FormUiControl states that hidden, pending and dirty will be bind in custom controls, but this is currently not the case.
Fixes#65575
(cherry picked from commit 9fe9566581)
Extends the `FormUiControl` interface to allow `InputSignalWithTransform` in addition to `InputSignal` for its properties.
Fixes#65756
(cherry picked from commit 7d1e502345)
This is necessary to exclude a race condition where the MutationObserver initialized by the instruction fired before the inputs are binded.
fixes#65678
(cherry picked from commit f35b2ef47c)
Adds a DI configuration option for signal forms that allows the
developer to specify CSS classes that should be automatically added
by the `Field` directive based on the field's status.
(cherry picked from commit c70e246c23)
The type checker will no longer prohibit binding the Signal Forms `[field]`
directive to an input with a dynamic `[attr.type]` or `[type]` binding.
(cherry picked from commit 3a1eb07c46)
Support binding `[field]` to directives that implement
`FormValueControl` or `FormCheckboxControl`.
The `[field]` binds to whichever directive (or component) matches first in the
event there are multiple implementations. We are considering whether to make
this an error state, which could be reported during type checking.
Closes#63910, Closes#64992
(cherry picked from commit f97a1d4856)
An early piece of feedback received regarding custom controls hosted on
native inputs was that they required a lot of boilerplate to bind
`FieldState` properties. Each property required an input to accept the
property, and a host binding to forward it to the native control.
(cherry picked from commit c727df5d38)
* Apply any debounce rules to updates from interop controls (if configured).
* Add tests to ensure debouncing works for all control types (native, custom,
and interop).
(cherry picked from commit b1037ec2f0)
Test that a component with a bound `[field]` input is not treated as a
control, and that `fieldBinding` does not include the corresponding
`Field` instance.
(cherry picked from commit acb78eeb7a)
Fixes some type checking errors in the signal forms tests that accumulated while there wasn't any type checking.
(cherry picked from commit 10915f2f5f)
When we set the `value` on a `<select>` element we're really just
setting the selected `<option>`. It treats the selected option as the
source of truth, rather than the actual value. This means that if
options are added or removed or their value changes, the `<select>` may
wind up with a different `value` than what's in our model.
This PR resolves this issue by adding a `MutationObserver` to the select
that is used to resync its value to the model whenever the options may
have changed.
(cherry picked from commit 194b41199b)
For each field state property, check if it has changed since the last
time it was checked before writing it the corresponding form control
property.
The `pattern` and `required` properties of the field state now return a
default value rather than `undefined` if not defined by metadata.
(cherry picked from commit 41be02da2f)
The directive implemnetation might set CVA values during the template evaluation. Since the template is a reactive context we need to untrack when setting the CVA values to prevent writing to signals in a reactive context.
fixes#64614
PR Close#64618
Prior to this change, `FieldState` defined a signal for each built-in
property. This unfortunately meant that the `Field` directive had no way
of knowing which property had actually been defined in the schema, and
would thus attempt to propagate them all to the bound form control. This
meant that the default values of these signals would override the
default or template defined values of these control properties.
Now these properties are `undefined` by default, and only initialized if
defined in the schema. Thus the `Field` directive will not attempt to
bind any properties that aren't explicitly managed by the schema.
PR Close#64446
Note that unlike the other built-in properties, `pattern` is not
propagated to native controls so the lack of symmetry with other
property tests is intentional.
PR Close#64446
Add support for interoperability between signal forms and reactive forms that
commit effccffde0 had removed.
A signal forms field can once again be bound to any element or component with a
`ControlValueAccessor`.
PR Close#64471
When a directive injects a `ViewContainerRef`, the runtime inserts a container that was throwing off the logic that recognizes native controls.
These changes switch to check if the node is a native control through the `TNode`. This also makes it a bit less prone to breaking during SSR.
Fixes#64362.
PR Close#64368
Caches information about the kind of form control that a `TNode`
represents in `TNodeFlags`. This avoids redundant computations on
subsequent template create and update passes.
Renames the `INVALID_CONTROL_HOST` error code to
`INVALID_FIELD_DIRECTIVE_HOST` for clarity and adds a test for it.
PR Close#64351
Renames the control directive and the input that users set to bind a
field to a UI control.
Previously users would do:
```
<input [control]="someField">
```
Now users will do:
```
<input [filed]="someField">
```
PR Close#64300
Fix a bug where the min property of a form field was not correctly
propagated to custom controls. Also ensure that min and max are only
bound to native input elements that support them.
PR Close#63884
Fix several typos caught by the added test cases:
* `disabled` attribute for native controls
* `readonly` property for custom controls
Note that the `name` test cases have been marked `pending()` due to
https://github.com/angular/angular/issues/63882.
PR Close#63884
Move most of the implementation of the `Control` directive into core
framework instructions. This allows field state changes to be propagated
to their corresponding UI controls directly during execution of a
template update block, instead of relying on `effect()`s to synchronize
each change later during the update (and too late in the case of
required inputs).
* Define a private API in `@angular/core` for signal forms to implement:
* `ɵControl` for the `Control` directive.
* `ɵFieldState` for the control's associated `FieldState`.
* Emit specialized instructions when compiling a `[control]` binding:
* `ɵɵcontrolCreate` sets up the `ɵControl` directive if present,
determines whether it's bound to a native control element or a
custom control component, and adds the appropriate event listeners
to notify the `ɵFieldState` of UI changes.
* `ɵɵcontrol` propagates changes from `ɵFieldState` properties to their
corresponding UI control properties (in additional to binding the `control`
property itself).
PR Close#63773
There are two primary reasons for this renaming:
1. It better reflects the actual nature of the proxy object, namely that
the form is represented as a tree, and that this object is used for
navigating the tree structure (while `FieldState` is used for getting
the state at a particular point in the structure).
2. This frees up the name `Field` to be used for the directive that
binds a `FieldTree` to a UI control.
PR Close#64214
Adds additional handling for input types that handle numbers:
- number
- range
- datetime-local
As well as input types that handle dates:
- date
- month
- week
- time
- *not* datetime-local which does not allow setting valueAsDate
This PR allows binding either a `Field<string>` or `Field<number>` to
the number type inputs and a `Field<string>`, `Field<numebr>`, or
`Field<Date | null>` to the date type inputs. Binding uses the
corresponding `.value`, `.valueAsNumber`, or `.valueAsDate` according to
the type of the `Field`.
When reading new values out of the input, the `Control` directive will
read the property that aligns with the type of the existing value in the
`Field` and write back the same type.
PR Close#63585
This allows passing errors and disabled reasons that did not originate
from `@angular/forms/signals` in case the the control is being used
separately from the forms system
PR Close#63455
This commit introduces an experimental version of a new signal-based forms API for Angular. This new API aims to explore how signals can be leveraged to create a more declarative, intuitive, and reactive way of handling forms.
The primary goals of this new signal-based approach are:
* **Signal-centric Design:** Place signals at the core of the forms experience, enabling a truly reactive programming model for form state and logic.
* **Declarative Logic:** Allow developers to define form behavior, such as validation and conditional fields, declaratively using TypeScript. This moves logic out of the template and into a typed, testable schema.
* **Developer-Owned Data Model:** The library does not maintain a copy of data in a form model, but instead read and write it via a developer-provided `WritableSignal`, eliminating the need for applications to synchronize their data with the form system.
* **Interoperability:** A key design goal is seamless interoperability with existing reactive forms, allowing for incremental adoption.
* **Bridging Template and Reactive Forms:** This exploration hopes to close the gap between template and reactive forms, offering a unified and more powerful approach that combines the best aspects of both.
This initial version of the experimental API includes the core building blocks, such as the `form()` function, `Field` and `FieldState` objects, and a `[control]` directive for binding to UI elements. It also introduces a schema-based system for defining validation, conditional logic, and other form behaviors.
Note: This is an early, experimental API. It is not yet complete and is subject to change based on feedback and further exploration.
Co-authored-by: Kirill Cherkashin <kirts@google.com>
Co-authored-by: Alex Rickabaugh <alxhub@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Leon Senft <leonsenft@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Dylan Hunn <dylhunn@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Michael Small <michael-small@users.noreply.github.com>
PR Close#63408
