Develop Reference

Function inside the AngularJS Controller

I have code snippet in which there is a Angular Modular Controller, but there is a function inside the same controller and with a call, which is raising doubt in my mind that is this way of coding allowed in Javascript or Angular? If Yes then how does it read it? See the below code format I have:
obj.controller('CartController',function($scope){
$scope.totalCart = function(){
var total = 10;
return total;
}
function calculate(){
...Some Logic..
}
$scope.$watch($scope.totalCart, calculate);
)};
Please help me to understand that is this type of function definition and call within a controller allowed in Angular/Javascript?

The calculate() is a private function -- it is only accessible in the scope of CartController. If you do not need to make use of your function in the view it is good idea to make it private. It says that it is not intended to be used in the view, so if someone else will be working with this code should think twice before use it in the view. Moreover: from within calculate you have access to all objects that are accessible in the scope of the CartController (including objects passed to CartController as parameters).
Function declared in this way is a proper JS function, which means you can get reference to it by its name. Sometimes it is thought to be more readable if you declare / create your function in advance and only then assign them to properties of some other object (in this case $scope):
function someFn (...) { ... }
function someOtherFn (...) { ... }
...
$scope.someFn = someFn
In the above snippet the intentions are very clear: make someFn accessible, while keep someOtherFn private.
Btw. declaring functions like: function nameFn(...){...} is called function statement; you can very similarly do it like: var nameFn = function(...) {...} (so called function expression). There is a slight difference between those -- basically it is illegal:
someFn();
var someFn = function(...) {...}
whereas, this works:
someFn();
function someFn(...) {...}
Sometimes you are forced to use this pattern, look e.g. at my answer to this question.

$scope.launch = function (which) {
};
var _func = function () {...}

The definition is allowed, it has the same affect as
$scope.$watch($scope.totalCart, function(){..some logic...})

How do I make a nonexistent (non-member, non-global) method invocable without using eval?

Let's start from the code:
function say(name) {
var ghost=function () {
function ghost() {
alert('!');
};
return body;
};
eval("var body=''+"+name+';');
eval(name+('=('+ghost).replace('body', body)+')();');
eval(name+'();');
}
function Baal() {
if ('undefined'===typeof ghost) {
say('Baal');
return;
}
ghost();
}
say('Baal'); // or just Baal();
Looks like that saying the devil's name invoke his presence (well, maybe he needs somebody for spiritual possession) ..
As you can see the ghost doesn't exist along with Baal, but we can invoke it since there're evals in say(name).
say(name) reassigns Baal to its code body as a closure and makes it captured a ghost method, that's how things work. But I'm trying to avoid eval ..
So .. let me reword the question:
How do I make a nonexistent(and not a member or global) method invocable without using eval?

Let me rephrase your question, just to make sure I’ve got it. Given a function, you want to put a new variable in its scope, without that scope being the global scope or a scope shared between the caller and the subject, without using eval (or the equivalent new Function and other hacks depending on the environment).
You can’t.
In the case you just mentioned, you could define one function, base(), that uses arguments.callee.caller.
Don’t do that.

The short answer: You don't.
That scope is not available. If you were to attach the scope then it would be available inside of the scope used. You could then access the method handles. I assume this is not what you were looking for, but here is what that would look like. demo
function say(name){
var methods = {};
methods.Baal = function(){
alert("!");
};
return methods[name];//this could invoke as well: methods[name]()
}
var handle = say('Baal');
handle();
What your evals break down to is something along these lines (although with dynamic content from string building - this is the end result)
function say(name) {
var Baal = (function () {
function ghost() {
alert('!');
};
return function(){
if ('undefined'===typeof ghost) {
say('Baal');
return;
}
ghost();
}
})();
Baal();
}
say('Baal'); // or just Baal();
Note that the meat of what happens here is from the function Baal, namely that it calls a hardcoded ghost() which in turn calls a hardcoded alert. Why go through all of this trouble to access a hardcoded function?
A better way would be to inject this function as a callback which expects some parameters to be injected.
jsFiddle Demo
function say(callback){
var params = "!";
if( typeof callback == "function" ){
callback(params);
}
}
say(function(params){
alert(params);
});

It's very difficult for me to read through your code and figure out what you are trying to accomplish with it, but it appears that you are trying to introduce a variable into the current scope so that you can call it. You cannot do this in javascript with the method that you demonstrated. Scoping only ever "flows down". By that I mean that a variable or function defined within a function will only be available to that function and any other functions defined therein. Your function named ghost will only ever be available within the function where it is defined, regardless of when that function is evaluated.
What you can do, however, is write a function that returns a function. You can then call that function and assign the result to a variable in the scope where you want to expose functionality. Doing that would look something like this.
function defineSpecialAlert() {
return function(name) {
alert(name + "!");
};
}
var newlyDefinedMethod = defineSpecialAlert();
newlyDefinedMethod("Baal");

So if I understand, it seems like you want to create an alias of eval: Something like
#Note this code is not intended as a solution, but demonstrates
#an attempt that is guaranteed to fail.
#
function myAlias(ctx) {
eval.call(ctx, 'var ghost = 42');
}
myAlias(this);
alert(ghost);
Javascript allows many funky sleight-of-hand tricks especially with closures, but this is maybe the one impossible thing that javascript cannot do. I've tried at length to do this exact same thing, and I can tell you that you'll run into nothing but complaints from the browser, saying that eval cannot be re-contexted or aliased in any way.

Access a javascript variable from a function inside a variable

Hello i have the following issue i am not quite sure how to search for it:
function(){
var sites;
var controller = {
list: function(){
sites = "some value";
}
}
}
So the question is how to access the sites variable from the top defined as
var sites
EDIT:
Here is a more complete part. i am Using marionette.js. i don't want to define the variable attached to the Module (code below) variable but keep it private to the Module, hope that makes sense. Here is the code that works:
Admin.module("Site", function(Module, App, Backbone, Marionette, $, _ ) {
Module.sites = null;
Module.Controller = {
list: function (id) {
Module.sites = App.request("site:entities");
}
};
});
and i would like instead of
Module.sites=null;
to do
var sites;
That sort of thing does make a difference right? Because in the first case i would be defining an accessible variable from outside where as the second case it would be a private one. i am a bit new to javascript so please try to make it simple.

if you are looking for global access, just declare the variable outside the function first, make your changes to the variable inside the function, then you can get the value whenever you need it.

I have found some info on this: sadly what i am trying to do doesn't seem possible.
Can I access a private variable of a Marionette module in a second definition of that module?
So i guess i have to do _variable to make developers know its private.

Disclaimer: I have no experience using Marionette, however, what you're describing sounds very doable.
One of the most powerful (in my opinion) features of JavaScript is closures. What this means is that any function declared from within another function has access to the variables declared in the outer function.
For example:
var func;
function foo() {
var answer = 42;
func = function () {
// I have access to variable answer from in here.
return answer++;
};
}
// By calling foo(), I will assign the function func that has access "answer"
foo();
// Now I can call the func() function and it has access to the "answer"
// variable even though it was in a scope that doesn't exist anymore.
// Outputs:
// 42
// 43
console.log(func());
console.log(func());
What this means is that if you declare var sites from within your module definition function as you described, you should have access to it from within any of your inner anonymous functions. The only exception is if Marionette is re-writing your functions (by using the Function function and toString()), which seems unlikely but possible.
Your original example should would as described, my suspicion is that there is something else going wrong with the code that is unrelated to your scope.

Accessing a function defined inside a function from the global scope?

Long story short, I have a long code that uses jQuery. Lots of files, functions, etc. A less than ideal amount of our users are having issues with our code because some addons, toolbars and the like they have installed breaks our JavaScript code because of jQuery gets included twice and nasty stuff like that.
I thought I could just
Include jQuery
Use $.noConflict
Then include the whole rest of my code between something like:
.
(function($) {
// All of my code goes here.
})(jQuery);
I haven't checked if this fixes our issues with those users, but it does work. The problem is, in one part of the site (image upload) we have an iframe that needs to call some of those functions defined in our big chunk of code. I've tried putting those functions out of this unnamed function call, but it uses, on itself, other functions which have to be there.
Any idea or workaround of how could I be able to access functions defined inside that function (shown above) from a code that's outside of it?
Thanks!

You cannot access a function context from the "outside world". Well, to be accorate you could do it in some older js engines which allowed for accessing .__parent__ attributes, but that is old'n'busted and no longer available.
However, you would need to either expose some functions within your closure, or you creating a namespace object where you write all of your logic in (which also has to be available in the parent context).
So I'd suggest something like
(function( $ ) {
function myFunc() {
// do stuff
}
function anotherFunc() {
}
window.myFunc = myFunc; // expose myFunc globally
}( jQuery ));
Maybe even better:
var myNameSpace = { };
(function( $ ) {
myNameSpace.myFunc = function() {
// do stuff
};
}( jQuery ));
// somewhere else
myNameSpace.myFunc();

It is not an ideal practice, but you can declare those functions in the global scope.
(function($) {
globalFunct = function (arg1, arg2) { // Don't use var keyword
...
};
})(jQuery);
It isn't ideal because you can run into naming collisions, much like you are observing with jQuery. Improve upon this approach by putting all of your globally-accessible methods in a "package." Choose a unique name for it. This will prevent collisions.
// Somewhere outside of your anonymous function, in the global scope
var myPackage = {};
(function($) {
myPackage.globalFunct = function (arg1, arg2) {
...
};
})(jQuery);
Then call that method by invoking myPackage.globalFunct().

Why are you wrapping your code in a call to the jQuery function object which you pass in to your self-executing anonymous function; are you meaning to create a jQuery object from all of your code?
In order to expose your code to the outside world, you need to assign your functions and objects to an object which is outside of the scope of your code, such as the window object.
For example, if you had created an object containing various methods and properties that you wanted to expose, you could do this:
//Your self-executing anonymous function
(function($)
{
//Object which contains various useful methods and properties
var useful = {...};
//Expose it to the outside world
window.Useful = useful;
})(jQuery);
EDIT: as others have noted, it is not an ideal solution as you will indeed run into naming collisions if you are not careful. Also, using an object external to your anonymous function as a namespacing object (as others have stated) is my preferred method

Yes, you can "export" the function from within a closure:
Yes, you can "export" the function from within a closure:
(function() {
function a() {
console.log("a");
}
function b() {
a();
console.log("b");
}
// make b globally available
window.b = b;
})();
b();

window.PARTY_CATS_jQuery = jQuery.noConflict(true);
(function($) {
$(function() {
// All of my code goes here.
});
})(COMPANY_NAME_jQuery);
Then just use PARTY_CATS_jQuery in your global functions
If you feel PARTY_CATS_ is not a unique enough name pick something safer like BABY_KILLER_jQuery

JavaScript anonymous function syntax

The following syntax is present in a .js file.
var fun1 = function(fun1_parameter1){
return{
fun2 : function(){
alert("xxx");
}
}
}
I am not getting this at all.
This js file uses namespaces also.
Help me understanding this.

What that code does is define a single variable named fun1.
The value is an anonymous function with one parameter.
Calling the function would return an anonymous object with a .fun2 property, which points to another anonymous function.
Calling that function would trigger the alert:
fun1(0).fun2(); // triggers alert("xxx")