrapping was depracated.

But result should be restangularized

[Sarabadu]

you are right, i correct my comment for avoid confusions

[mgonto]

I've implemented something to fix this promise unwrapping problem.

Check out https://github.com/mgonto/restangular#using-values-directly-in-templates