Getting requested page route in Nuxt middleware - vue.js

I have a very simple 'named' Nuxt middleware set up (taken from the docs) which checks in the store to see whether a user is authenticated before they can navigate to certain routes. If the user is not authenticated, they are directed to a straightforward form in which they have to provide an email address to gain access (at http://example.com/access). All of that works fine, after they fulfil the middleware's store.state.authenticated check they can navigate around no problem.
export default function ({ store, redirect }) {
if (!store.state.authenticated) {
return redirect('/access')
}
}
My question is, once the user has entered their email address, I have no way of knowing what route they were initially trying to access. I've looked at other questions here about passing data between routes but because of the way the middleware works these solutions don't seem to be feasible.
I really would rather not set the slug in the vuex state as this will lead to a whole other set of complications – I also don't mind setting the intended slug as a query or a param on the /access url. I have read through the docs for the Nuxt redirect function and realise you can pass a route.query as an argument. So it seems that you could potentially do something like this:
return redirect('/access', intendedSlug)
...or, if using params(?):
return redirect(`/access/${intendedSlug}`)
But I don't know how to pass that intendedSlug value to the middleware in the first place as it's not exposed on the context passed to the function or anywhere else. It seems like this would be a common problem, but I can't find any simple solutions – any help would be really appreciated!

To help #Bodger I'm posting how I resolved this, it may not be perfect and it's working on a slightly older version of Nuxt (I know 😵!) but this is how I resolved the issue.
.../middleware/authenticated.js
export default function (context) {
const path =
context.route.path.length && context.route.path[0] === '/'
? context.route.path.slice(1)
: context.route.path
const pathArray = path.split('/')
if (process.server && !context.store.state.authenticated) {
return context.redirect('/access', pathArray)
} else if (!context.store.state.authenticated) {
return context.redirect('/access', pathArray)
}
}
The pathArray is then accessible in my /access page.
.../pages/access.js
data() {
return {
attemptedRoutePathArray: Object.values(this.$route.query)
...
}
},
...
computed: {
attemptedRouteURL() {
return new URL(
this.attemptedRoutePathArray.join('/'),
process.env.baseUrl
)
},
...
}

Related

How to array destructure a Promise.all in Nuxt's asyncData

I am working with Nuxt and Vue, with MySQL database, all of which are new to me. I am transitioning out of WebMatrix, where I had a single Admin page for multiple tables, with dropdowns for selecting a particular option. On this page, I could elect to add, edit or delete the selected option, say a composer or music piece. Here is some code for just 2 of the tables (gets a runtime error of module build failed):
<script>
export default {
async asyncData(context) {
let [{arrangers}, {composers}] = await Promise.all([
context.$axios.get(`/api/arrangers`),
context.$axios.get(`/api/composers`),
])
const {arrangers} = await context.$axios.get('/api/arrangers')
const {composers} = await context.$axios.get('/api/composers')
return { arrangers, composers }
},
}
</script>
You do have the same variable name for both the input (left part of Promise.all) and as the result from your axios call, to avoid naming collision, you can rename the result and return this:
const { arrangers: fetchedArrangers } = await context.$axios.get('/api/arrangers')
const { composers: fetchedComposers } = await context.$axios.get('/api/composers')
return { fetchedArrangers, fetchedComposers }
EDIT, this is how I'd write it
async asyncData({ $axios }) {
const [posts, comments] = await Promise.all([
$axios.$get('https://jsonplaceholder.typicode.com/posts'),
$axios.$get('https://jsonplaceholder.typicode.com/comments'),
])
console.log('posts', posts)
console.log('comments', comments)
return { posts, comments }
},
When you destructure at the end of the result of a Promise.all, you need to destructure depending of the result that you'll get from the API. Usually, you do have data, so { arrangers } or { composers } will usually not work. Of course, it depends of your own API and if you return this type of data.
Since destructuring 2 data is not doable, it's better to simply use array destructuring. This way, it will return the object with a data array inside of it.
To directly have access to the data, you can use the $get shortcut, which comes handy in our case. Directly destructuring $axios is a nice to have too, will remove the dispensable context.
In my example, I've used JSONplaceholder to have a classic API behavior (especially the data part) but it can work like this with any API.
Here is the end result.
Also, this is what happens if you simply use this.$axios.get: you will have the famous data that you will need to access to later on (.data) at some point to only use the useful part of the API's response. That's why I do love the $get shortcut, goes to the point faster.
PS: all of this is possible because Promise.all preserve the order of the calls: https://stackoverflow.com/a/28066851/8816585
EDIT2: an example on how to make it more flexible could be
async asyncData({ $axios }) {
const urlEndpointsToFetchFrom = ['comments', 'photos', 'albums', 'todos', 'posts']
const allResponses = await Promise.all(
urlEndpointsToFetchFrom.map((url) => $axios.$get(`https://jsonplaceholder.typicode.com/${url}`)),
)
const [comments, photos, albums, todos, posts] = allResponses
return { comments, photos, albums, todos, posts }
},
Of course, preserving the order in the array destructuring is important. It's maybe doable in a dynamic way but I don't know how tbh.
Also, I cannot recommend enough to also try the fetch() hook alternative someday. I found it more flexible and it does have a nice $fetchState.pending helper, more here: https://nuxtjs.org/blog/understanding-how-fetch-works-in-nuxt-2-12/ and in the article on the bottom of the page.

Load component/template depending on the route param vuejs

I would like to ask if can I implement this on vuejs, so basically the code will load a page/template base on the param url. I've been searching for a while and can't get the results I need or maybe I'm just searching a wrong keyword.
My url is like this, so I just can't manually declare the url in my route because it is dynamic, fetch from the database.
path: '/user/page_type
Thank you very much!
export default {
mounted () {
if(this.$routes.params.page_type == "home"){
// Load Homepage Here
// ../../../page/HomePage.vue
}
else if(this.$routes.params.page_type == "speaker"){
// Load Speakerpage Here
// ../../../page/HomePage.vue
}
else if(this.$routes.params.page_type == 'html'){
// Load HTML Page Here
// ../../../page/HtmlPage.vue
}
}
}
This is available out of the box within official addon vue-router.
Docs for your case: link

How to use store.filter / store.find with Ember-Data to implement infinite scrolling?

This was originally posted on discuss.emberjs.com. See:
http://discuss.emberjs.com/t/what-is-the-proper-use-of-store-filter-store-find-for-infinite-scrolling/3798/2
but that site seems to get worse and worse as far as quality of content these days so I'm hoping StackOverflow can rescue me.
Intent: Build a page in ember with ember-data implementing infinite scrolling.
Background Knowledge: Based on the emberjs.com api docs on ember-data, specifically the store.filter and store.find methods ( see: http://emberjs.com/api/data/classes/DS.Store.html#method_filter ) I should be able to set the model hook of a route to the promise of a store filter operation. The response of the promise should be a filtered record array which is a an array of items from the store filtered by a filter function which is suppose to be constantly updated whenever new items are pushed into the store. By combining this with the store.find method which will push items into the store, the filteredRecordArray should automatically update with the new items thus updating the model and resulting in new items showing on the page.
For instance, assume we have a Questions Route, Controller and a model of type Question.
App.QuestionsRoute = Ember.Route.extend({
model: function (urlParams) {
return this.get('store').filter('question', function (q) {
return true;
});
}
});
Then we have a controller with some method that will call store.find, this could be triggered by some event/action whether it be detecting scroll events or the user explicitly clicking to load more, regardless this method would be called to load more questions.
Example:
App.QuestionsController = Ember.ArrayController.extend({
...
loadMore: function (offset) {
return this.get('store').find('question', { skip: currentOffset});
}
...
});
And the template to render the items:
...
{{#each question in controller}}
{{question.title}}
{{/each}}
...
Notice, that with this method we do NOT have to add a function to the store.find promise which explicitly calls this.get('model').pushObjects(questions); In fact, trying to do that once you have already returned a filter record array to the model does not work. Either we manage the content of the model manually, or we let ember-data do the work and I would very much like to let Ember-data do the work.
This is is a very clean API; however, it does not seem to work they way I've written it. Based on the documentation I cannot see anything wrong.
Using the Ember-Inspector tool from chrome I can see that the new questions from the second find call are loaded into the store under the 'question' type but the page does not refresh until I change routes and come back. It seems like the is simply a problem with observers, which made me think that this would be a bug in Ember-Data, but I didn't want to jump to conclusions like that until I asked to see if I'm using Ember-Data as intended.
If someone doesn't know exactly what is wrong but knows how to use store.push/pushMany to recreate this scenario in a jsbin that would also help too. I'm just not familiar with how to use the lower level methods on the store.
Help is much appreciated.
I just made this pattern work for myself, but in the "traditional" way, i.e. without using store.filter().
I managed the "loadMore" part in the router itself :
actions: {
loadMore: function () {
var model = this.controller.get('model'), route = this;
if (!this.get('loading')) {
this.set('loading', true);
this.store.find('question', {offset: model.get('length')}).then(function (records) {
model.addObjects(records);
route.set('loading', false);
});
}
}
}
Since you already tried the traditional way (from what I see in your post on discuss), it seems that the key part is to use addObjects() instead of pushObjects() as you did.
For the records, here is the relevant part of my view to trigger the loadMore action:
didInsertElement: function() {
var controller = this.get('controller');
$(window).on('scroll', function() {
if ($(window).scrollTop() > $(document).height() - ($(window).height()*2)) {
controller.send('loadMore');
}
});
},
willDestroyElement: function() {
$(window).off('scroll');
}
I am now looking to move the loading property to the controller so that I get a nice loader for the user.

EmberJS Route to 'single' getting JSONP

I'm having trouble with EmberJS to create a single view to posts based on the ID, but not the ID of the array, I actually have a ID that comes with the json I got from Tumblr API.
So the ID is something like '54930292'.
Next I try to use this ID to do another jsonp to get the post for this id, it works if you open the api and put the id, and actually if you open the single url with the ID on it, works too, the problem is:
When, on the front page for example, I click on a link to go to the single, it returns me nothing and raise a error.
But if you refresh the page you get the content.
Don't know how to fix and appreciate some help :(
I put online the code: http://tkrp.net/tumblr_test/
The error you were getting was because the SingleRoute was being generated as an ArrayController but the json response was not an Array.
App.SingleController = Ember.ObjectController.extend({
});
Further note that the model hook is not fired when using linkTo and other helpers. This because Ember assumes that if you linked to a model, the model is assumed to be as specified, and it directly calls setupController with that model. In your case, you need to still load the individual post. I added the setupController to the route to do this.
App.SingleRoute = Ember.Route.extend({
model: function(params) {
return App.TKRPTumblr.find(params.id);
},
setupController: function(controller, id) {
App.TKRPTumblr.find(id)
.then(function(data) {
controller.set('content', data.response);
});
}
});
I changed the single post template a bit to reflect how the json response. One final change I made was to directly return the $.ajax. Ember understands jQuery promises directly, so you don't need to do any parsing.
Here is the updated jsbin.
I modified: http://jsbin.com/okezum/6/edit
Did this to "fix" the refresh single page error:
setupController: function(controller, id) {
if(typeof id === 'object'){
controller.set('content', id.response);
}else{
App.TKRPTumblr.find(id)
.then(function(data) {
controller.set('content', data.response);
});
}
}
modified the setupController, since I was getting a object when refreshing the page and a number when clicking the linkTo
Dont know if it's the best way to do that :s

Dynamically Adding / Removing Route in Durandal Router when application is loaded

I need help in dynamically adding/removing route in Durandal Router. What I want is after user is logged in then I would be able to add or remove specific route depending upon logged in user's type.
I tried to add/remove route from visibleRoutes/allRoutes array ... but get binding exception from knockout library...
I was hoping it would be common scenario... but still couldn't find any solution ... please help me in fixing this issue.
Thanks.
Wasim
POST COMMENTS:
I tried this function to dynamically hide/show route... and similary tried to add/remove route from allRoutes[] ... but then get exception on knockout bidning
showHideRoute: function (url,show) {
var routeFounded = false;
var theRoute = null;
$(allRoutes()).each(function (route) {
if (url === this.url) {
routeFounded = true;
var rt = this;
theRoute = rt;
return false;
}
});
if (routeFounded)
{
if (show)
{
visibleRoutes.push(theRoute);
}
else
{
visibleRoutes.remove(theRoute);
}
}
}
In Durandal 2.0.
You can enumerate the routes to find the one you wish to show/hide.
Then change the value of: nav property
Then run buildNavigationModel();
here is an example:
// see if we need to show/hide 'flickr' in the routes
for (var index in router.routes) {
var route = router.routes[index];
if (route.route == 'flickr') {
if (vm.UserDetail().ShowFlickr) { // got from ajax call
// show the route
route.nav = true; // or 1 or 2 or 3 or 4; to have it at a specific order
} else if (route.nav != false) {
route.nav = false;
}
router.buildNavigationModel();
break;
}
}
Durandal 2.0 no longer has the method visibleRoutes. I found that the following works for me.
router.reset();
router.map([
{ route: 'home', moduleId: 'home/index', title: 'Welcome', nav: true },
{ route: 'flickr', moduleId: 'flickr/index', title: '', nav: true }
])
.buildNavigationModel()
.mapUnknownRoutes('home/index', 'not-found');
This removes all previous routes, if you want to maintain current routes you could try using the router.routes property to rebuild the array of routes.
I had a similar requirement. If I were you, I would take another approach. Rather than adding/removing routes when application loads - get the right routes to begin with per user type.
Two options, (I use both)
1) have a json service provide the proper routes per user type, this approach would be good if you need to 'protect/obscure' routes... i.e. I don't want the route referenced on any client resource.
2) A simpler solution see Durandal.js: change navigation options per area
You can have a settings property identify the user type.
I hope this helps.
I had a similar problem: First, router.visibleRoutes() is an observable array. In other words, when you change its value, the routes automatically update. However, the items in this array are not observable, so to make a change you need to replace the entire array and not just make a change to a single item in it.
So, all you have to do is find which item in this array you want to remove, and then create a new array without this item, and set router.visibleRoutes() to this new array.
If, for example, you find out the it is the 3rd item, then one way of doing it is:
router.visibleRoutes(router.visibleRoutes().splice(2, 1))
Note that splice() returns a new array where an item is removed. This new array is put into router.visibleRoutes.