ngx-mf

ngx-mf is a small (100 lines of code) zero dependency set of TypeScript types for recursive infer angular FormGroup, FormArray or FormControl type from your model type.

It doesn't increase your bundle size because it's just TypeScript types.

Installation

npm

$ npm i ngx-mf

yarn

$ yarn add ngx-mf

How It Works

Define some model:

enum ContactType {
    Email,
    Telephone,
}

interface IContactModel {
    type: ContactType;
    contact: string;
}

interface IUserModel {
    id?: number;
    firstName: string;
    lastName: string;
    nickname: string;
    birthday: Date;
    contacts: IContactModel[];
}

Then define your form type based on IUserModel:

type Form = FormType<IUserModel, { contacts: [FormElementGroup] }>

Then you have form type, before form will be defined:

Form[T] is FormGroup<{
    id?: FormControl<number | undefined> | undefined; 
    firstName: FormControl<string | null>;
    lastName: FormControl<string | null>;
    nickname: FormControl<string | null>;
    birthday: FormControl<Date | null>;
    contacts: FormArray<FormGroup<{
        type: FormControl<ContactType | null>;
        contact: FormControl<string | null>;
    }>>;
}>

Usage

ngx-mf exports types FormModel and FormType

FormModel<TModel, TAnnotations> - WARNING (deprecated) recursively turns TModel fields (where TModel is your model type) into a FormGroup, FormArray or FormControl. You can choose what do you want: FormGroup, FormArray or FormControl by annotation. You can pass TAnnotations as the second argument to specify output type using special easy to use syntax.

FormType needs to get types of nested fields.

Example model from How It Works chapter:

enum ContactType {
    Email,
    Telephone,
}

interface IContactModel {
    type: ContactType;
    contact: string;
}

interface IUserModel {
    id?: number;
    firstName: string;
    lastName: string;
    nickname: string;
    birthday: Date;
    contacts: IContactModel[];
}

Lets say we want infer FormGroup where fields firstName, lastName, nickname, birthday should be FormControl and field contacts should be FormArray of FormGroups.

For that we need to pass annotation in our FormType type. The syntax of annotation will be:

{ contacts: [FormElementGroup] }

Where contacts is our field, [FormElementGroup] indicates that field is FormArray. [FormElementGroup] indicates that we have FormGroup inside FormArray.

So our full UserForm type should be:

type UserForm = FormType<IUserModel, { contacts: [FormElementGroup] }>

You can find full example here /tests/example.test.mts

FormType<TModel, TAnnotations> - Recursively turns TModel fields (where TModel is your model type) into types tree with your model structure and additional fields for shortcuts. There is 3 type of shortcuts:

• T - type of full form for current node, something like FormGroup<...>
• G - group type of your FromGroup, looks like {a: FromControl<...>, b: FormControl<...>}
• I - array item type of your FormArray, looks like FormControl<...>

You can combine keys of your model and this additional fields for every level of your type to get type that you need.

I strongly recommend to use FormType, because in specific cases you may need to get form type for nested fields, and sometime this fields are optional, and it will be difficult to get type of nested optional field.

Annotations

ngx-mf annotations have three different annotations: FormElementArray, FormElementGroup, FormElementControl

• FormElementArray - infer FormArray on the same nesting
• FormElementGroup - infer FormGroup on the same nesting
• FormElementControl - infer FormControl on the same nesting

Also annotations can be objects, like {a: FormElementGroup}, and arrays, like [FormElementGroup].

If you use {} then object with the same nesting will be FormGroup If you use [] then object with the same nesting will be FormArray

And you can combine keys of TModel, {}, [], FormElementArray, FormElementGroup, FormElementControl to specify what you do want to infer in result type.

Check /tests/annotations.test.mts for details

Examples Of Usage

Definition of example model:

interface Model {
    a: number | null;
    b?: {
        c: {
            d: number[];
            e: { 
                f: string; 
            }
        }[]
    }
}

Lets see what FormType will do without annotations

type Form = FormType<Model>

Form[T] is FormGroup<{
    a: FormControl<number | null>;
    b: FormControl<string[]>;
    c?: FormControl<{
        d: {
           e: number[];
           f: {
               g: string;
           };
        }[];
    } | undefined> | undefined;
}>

As you can see root is FormGroup, and elements is FormControl - it is the default behavior of FormType without annotations

As you can see c field is optional, because in Model this field marked as optional in form type too. That means, all optionals will be optionals in inferred type.

Now let's say that c should be FormGroup

type Form = FormType<Model, { c: FormElementGroup }>

Form[T] is FormGroup<{
    a: FormControl<number | null>;
    b: FormControl<string>;
    c?: FormGroup<{ // <<
        d: FormControl<{ // <<
           e: number[];
           f: {
               g: string;
           };
        }[]>;
    } | undefined> | undefined;
}>

Now let's say that c.d should be FormArray

type Form = FormType<Model, { c: { d: FormElementArray } }>

Form[T] is FormGroup<{
    a: FormControl<number | null>;
    b: FormControl<string[]>;
    c?: FormGroup<{ // <<
        d: FormArray<FormControl<{ // <<
           e: number[];
           f: {
               g: string;
           };
        }>>;
    } | undefined> | undefined;
}>

Now let's say that c.d.e should be FormArray

type Form = FormType<Model, { c: { d: [ { e: FormElementArray } ] } }>

Form[T] is FormGroup<{
    a: FormControl<number | null>;
    b: FormControl<string[]>;
    c?: FormGroup<{ // <<
        d: FormArray<FormGroup<{ // <<
           e: FormArray<FormControl<number>>; // <<
           f: {
               g: string;
           };
        }>>;
    } | undefined> | undefined;
}>

Now let's say that c.d.e should be FormArray and c.d.f should be FormGroup

type Form = FormType<Model, { c: { d: [ { e: FormElementArray, f: FormElementGroup } ] } }>

Form[T] is FormGroup<{
    a: FormControl<number | null>;
    b: FormControl<string[]>;
    c?: FormGroup<{ // <<
        d: FormArray<FormGroup<{ // <<
           e: FormArray<FormControl<number>>; // <<
           f: FormGroup<{ // <<
               g: FormControl<string>; // <<
           }>;
        }>>;
    } | undefined> | undefined;
}>

If you pass array type to FormType then you will get FormArray instead of FormGroup

type Form = FormType<number[]>

would be

FormArray<FormControl<number>>

Also you can define FormArray recursively like group inside array inside array :)

type Form = FormType<SomeModel, [[FormElementGroup]]>

Or array inside group inside array for example:

type Form = FormType<SomeModel, [{a: FormElementArray}]>

Other examples you can find in annotation tests /tests/annotations.test.mts

The right way to debug your types

• Always use FormGroup<FormType[G]> types when you create your form group. Because it will be more simpler to debug wrong types, and it allow you to not to specify controls types directly. See answer here https://github.com/iamguid/ngx-mf/issues/19

• Use FormBuilder (fb.group<Form[G]>(...)) or constructor (new FormGroup<Form[G]>(...)) syntax to define your forms. Because if you use array syntax, then you can't pass argument to FormGroup type.

Questions

Q: Why i can't use just FormGroup<Model> ?

A: Because when your model have nested fields, then it won't work

Q: Why i can't define form just as FormGroup ?

A: Because then you loose your types

Q: Why i can't define forms without binding it to model type ?

A: Yes you can, but it's more usefull to bind it, because if you change the model it will better to see inconsystency directly in your form

Q: Why i can't init form when define it and use typeof to infer form type?

A: Yes you can, it is another way to save form type and you can use typeof to get type of form, to pass it to the method, but when your model will change then you will see errors only in the places where you use patch > or setValue, but it is inderect errors, and when you bind forms to models you will see errors on the form definition. But, anyway in that case you can't to get types of your form before it will be define

Q: What about dynamic forms ?

A: you can make some fields optional and enable/disable it when you need it.

Q: What about complicated forms that includes many of fields, groups and controls

A: It is the main scenario of ngx-mf

Links

• Reddit topic - https://www.reddit.com/r/angular/comments/vv2xmd/what_do_you_think_about_generating_formgroup_type/
• Stackoverflow questions - https://stackoverflow.com/questions/72500855/formbuilder-with-strongly-typed-form-in-ng14 https://stackoverflow.com/questions/72507263/angular-14-strictly-typed-reactive-forms-how-to-type-formgroup-model-using-exi
• Dev.to article - https://dev.to/iamguid/new-way-to-cook-angular-14-typed-forms-1g7h
• Medium article - https://medium.com/p/1ffebf193df
• Playground -