Edit: NVM, you can close this....

it turns out it was my fault; if you use syntax for (i in arr){ collection.push({id: i, ...}) console.log(i, typeof i) } you'll see JS uses a string type for index, and that breaks the collections update/find Fn's

sorry.....

Hi I'm a little confused on Collection.set and Collection.push, can you tell me if this is a bug?

Anyway If you use collection.push({id: 9999, otherfield: 1234}) collection.set({id: anyid, ...}) no longer works... I assume this is because either you cannot set the ID from push, you cannot start above 0, or you cant use abritrary IDs from the backend ^_^.

1. What is the correct way to add an item to collection, .push()? Is it without specifying an id?

• I am using push({ id: 9999, otherfield: 1234, otherfield2: 1234 }), and i'm using Ids > 0 as my first item, I think this is causing the problem

2. What is the correct way to update one field of one item to that collection?

• If I do collection.set({ id: 1, field2: 'newdata'}), sometimes the entire object is replaced with this new smaller object (now only has these 2 fields) but usually nothing happens and .get(id) returns the old values

Maybe you can update the docs to be a little more clear? This is a great lib

I'm trying to create two instances of 1 widget Box; is this the best way?

Also bug report? Its not working.

<div id="appwrapper">
    <div id="app">
        <div data-ref="view"></div>
    </div>
</div>

var Box = Controller.extend({
    init:function(){},
    render:function(){
        return {
            view: { html: 'adsfasdfdsfadfsa' }
        }
    },
    click:function(){},
})

window.app = new Box({view: 'appwrapper' })
window.app2 = new Box({ view: 'appwrapper' })

// nothing is displayed and no errors are given

// window.app = new Box({view: document.getElementById('app') }) // works

from the docs: If options.view is a string, then it is used to locate the DOM node by ID and clone its first child. This is much faster than doing templating and parsing templates using innerHTML.

not sure if its not working or im doing it wrong. Chrome 33 on linux.

Hi Artemi. I was trying to find a model in a collection, passing some of its attributes, but without the id. Contrary to my expectations, the collection's find method yielded "undefined", although I was certain that there was the model whose attributes I was looking for. I think I may have found a possible issue.

Changing (from line 80 onwards)

isEqual: function(attr) {
    for (var key in attr) {
      if (!isEqual(attr[key], this[key])) return false;
    }
    return true;
  },

To

isEqual: function(attr) {
    for (var key in attr) {
      if (isEqual(attr[key], this[key])) return true;
    }
    return false;
  },

made it possible to find a model in a collection, by passing some of its attributes (without the id).

Hi, I have a function 'status' on a model that returns the status of an object based on some other model attributes (assigned_to, start_date, complete_date).

In my render function, I'm trying to do this: render: function() { return { job_status: this.model.status }

However, in my view I just see the toString of the 'status' function (rather than the return value of the function).

In the docs, it says that Model#get accepts an attribute or function name.

What am I doing wrong?

A nicer package manager: http://spmjs.io Documentation: http://spmjs.io/documentation

http://spmjs.io/package/espresso.js

It is a package manager based on Sea.js which is a popular module loader in China.

spmjs focus in browser side. We supply a complete lifecycle managment of package by using spm.

If you need ownership of espresso.js in spmjs, I can add it for your account after signing in http://spmjs.io.

it appears init is not passed options they are just set behind the scenes

init: function(options){ console.log(options) }

shows 'undefined'.

i think the docs are wrong, perhaps you should also mention that you should pass an object

I converted a small app from a self-submitting iframe that did all rendering on the server to an Espresso app. (Ended up ~150 lines coffeescript compiled to >300 lines javascript.) I needed the features added here to properly handle form elements, especially removing a disabled attribute once it was added and setting the value of form elements (selects are much easier to set this way, textareas can only be set this way).

I think there's a case to be made for supporting false as well as null for attribute removal, as I can't think of any circumstance in which I would set an attribute to boolean false and want the result to be attribute="false", but I didn't make that further change.

I am interested in starting a similar project based on components of backbone and react but it looks like this project might be heard in a similar direction but I have a few questions.

1. There doesn't seem to be a router, did I just miss it? If not what are the plans for one?
2. There isn't an example of using templates, is it possible? For later applications there is no way all the HTML can be in a single file.
3. Why not just use react as the rendering engine? they have already addressed many issues of updating the Dom efficiently.

I think it may help to follow the path lead from other projects such as underscore, since this awesome lightweight framework is inspired by Backbone. It seems this implementation is faster on modern browsers as well. http://jsperf.com/underscore-js-istype-alternatives