This commit makes the host bindings of `NgControlStatus[Group]`
compatible with `OnPush` components. Note that this intentionally _does not_
expose any new APIs in the forms module. The goal is only to remove
unpreventable `ExpressionChangedAfterItHasBeenCheckedError` in the forms
code that developers do not have control over.
PR Close#55720
With this change, If an async validator that should have emitted was cancelled by a non-emitting validator, the status change will be reported on the `AbstractControl.events` observable.
This issue can happen when a `FormControl` is added to a `FormGroup` and a FormGroupDirective/FormControlDirective trigger a non-emitting validation (which cancels the initial validator execution).
Note: The behavior remains the same of the existing `statusChanges` observable as the change was too breaking to land in G3.
fixes: angular#41519
PR Close#55134
This commit deprecates the aliases for the control events to ease the changes in G3
A follow-up commit will remove those deprecated entries.
PR Close#55698
Since we aren't using clang anymore, we can remove the comments and the workarounds that were in place to prevent it from doing the wrong thing.
PR Close#55750
When a formControlName is used without a parent formGroup, an error is
logged in the console. Before this commit, there was no information
about which control had the issue. Now, it's reported and the
troubleshoot is much faster.
PR Close#55397
This commit introduces a new method to subscribe to on every `AbstractControl` subclass.
It allows to track value, pristine, touched and status changes on a given control.
Fixes#10887
PR Close#54579
The `RadioControlRegistry` was only provided in a module, providedIn: 'root' fixes that issue.
Fixes#54117
Co-authored-by: sr5434 <118690585+sr5434@users.noreply.github.com>
PR Close#54130
Non typed forms allow to pass null to nested groups when calling `formGroup.reset()`, this commit prevent an undefined access.
fixes#20509
PR Close#48830
The `Writable` type is usefull when we want overwrite readonly properties and we still want to maintain code navigation/reference. It should be use instead of `any` type assertions for example.
PR Close#49754
We enabled a lint rule internally to require that multi-provided
`InjectionToken`s have a `readonly` array type, the tokens in this
PR do not follow this rule and are causing lint violations.
Fixes#51124
PR Close#51125
According to the HTML specification most attributes are defined as strings, however some can be interpreted as different types like booleans or numbers. [In the HTML standard](https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/common-microsyntaxes.html#boolean-attributes), boolean attributes are considered `true` if they are present on a DOM node and `false` if they are omitted. Common examples of boolean attributes are `disabled` on interactive elements like `<button>` or `checked` on `<input type="checkbox">`. Another example of an attribute that is defined as a string, but interpreted as a different type is the `value` attribute of `<input type="number">` which logs a warning and ignores the value if it can't be parsed as a number.
Historically, authoring Angular inputs that match the native behavior in a type-safe way has been difficult for developers, because Angular interprets all static attributes as strings. While some recent TypeScript versions made this easier by allowing setters and getters to have different types, supporting this pattern still requires a lot of boilerplate and additional properties to be declared. For example, currently developers have to write something like this to have a `disabled` input that behaves like the native one:
```typescript
import {Directive, Input} from '@angular/core';
@Directive({selector: 'mat-checkbox'})
export class MatCheckbox {
@Input()
get disabled() {
return this._disabled;
}
set disabled(value: any) {
this._disabled = typeof value === 'boolean' ? value : (value != null && value !== 'false');
}
private _disabled = false;
}
```
This feature aims to address the issue by introducing a `transform` property on inputs. If an input has a `transform` function, any values set through the template will be passed through the function before being assigned to the directive instance. The example from above can be rewritten to the following:
```typescript
import {Directive, Input, booleanAttribute} from '@angular/core';
@Directive({selector: 'mat-checkbox'})
export class MatCheckbox {
@Input({transform: booleanAttribute}) disabled: boolean = false;
}
```
These changes also add the `booleanAttribute` and `numberAttribute` utilities to `@angular/core` since they're common enough to be useful for most projects.
Fixes#8968.
Fixes#14761.
PR Close#50420
This commit updates parts of the FW to be ES2022 complaint.
These changes are needed to fix the following problems problems with using properties before they are initialized.
Example
```ts
class Foo {
bar = this.buz;
constructor(private buz: unknown){}
}
```
PR Close#49559
This commit updates parts of the FW to be ES2022 complaint.
These changes are needed to fix the following problems problems with using properties before they are initialized.
Example
```ts
class Foo {
bar = this.buz;
constructor(private buz: unknown){}
}
```
PR Close#49332
The private util `isObservable` was actually just testing the same thing as`isSubscribable()`. As the implementation is closer to the function's name, let's only keep ``isSubscribable`.
PR Close#49295
`setDisabledState` is supposed to be called whenever the disabled state of a control changes, including upon control creation. However, a longstanding bug caused the method to not fire when an *enabled* control was attached. This bug was fixed in v15.
This had a side effect: previously, it was possible to instantiate a reactive form control with `[attr.disabled]=true`, even though the the corresponding control was enabled in the model. (Note that the similar-looking property binding version `[disabled]=true` was always rejected, though.) This resulted in a mismatch between the model and the DOM. Now, because `setDisabledState` is always called, the value in the DOM will be immediately overwritten with the "correct" enabled value.
Users should instead disable the control directly in their model. (There are many ways to do this, such as using the `{value: 'foo', disabled: true}` constructor format, or immediately calling `FooControl.disable()` in `ngOnInit`.)
If this incompatibility is too breaking, you may also opt out using `FormsModule.withConfig` or `ReactiveFormsModule.withConfig` at the time you import it, via the `callSetDisabledState` option.
However, there is an exceptional case: radio buttons. Because Reactive Forms models the entire group of radio buttons as a single `FormControl`, there is no way to control the disabled state for individual radios, so they can no longer be configured as disabled.
In this PR, we have special cased radio buttons to ignore their first call to `setDisabledState` when in `callSetDisabledState: 'always'` mode. This preserves the old behavior.
PR Close#48864
refactor(forms): make FormBuilder classes provided in root
This commit updates the FormBuilder classes to provide them in root
instead of using a deprecated pattern of providing a service in a specific
module using the `providedIn` syntax.
Closes#48237.
PR Close#48245
Fixes that the `AbstractControl` was mutating the validators arrays being passed into the constructor an helper methods like `setValidators`.
Fixes#47827.
PR Close#47830
[A Github issue](https://github.com/angular/angular/issues/43821) about an arcane-sounding Forms error is one of the repo's top-ten most visited pages. This converts the error to `RuntimeErrorCode` and adds a dedicated guide to explain how to solve it.
PR Close#47969
Fixes that the `AbstractControl` was mutating the validators arrays being passed into the constructor an helper methods like `setValidators`.
Fixes#47827.
PR Close#47830
Previously, `setDisabledState` was never called when attached if the control is enabled. This PR fixes the bug, and creates a configuration option to opt-out of the fix.
Fixes#35309.
BREAKING CHANGE: setDisabledState will always be called when a `ControlValueAccessor` is attached. You can opt-out with `FormsModule.withConfig` or `ReactiveFormsModule.withConfig`.
PR Close#47576
This commit exports existing utility functions to check for control instances:
isFormControl, isFormGroup, isFormRecord, isFormArray
Those are useful when implementing validators that use the specifics of one of those control types.
To narrow down the type to what it actually is, we can now use the util functions in validators:
```
export const myArrayValidator: ValidatorFn = (control) => {
if (!isFormArray(control)) { return null; }
// now you can use FormArray-specific members, e.g.:
if (control.controls.every(c => !!c.value) {
return { myerror: true }
} else { return null; }
}
```
PR Close#47718
Updated methods' description verbs. They are sometimes used with the assumption of the 'it' pronoun and sometimes not. For instance, the verb 'to construct' is used with 's' in one method description and not others. It is the case for other verbs as well. This is also remarkable in the description of the built-in methods of FormArray.
PR Close#47399
The forms `submit` event handlers have a `return false` to prevent form submissions from reloading the page, however this also prevents the browser behavior for forms with `method="dialog"`.
These changes add an exception since the `method="dialog"` doesn't refresh the page.
Fixes#47150.
PR Close#47308
Type inference in cases involving `ControlConfig` was previously not working as desired. This was because the compiler was enforcing that `ControlConfig` is a *tuple* -- which is not always that easy to prove! By relaxing this constraint a bit, and just inferring from `ControlConfig` as an array, the type inference catches many more cases, and is generally more correct.
PR Close#47034
Users using the "disabled" property binding on reactive form controls would want to know how to dynamically update the disabled state of a form control when they get a console warning.
PR Close#47041
The new `FormRecord` entity introduced in Angular v14 does not have its builder method.
This commit adds it, allowing to write:
```
const fb = new FormBuilder();
fb.record({ a: 'one' });
```
This works for both the `FormBuilder` and the `NonNullableFormBuilder`
PR Close#46485
Replace `new Error()` in a forms Validators function with `RuntimeError`, for better tree-shakability. Also, improve the error messages, and add documentation.
PR Close#46537
Consider the case in which `FormBuilder` is used to construct a group with an optional field:
```
const controls = { name: fb.control('') };
const foo: FormGroup<{
name: FormControl<string | null>;
address?: FormControl<string | null>;
}> = fb.group<{
name: FormControl<string | null>;
address?: FormControl<string | null>;
}>(controls);
```
Today, with fully strict TypeScript settings, the above will not compile:
```
Types of property 'controls' are incompatible.
Type '{ name: FormControl<string | null>; address?: FormControl<FormGroup<SubFormControls> | null | undefined> | undefined; }' is not assignable to type '{ name: FormControl<string | null>; address?: FormGroup<SubFormControls> | undefined; }'.
```
Notice that the `fb.group(...)` is calculating the following type for address: `address?: FormControl<FormGroup<string|null>`. This is clearly wrong -- an extraneous `FormControl` has been added!
This is coming from the calculation of the result type of `fb.group(...)`. In the type definition, if we cannot detect the outer control type, [we assume it's just an unwrapped value, and automatically wrap it in `FormControl`](https://github.com/angular/angular/blob/14.0.0/packages/forms/src/form_builder.ts#L66).
Because the optional `{address?: FormControl<string|null>}` implicitly makes the RHS have type `FormControl<string|null>|undefined`, [the relevant condition is not satisfied](https://github.com/angular/angular/blob/14.0.0/packages/forms/src/form_builder.ts#L55). In particular, the condition expects just `FormGroup<T>`, not `FormGroup<T>|undefined`. So we assume `T` is a value type, and it gets wrapped with `FormControl`.
The solution is to add the cases where `undefined` is included in the union type when detecting which control `T` is (if any).
PR Close#46253
It is currently unclear which directive to use for FormRecord. This commit amends the docs to explicitly state that the group directives can and should be used with records.
PR Close#46235
DEPRECATED:
It is now deprecated to provide *both* `AbstractControlOption`s and an async validators argument to a FormControl. Previously, the async validators would just be silently dropped, resulting in a probably buggy forms. Now, the constructor call is deprecated, and Angular will print a warning in devmode.
DEPRECATED:
The `initialValueIsDefault` option has been deprecated and replaced with the otherwise-identical `nonNullable` option, for the sake of naming consistency.
In some places, the [@see][1] JSDoc tag was incorrectly used instead of
the [@link][2] inline tag, leading to warnings during doc generation and
the `@see` tags being ignored (and thus shown in the docs as is).
Replace the `@see` tags with the intended `@link` tags.
[1]: https://jsdoc.app/tags-see.html
[2]: https://jsdoc.app/tags-inline-link.html
PR Close#46040
* `FormRecord` jsdocs should now appear on a.io
* The `{@see foo#bar}` syntax previously did not work, and has been replace with backticks
PR Close#46023
Consider a typed group for storing contact information:
```
declare interface ContactControls {
name: FormControl<string|null>;
}
contactForm: FormGroup<ContactControls> = ...;
saveForm(form: FormGroup<ContactControls>) {
service.newContact(contactForm.value);
}
```
What should be the type of `newContact`? The answer, of course, is the value type:
```
declare interface Contact {
name: string|null;
}
class ContactService {
newContact(c: Contact) {}
}
```
This is quite redundant, and therefore, we should allow the value type to be generated automatically. We already have the helper types to do this -- we just need to document and export them. Then, this becomes possible:
```
class ContactService {
newContact(c: RawValue<FormGroup<ContactControls>>) {}
}
```
PR Close#45978
Previously, using `FormBuilder` with a union type would produce unions of *controls*:
```
// `foo` has type `FormControl<string>|FormControl<number>`.
const c = fb.nonNullable.group({foo: 'bar' as string | number});
```
This actually works in many cases, due to how extraordinarily powerful Typescript's distributive types are (e.g. `value` still has type `string|number`), but it is subtly incorrect. Here is a code example that exposes the reason the inference is incorrect. It exploits the fact that Typescript will not "un-distribute" a type, producing an obviously spurious error:
```
// fc gets an inferred distributive union type `FormControl<string> | FormControl<number>`
let fc = c.controls.foo;
// Error: Type 'FormControl<string | number>' is not assignable to type 'FormControl<string> | FormControl<number>'.
fc = new FormControl<string|number>('', {initialValueIsDefault: true});
```
Instead, we want the union to apply to the *values*:
```
// `foo` should have type `FormControl<string|number>`.
const c = fb.nonNullable.group({foo: 'bar' as string | number});
```
Essentially, we want to prevent Typescript from distributing the type. [As specified in the handbook](https://www.typescriptlang.org/docs/handbook/2/conditional-types.html#distributive-conditional-types):
> Typically, distributivity is the desired behavior. To avoid that behavior, you can surround each side of the extends keyword with square brackets.
This PR applies this suggestion to `FormBuilder`'s type inference.
Fixes#45912.
PR Close#45942
Based on early feedback, calling `fb.nonNullable.group(...)` continues to be clunky for a form with many such groups. Allowing `NonNullableFormBuilder` to be directly injected enables the following:
```
constructor(private fb: NonNullableFormBuilder) {}
```
PR Close#45904
With typed forms, all `FormControl`s are nullable by default, because they can be reset to `null`. This behavior is possible to change by passing the option `initialValueIsDefault: true`. However, in a large form, this is extremely cumbersome, as the option must be repeated over and over. Additionally, it is not possible to take full advantage of `FormBuilder`, since `FormBuilder.group` and `FormBuilder.array` will produce nullable controls.
This PR introduces a new accessor `FormBuilder.nonNullable`, which produces *non-nullable* controls. Specifically, any call to `.control` will produce controls with `{initialValueIsDefault: true}`, and calls to `.array` or `.group` that implicitly build inner controls will have the same effect.
```ts
let nfb = new FormBuilder().nonNullable;
let name = nfb.group({who: 'Alex'}); // FormGroup<{who: FormControl<string>}>
name.reset();
console.log(name); // {who: 'Alex'}
```
PR Close#45852
Previously, the following code would fail to compile:
```
let form: FormGroup<{email: FormControl<string | null>}>;
form = fb.group({
email: ['', Validators.required]
});
```
This is because the compiler was unable to properly infer the inner type of `ControlConfig` arrays in some cases. The same issue applies to `FormArray` as well under certain circumstances.
This change cleans up the `FormBuilder` type signatures to always use the explicit Element type, and to catch `ControlConfig` types that might fall through.
PR Close#45684
As part of the typed forms RFC, we proposed the creation of a new FormRecord type, to support dynamic groups with homogenous values. This PR introduces FormRecord, as a subclass of FormGroup.
PR Close#45607
This PR strongly types the forms package by adding generics to AbstractControl classes as well as FormBuilder. This makes forms type-safe and null-safe, for both controls and values.
The design uses a "control-types" approach. In other words, the type parameter on FormGroup is an object containing controls, and the type parameter on FormArray is an array of controls.
Special thanks to Alex Rickabaugh and Andrew Kushnir for co-design & implementation, to Sonu Kapoor and Netanel Basal for illustrative prior art, and to Cédric Exbrayat for extensive testing and validation.
BREAKING CHANGE: Forms classes accept a generic.
Forms model classes now accept a generic type parameter. Untyped versions of these classes are available to opt-out of the new, stricter behavior.
PR Close#43834
in the validators documentation, the value for the formControl for both required and requiredTrue validators is an empty string. This is OK for required since it gives us an error. But I think if we set the value of formControl responsible for requiredTrue to something other than an empty string (e.g.: 'some value'), it would demonstrate the difference between required and requiredTrue better.
PR Close#45533
in the validators documentation, the value for the formControl for both required and requiredTrue validators is an empty string. This is OK for required since it gives us an error. But I think if we set the value of formControl responsible for requiredTrue to something other than an empty string (e.g.: 'some value'), it would demonstrate the difference between required and requiredTrue better.
PR Close#45533
Fixes a long-standing issue where swapping out the `FormGroup` and calling `disable` immediately afterwards doesn't actually disable the `ControlValueAccessor`.
Fixes#22556.
PR Close#43499
There was a subtle bug involving the opt-out class for FormBuilder, which I discovered during the ongoing migration. The types must be structurally the same, because people pass around FormBuilders, in addition to passing around the controls they produce. This PR ensures FormBuilder and UntypedFormBuilder are assignable to each other.
PR Close#45421
model.ts is currently extremely large. This is the first step in an attempt to refactor it to be more easily navigable and reviewable. This commit breaks up `model.ts` into the following new files:
* `model/abstract_model.ts`: The remainder of the model, including the `AbstractControl` base class and helper functions which are used throughout.
* `model/form_control.ts`: `FormControl`, `FormControlOptions`, and helpers, plus the constructor and untyped friends.
* `model/form_array.ts`: `FormArray` and untyped friends.
* `model/form_group.ts`: `FormGroup` and untyped friends.
This first phase is a purely mechanical code move. There is no new code at all, and no interfaces have been separated.
PR Close#45217
Currently, there is a freestanding `getRawValue` function which examines the type of the control. This is an issue for refactoring `model.ts` because it creates unnecessary dependencies between the `AbstractControl` classes. It is cleaner to simply add this method to the model hierarchy and call it directly, and will ease upcoming refactoring.
PR Close#45200
