In an Angular style app, I would expect the typescript files to be bundled together and basically all loaded at start up of the app. In an MVC type app (a view per page, not a SPA), I would expect to only load typescript for that page. I don't want to load typescript that is not relevant for that page.
I split my typescript into separate files (basically one class per file). I then set up import/export clauses in the files to reference the classes. I think this approach will work better when I go to use external libraries (jquery, etc). If I use namespace, later on when I go to use third party libraries I don't think it will work.
However, that means I need to look at some sort of loader. If I have lots of little typescript files I don't necessarily know when all files have loaded before attempting to use them, which is the sort of thing that requirejs looks after. I haven't used web pack but I think it does the same sort of thing?
But that would mean I would need a requirejs config for each MVC page which doesn't seem to be very efficient. What approach should I be taking to load all the typescript files I require for the specific MVC page, bearing in mind I could end up with dozens of MVC pages?
There is now (2021) a partial solution to this question. I'm not sure it is "efficient" but it does load multiple Typescript files on different MVC pages.
If you alter your typescript config to output ES6 modules, tsc will create one JS file fore each TS file, each in an ES6 module. If you then use a module script tag, the browser will import the files as needed
<script src="scripts/modules/start.js" type="module"></script>
<!-- and/or -->
<script type="module">
import { loadStats } from 'pages/homepage.js'
<!-- note that this is JavaScript -->
loadStats();
<script>
This does require users to be using a modern browser: https://caniuse.com/es6-module
This is not a panacea - there are lots of gottchas and work arounds, one big one being that import statements must be in JavaScript Module style, not TS style
import { loadStats } from 'pages/homepage' // <-- Will not work at runtime
import { loadStats } from 'pages/homepage.js' // <-- Use this style. Note the JS extension
as tsc does not correctly convert import statements. This should point at the TS file (as the created JS files will have the same relative path), Visual Studio appears to be able to cope for the purposes of intellisence and compiling.
We managed to get npm to work for typings, but struggled for other packages. We have, though, been able to retro-fit typescript into an older MVC app this way (we wanted/needed type checking for API calls).
Related
I have a large rails application that I am wanting to split out into smaller applications. The one piece of this application that will be universal to all smaller applications is the mast and footer. I would like to extract the html, javascript and css for the mast and footer into it's own package that each app can load and render.
The main issue I'm running into is that the apps will likely not all be written in rails. Some will be rails, some will be expressjs, some written in Go, and some may end up being written in other languages, so my solution needs to be language agnostic.
My thought is that I can extract the html, css and javascript into it's own git repo, use mustache templates for the html, and then use grunt or a similar build tool to build a gem, a package.json structure and a golang module. Possibly each in it's own git submodule.
I'm curious if there is a more standardized way of doing this. Or if anyone knows of a simpler way of achieving this goal.
Sounds like the technology in common is HTML/JS/CSS.
Wouldn't it be better to export the mast and footer as a self contained JS library, or more precisely, as widgets?
So whatever the application server tech stack would be, you could always generate the HTML in the form of:
<script src="your_widgets.js"></script>
<script>new Footer.render('id_of_dom_element_to_render_to');</script>
By doing so, whether you want the widget library to load the template or you want to embed the template into the widget library or whether you want to simply just construct it using HTMLFragment will not be limited by the server tech choice.
Dartium does interpret dart files and it opens plenty of fun to develop new toys, and Chrome extensions and apps. But when it comes to do scripts injection in web pages, the executeScript method only takes files supposedly one of the .css and .js formats. Files in other mimetype (typically application/dart) is offbound. Therefore, the question is pretty much naive:
Is there anyway to directly inject a Dart file?
Thanks.
Not a way to directly inject dart-files, but a workaround to inject your dart-application would be to use dart2js and than inject the compiled js-file myDartScript.dart.precompiled.js of your dart-script.
(Use the precompiled-version to avoid errors against the Content Security Policy)
Maybe you also have to inject packages/browser/dart.js and packages/browser/interop.js.
Untested
Im bulding a website using MVC4. Recently I've read about TypeScript. It looks really nice however I cannot find any use for it in a MVC website. Am I missing something? Do you use it? Where?
TypeScript is a pre-compiler for JavaScript. Hence you can use TypeScript only as a replacement for JavaScript (server-side, e.g. Node.js, or client-side, i.e. in the browser).
As you are probably writing MVC4 code with C#, TypeScript will be of no use for you in relation to MVC4.
Regarding the client-side it's somewhat different.
I guess the main point you need to know is that TypeScript is not (yet) just another language on the server, that you can exchange with C#.
I find it quite useful for building largish apps with lots of logic on the client. The interfaces help avoid some errors. It compiles to javascript so you could use it instead of javascript. If you're just writing a couple of lines I wouldn't bother though.
You can link to the generated javascript files from TS files directly in the script bundles or HTML. If you want to automatically link to many JS files, use require JS. This will save you having to link to many js files.
I am getting ready to code a number of HTML helpers for UI elements in an ASP.NET MVC 3 project. I expect many of the helpers to depend on code that is located in external javascript libraries. These could be custom javascript libraries that I write, or they could reference 3rd party libraries like jQuery and jQueryUI. For example, I might write HTML.RichM.DataPicker(...) that would require the page to have jQuery and jQueryUI referenced and some code executed in the document ready function. Getting code into the document ready function is pretty straightforward I guess -- I could simply inject a new script block into the output with the contents of the function, even though that would mean I might have a page peppered with document ready functions all over.
The other part of this is making sure that the jQuery and jQuery UI libraries (in my example) are referenced and included. Is there an "MVC way" to add the code references to the view page or the layout/master if they are not already there, or must I instruct users of my HTML helpers that they need to add references manually for any required javascript files? Of course, I could just instruct them to include all possible external library references in the master or layout page, but that seems like overkill. In ASP.NET Web Forms, for example, I might have used RegisterClientStartupScript or RegisterStartupScript to do this from my custom control.
Thanks for any suggestions!
I think the easiest way is to include the dependant scripts in the header, that's maybe not what you want to do, but I think it's the easiest way.
I suggest you using a tool like SquishIt to bundle your JS files together, that way, you will not have to load like 20 js files, it will be more efficient and cleaner.
When creating an empty MVC 2 project, I have a lot of javascript files in my Scripts folder. Why? Will removing them affect my application?
No removing them won't affect anything, unless they are being used in pages. However you said this is an empty MVC project so you'll be fine.
They're there for you to use, to make your life easier. For example, JQuery is included.
Take for example JQuery file, It provieds functions which has solutions for crossbrowser related issues which makes developement easy. Similarly other files has functions whcih are providing readymade functionalities which can be used for rapid developement.
Unfortunatly as JS is traveling to browsers its downloaded on the client. Its suprising for not JS people as its not like .NET api where one or more dll is sufficient for all the api and developer dont have to worry(some times :)) about from where they are coming.
I will suggest you to study included JS files and include/use only those which you really wanted to use.