Passing variables to patterfly-notification-drawer triggers infinite loop

[benjaminapetersen]

If I pass the template includes via $scope variables like this:

          angular.extend($scope, {
            notificationGroups: [{
              heading: 'Tab 1',
              subHeading: 'woohoo!',
              notifications: [{
                unread: true,
                message: 'Hello world'
              }]
            }],
            headingInclude: 'views/directives/notifications/heading.html',
            subheadingInclude: 'views/directives/notifications/subheading.html',
            notificationBodyInclude: 'views/directives/notifications/notification-body.html',
            notificationFooterInclude: 'views/directives/notifications/notification-footer.html',
            customScope: {}
          });

  <div
    pf-notification-drawer
    heading-include="headingInclude"
    subheading-include="subheadingInclude"
    notification-body-include="notificationBodyInclude"
    notification-footer-include="notificationFooterInclude"
    custom-scope="customScope">
  </div>

My console logs some pretty gnarly things:

And the chrome-helper process associated with this page very quickly consumes over 1GB of memory (this is when I force quite, it seems to climb indefinitely).

[jeff-phillips-18]

The includes are expected to be attributes, I believe you need to use heading-include=“{{headingInclude}}” .

Not saying it is OK to infinite loop on error but does this fix your particular issue?

[benjaminapetersen]

Ah, yeah that was a dumb mistake on my part, getting the binding right fixes.

As far as that loop error goes, I'm guessing that it attempted to make an $http request for the template on the string headingInclude which fails and probably returns index.html. The directive is likely trying to put index.html into the page, which reloads angular & triggers the whole cycle again.

[jeff-phillips-18]

Great. Should we close this then? I'm not sure we could fix this in the drawer code unless we were to expect variables instead and that would be a breaking change.

[benjaminapetersen]

I'm fishing around a bit to see if this is a common problem with using includes, or if there is a good way to check against it.