docs($rootScope.Scope): reinsert lost example #12167
Conversation
This doc example was lost long ago here angular@2845dd1 As it is now, it says 'here is a simple scope snippet...' but has a non-linking file link to the test doc. Doesn't make sense. This change simply puts back the example as it originally was.
| // still old value, since watches have not been called yet | ||
| expect(scope.greeting).toEqual(undefined); | ||
|
|
||
| scope.$digest(); // fire all the watches |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Since you are at it, why not fix the double space after "all" :D
removed extra white space at line 131 per code review suggestion
| // still old value, since watches have not been called yet | ||
| expect(scope.greeting).toEqual(undefined); | ||
|
|
||
| scope.$digest(); // fire all the watches |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We should probably change this to scope.$apply(), since the use of $digest is basically not recommened anywhere in the docs.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't disagree regarding $digest not being recommended, but changing the example is not quite the scope of this request. This example was accidentally removed so I am just putting it back. This sample comes directly from the unit tests. All the examples on this page use $digest; none of them use $apply. The notes do indicate that $digest is not recommended, but similar notes regarding 'better practices' exist throughout the documentation. If you would like to file an issue to have the examples all changed to $apply, I think that would be great and hopefully someone can pick it up. Thanks!
|
I decided to not add the example, because it introduces concepts like $watch and $digest without actually explaining them. The examples for the methods do a better job at this. I also added a link to the guide. |
The removed line pointed to a removed example. Re-adding the example would have been of questionable value, as it introduced several concepts without context. It's therefore better to link to the guide, which provides a better introduction. Closes #12167
The removed line pointed to a removed example. Re-adding the example would have been of questionable value, as it introduced several concepts without context. It's therefore better to link to the guide, which provides a better introduction. Closes angular#12167
The removed line pointed to a removed example. Re-adding the example would have been of questionable value, as it introduced several concepts without context. It's therefore better to link to the guide, which provides a better introduction. Closes angular#12167
The removed line pointed to a removed example. Re-adding the example would have been of questionable value, as it introduced several concepts without context. It's therefore better to link to the guide, which provides a better introduction. Closes angular#12167
This doc example was lost long ago here 2845dd1
As it is now, it says 'here is a simple scope snippet...' but has a non-linking file link to the test doc. Doesn't make sense. This change simply puts back the example as it originally was.