Single view multiple models

common problem that is often visible with large collections is that on update or change, we render a view for every single model in the collection. is our render method again, this time with a single reflow:Var container = document. course, there is nothing stopping you from passing in the models separately:Var contacts = new contactsmodel();. i agree that it's sometimes useful to pass multiple models/collections into a view. is creating views that listen on changes in models or collections.

Single zone models

.set({likes:++likes_count}) causes the model sending a "change" message to all views that concerned with it. your booklistview should look more like this:Var booklistview = backbone. - Give your JS App some Backbone with Models, Views, Collections, and EventsJoin the stack overflow community. well could a dog pick out the scent of a single person in a pool of carnage? when initializing our collections and models, we can populate them with data from this object, saving us the need to do multiple .

Single diode equivalent circuit models

so normally if your view has to show some models, allow them maybe to be updated and saved, they should come into the view in the options argument to the initialize function.'m not sure of the situations you're describing but, in my experience, you shouldn't use multiple models and collections in a view unless you absolutely have to. of all, backbone views already have a cached version of $(this. the sub-view, it would be better to say:Var output = this. the standard convention for model/collection passing into the view constructor via the special model/collection key is very useful and elegant.

Backbone single view multiple models

the above implementation is good enough, i hope it can help other backbone newbies to get up and running with re-rendering model view when model attributes change. question is whether this method is an efficient method of updating individual views (when model attributes change due to events) or are there any better methods than this? a view's initialize will copy the collection property out of its options just like it will copy model:Constructor / initialize new view([options]).-insert model into a sorted collection's view after editing0render a view of backbone model returns undefined0backbone performance - collection with a view per model or only one view for the whole collection0backbone js - combination of collection, views and models4nested models and collection in backbonejs1when to destroy my model in case of multiple views depending on it. could you also please shed some light on memory issues if there is 1 view per model with an infinite scroll implementation.

Single echelon single commodity location models

view per model vs one big view shouldn't really have much of a memory impact on its own. problem arises when we remove a view (usually by calling its . i have many methods in a single view that calls different models. as it can be noticed i have not specified an 'el' attribute for the view of each model and so it will be a 'div'. them; it only takes a minute:Backbonejs: how to assign multiple models in a single view.

Single forest single domain models

.each to make this inside the iterator function the parent view. user detail view would be bound to the user model., is it wrong for the model to know about its view? a common time to reclaim view is after the corresponding model removed from the container, or destroyed. i'm not sure the realities of a view having a one-to-one relationship with data objects is entirely true in a complex application.

is the name "rigel", and especially "rigel vii", used in multiple universes?, if your view really needs so many models and nothing else in your system cares about them, just create them during initialize and store them directly as properties on this (your view instance) and off you go. i agree that sending them in options is a simple and reasonable approach, unfortunately data has complex nuance even for the most simplistic view.// create a sub view for every model in the collection. review stack exchange is a question and answer site for peer programmer code reviews.

GitHub - theironcook/inder: Simple, flexible and

are several special options that, if passed, will be attached directly to the view: model, collection, el, id, classname, tagname, attributes and events. models represent data that either is currently or will eventually be stored in database somewhere. @braddunbar so you are suggesting in the case where a view has nested sub views that operate on a different model/collection it is the best practice to pass those in via the options space? with using multiple models in a single backbone view and ejs template., view provides remove() function to reclaim itself (remove html snippet from its parent node, stop listening to the model, etc), but it is the developer's duty to decide when to reclaim.

Developing Applications -

now, sometimes you want to create a model just for managing ephemeral browser state, which is fine, but the common case is that most read/edit/delete views don't create models unless that's their primary purpose like a "post new comment" form. that case, i'd consider a dynamic model with both of your sub-models. above example does the same where in clicking a hyperlink updates the counter called 'likes' and updates the corresponding model view only. technique is usually intended to allow the view to automatically re-render itself when the underlying data changes. get the idea, its just a theoretical example i am not building that app but its to get the idea of having a view combining multiple models.

well could a dog pick out the scent of a single person in a pool of carnage?.js apps generally contain a single html page, that initializes some basic structure and loads a few js and css files to get the app up and running. do i need to create a new model for this, to bind to a new view? find that things work better when views only touch their own el and leave it up to someone else to put that el into the dom. can also consider merging both models, if you are sure they dont use the same parameters.

if we use that callback only to change the way a model is rendered, then it's not such a big deal, but it's all too easy to simply slap more code in there, updating other attributes, or even changing other models.(), the view will automatically unbind any event bound to it using the . application data is retrieved using collections and models, using their . models declared above corresponds to different methods declared in events. also means that for large collections we may end up with many views (at least one for every model in the collection) that we may dynamically create or destroy based on changes to the data.

Backbone single view multiple models

way to avoid it, is to collect all rendered elements into one documentfragment, which is basically just a container for dom elements, and then appending that single container to the dom tree - triggering only a single page reflow. in such a case, even though our code may no longer hold a reference to that view, it is never garbage collected since the model still holds such a reference via the event handler..So u mean to say is, we should avoid using/referring multiple collections in single view?.js app approach not very scalable - nested views2backbone/chaplinjs view with various template3unit testing backbone model-1backbone view for logging a user in4backbone learning piece, movie application using views, collection, models, routes and localstorage1managing collection views, adding/removing views, and listening for events2rendering comments in a backbone view0backbone view that “starts” the application2backbone view creates favorites pane0backbone keep reference of inner views on parent view for disposal. feature i have been trying to implement is that multiple models with same template will load in 1 collection, clicking on any element in the rendered view of that model has to give me access to that model so that i can re-render the view of the clicked model only.

what happens when you have many models and collections that require various compositions per view. model instances should be passed to views in the options argument to the initialize method. setup of backbone:1 view for the collection,

. we don't need renderone in bookview at all, you can bind render to the appropriate event. situations where multiple models or collections are passed into views it is equally elegant to pass them in as nested objects to the view constructor (ie.

also i am not sure if having a view for each loaded model will not cause any memory issues (asuuming i have an infinite scroll implemented which keeps on loading the list of books). dom element may be removed, the view object itself is never released from memory. such logic certainly does not belong within the scope of our view code. may have to do some manual triggering of events and i'm not sure what your api returns, but fundamentally these are all dealing with a single user record and can be handled by a single model. possibly adding collections and models (notice the plural) as new special constructor arguments (added to instance by convention) would be a conservative and explicit enhancement.
you should instantiate it like this:Var mybooklist = new booklistview({ collection: mybookcollection });. far all tests and tutorials i've been trying, to get the structure in my head, show me that a view is bound to 1 model. also, listening to events on multiple models/collections usually means your view should be split up, making the dispose support a non-issue. breaking up views to respond to only one model/collection turns out much more modular and reusable code. biggest difference here being the shift in responsibility from the model to the view.