Add support for directives in the DTLoadingTemplate

[matthew-sycle]

… but angular-datatables only works with raw HTML

• pass $scope into showLoading(), which passes to DTLoadingTemplate.compileHtml(), which can then compile the HTML which can contain directives
• DTLoadingTemplate can then be overridden, with a custom html variable that can now contain directives

[l-lin]

Good idea! 👍

However, I changed the way to override the default loading message.
So now, instead of overriding the DTLoadingTemplate factory, you will need to initialize like this;

angular.module('showcase', ['datatables'])
.run(initDT);

function initDT(DTDefaultOptions) {
    DTDefaultOptions.setLoadingTemplate('<img src="images/loading.gif" />');
}

[Rohland]

This change seems to have broken things for me. Previously, I was setting up the template like this:

var dtLoadingTemplate = function dtLoadingTemplate() {
    var loader = [];
    loader.push('<div>');
    // .... custom loader html
    loader.push('</div>');
    return {
        html: loader.join('')
    };
};

angular.module('myapp').factory('DTLoadingTemplate', dtLoadingTemplate);

The change made now causes "compileHtml is not a function" to be thrown.

For now I've refactored my code as follows.

var dtLoadingTemplate = function dtLoadingTemplate() {
    var loader = [];
    loader.push('<div>');
    // .... custom loader html
    loader.push('</div>');

    var template = {};
    template.html = loader.join('');
    template.compileHtml = function($scope){
        return template.html;
    };

    return template;
}

angular.module('myapp').factory('DTLoadingTemplate', dtLoadingTemplate);

I'm sure others will run into this too.

Perhaps look at changing the behaviour such that the html value is returned if the compileHtml method is undefined on the object.

[l-lin]

See my previous comment. You won't have to override the service DTLoadingTemplate now. You need to set the config in a run function.

[Rohland]

Yes, I understood that from the discussion :)

The point I'm making is that the change is a breaking change for anyone who
was using the approach outlined in my post. It wouldn't take a lot to
update the code to make your change backward compatible. I hope that makes
sense.