Looper nested data using Custom + Array - out of scope?

[mjshelley]

Hey Guys,

I have a nested Looper running on Pro 5.0.6 that seems to have a scope issue.

I have a Custom loop that returns an array, and inside that a Div tag that makes use of the Array looper feature; this works perfectly.

However, I cannot assign looper fields to that Div from the original Custom loop, despite still being in scope.

For example, I cannot insert the ID from the parent Looper field (Yes, this 100% exists :D) into the ID of the object.

tao_ems_{{dc:looper:field key="ID"}}

Here’s the parent Custom loops data - the slider works, proving the data is there, and the ID is used in other places in scope, above this DIV - but it seems to not work, possibly because I’ve set a Looper Provider of Array at the same level?

This is an active build, so would appreciate some advice here

Kind regards,

Matthew

[alexander]

Hi Matthew,

Unfortunately I think you might need an extra Div here. I’ve double checked this and enabling a Looper Provider will unset the current scope. Ideally, it would work like you have it setup and not lose access to the current consumer until the next consumer runs - even if a Provider is enabled somewhere in the chain. I’ve added this to our issue tracker so we can look into it and hopefully make that possible, but I can’t provide an ETA on when that will be available.

Meanwhile, it should work if you place your provider in another nested Div element.

---

As an aside, something the might help while you’re working with complex loopers is using some internal debugging tools we have. Try adding these in a text or Raw Content element:

{{dc:looper:debug_provider}}

{{dc:looper:debug_consumer}}

The debug_provider will give you some basic meta data about the current provider and debug_consumer will give you all the data in scope.

[mjshelley]

Hey @alexander,

Thanks for the feedback, I’ll figure out a work-around with some additional JavaScript but thanks for the tips about the debug tags - that is very useful!

Really appreciate it.

Thanks,

Matthew

[alexander]

Ok, sounds good!