Develop Reference

How to structure app with Angular JS

I am trying to learn Angular JS and use it in my web app project and am looking for some guidance as well as answers to specific angular js questions. Tech stack I am using is MySQL db, Java w/ Spring Framework, HTML/CSS/Bootstrap/JS, etc..
The purpose of the app is basically a "social media craigslist" where it will have:
1. User accounts
2. Ability to create a "newsfeed-esque" post (one "view")
3. Ability to create a sale post (separate "view")
4. A view for an "inventory"
5. A view for a "wishlist"
etc..
(note: Items 2-5 are accessed via a nav bar of sorts that sits on the left side of my page and the idea was to have the main section of the page switch the content based on what nav item you clicked.. more later..)
What I was doing was writing a bunch of Javscript code to make calls to my web services (grabbing static content to populate drop downs, sending user login info for logging in, etc..) and the < script > tags were growing and all of this was living in my index.html page and I thought it might make more sense to use something like Angular JS and structure it a bit differently and "modularize" the code so it wasn't a giant mess in index page. I was also doing some manual .hide() and .show() JS stuff so I thought that it also might make more sense to switch out the content using something like AngularJS instead of having maximum ONE .show() active at once and then having to do as many .hide()'s as I would need to, to manually switch out the content. This is sounding like a SPA (single page app) right?
I have researched AngularJS StackOverflow posts and looked at w3schools and other helpful websites but am having trouble with how to structure this and use best practices not only with code efforts but organizational as well.
1) Am I correct in thinking Angular would make the hide and show of content easier?
2) I would like to make each "feature" of my website have its own controller and have Controller1.js, Controller2.js, etc.. but do I need to have a
var app = angular.module('myApp', []); ...
line at the top of each controller or do I need something like a main controller with that in there only once and then a call to each controller from a main controller? Or is this not even how I should go about it? Thought process was again to modularize and avoid having one giant beastly file with all my JS logic in it.
3) I assume that I need to use the ng-route stuff (is this correct?) in order to do that hide and show of html content? (items 2-5 listed above) But in what file should that live? a javascript controller file? index.html? other?
4) I read you can only have one ng-view per application. Does that mean that you can only switch/change the content for ONE < div > / section of your web app, OR can you have multiple different divs being changed?
5) fyi - my current file structure is pretty much this.. is this how it should be?
-Java Resources (java code)
...
-WebContent
-img
-META-INF
-resources
-css (folder)
-js (folder with js files - controllers)
-WEB-INF
-lib (folder)
-views (folder)
-xx-servlet.xml
-web.xml
-index.html
-pom.xml
A lot of my questions are just because I am new to AngularJS and not seasoned in JS itself so am trying to better understand. Thanks for any and all help in advance.

First of all, if you want to use multiple views per app then you should use angular-ui-router module instead of angular-route module.
Now, we come to the file handling. So, for that you can make as much file as you can to define controllers, config, services and factories for the app. There are three ways of doing this.
The first one is putting var app = angular.module("MyApp",[]); in first file and defining controllers and services like app.controller('ctrl', ControllerFunction) in each of the other files below the first one. But, personally i don't prefer to use this way as you are exposing your app as a global variable here.
The second way is to create a main module in first file using angular.module('MyApp',[]) and in other files you can get it and define controllers using angular.module('MyApp').controller('ctrl', ControllerFunction). This is the safer way than the previous one.
The third way is to create a different module in each of the files and using all the modules in a single main module as dependencies. Like below
in one file
angular.module('Module1',[]).controller('ctrl1',CtrlFun1);
in another file
angular.module('Module2',[]).controller('ctrl2',CtrlFun2);
and in the main file, the main module, which is to be bootstraped
angular.module('MyApp',['Module1','Module2'])
This is the safest way to define services in different files. I personally advise this way of using multiple js files in single app. Because here you care not exposing a global variable or a single module, so anyone cannot inject some code using console easily.

AngularJS module architecture

I am planning to create several modules in my company's application and I'm having trouble designing the architecture for the modules. I have done research and it seems like either you are supposed to use one module per page, or create a 'master' module that depends on all of your other modules. I don't like this approach because it means I have to load all of the javascript for every aspect of my application for every single page. That seems inherently wrong, but I also can't seem to figure out how to handle it the other way if I need to use one module in multiple places on a page. For example, I have a membership module that I have and I'm attaching to the header section of my web page. This would be intended for logging in, registration, and performing a 'forgot password' type workflow.
On another page dedicated to changing a password (from a reset link) the header is also present, but I want to include the password reset functionality in the membership module. I've read that one methodology of designing your application is by functionality/feature. I figured membership was an appropriate application of that, but now I'm not sure since I am having trouble applying the membership module more than once on any particular page.
Am I on the right track, or is there a preferred method for this? Should I have a separate module for the header and one for the rest of the page? Should I just bite the bullet and load everything? (I hope not...)
I should also note that this is an ASP.Net MVC application where we are still heavily relying on MVC for serving views and partial views. As such I wanted to use a render javascript section to dynamically load only the javascript necessary for that page to function. Is this a farce?
<header ng-app="membership">
//stuff for header membership functions
</header>
<div ng-app="membership">
//somewhere else that needs membership, outside of header
</div>

I personally like Mini SPAs (Silos) instead of full SPA. You can watch Miguel A Castro's video, and download the source at his website.
What it does is when a request comes in, it goes to ASP.Net MVC Route first. Then, Angular Route takes over the rest. It is a very slick design.
FYI: Angular 2 is right around the corner, so I went ahead and updated those to Angular 1.5 Compotent so that I can convert to Angular 2 easily later.
If you want, you can stop there. I went one step future, and use Strongly Typed Views using Matt Honeycutt's Building Strongly-typed AngularJS Apps with ASP.NET MVC 5 approach.
Then I implemented Angular Helpers like Axel Zarate's ANGULAR.NET – HELPERS FOR ASP .NET MVC 4.

On an Angular application, as it is a Single Page Application, yes, all your javascript must be loaded. It's the code of your application and it's necessary. That's done only once on first page load.
You're always on the same page, but on a different state.
One good approach is to define a master module who include all other modules. Those modules can also include other "sub modules" they need.
angular.module('App', [
'App.Membership'
// ...
// All others modules you need, including 3rd party modules
])
Then, on each module, you can define the different states associated and their controller
angular.module('App.Membership', [
// Module dependencies
])
.config(['$stateProvider', function($stateProvider) {
//State definition
$stateProvider.state('membership', {
parent: 'app',
url: '/member',
controller: 'MembershipCtrl',
template: '<ui-view/>'
});
}]);
You can also add a global controller to handle elements who are always present, like a header.
Hope this helps

Using require.js for client side dependancies in Adobe CQ5

I was wondering if anyone had experience using require.js with the Adobe CQ5 platform. I'm writing a Chaplin.js(backbone-based) single page app that will be integrated into the rest of CQ5-based site we're working on. Chaplin requires the use of a module system like AMD/Common.js and I want to make sure my compiled javascript file will usable within CQ5's clientlibs. Is it as simple as adding require.js as a dependency in clientlibs prior to loading in my javascript modules? Someone's insight who has experience in doing this would be greatly appreciated.

I've implemented this as a solution of organize in a better way all the modules such as:
//public/js/modules/myModule.js
define('myModule',[ /* dependencies */] ,function( /* stuff here */ ))
and in the components such:
<% //components/component.jsp %>
<div>
<!-- stuff here -->
</div>
componentJS:
//components/component/clientlibs/js/component.js
require(['modules/myModule']);
and finally I've configured require (config.js) and I've stored the JSs modules in a new different design folder. Located the compiled JS after close </body> to guarantee the JS is always located at the bottom after the HTML.
<!-- page/body.jsp -->
...
<cq:includeClientLib js="specialclientlibs.footer"/>
</body>
solving with this the issue of have "ready" all the content before the JS is executed. I've had some problems to resolve with this async stuff managed for the clienlibs compilation tool, in production the problem was different, however, in development, the order in what CQ compiles the JS has produced me some lacks in terms of order of the JS. The problem really was a little bit more complex than the explanation because the number of JS was really big and the team too, but in simple terms it was the best way I've discovered so far..

The Idea
I think you can compile your Chaplin.js with one of the AMDShims to make it self contained, wraps every dependencies it needs inside a function scope, expose an entry point as global variable (which is a bad practise, but CQ do it all the time...) and then use the compiled.js inside a normal clientlib:
AMD Shims
https://github.com/jrburke/requirejs/wiki/AMD-API-Shims
Example
Here is an example of how we make the one of our libs self-contained:
https://github.com/normanzb/chuanr/blob/master/gruntfile.js
Basically, in source code level the lib "require"s the other modules just as usual. However after compiled, the generated chuanr.js file contains everything its needs, even wrapped a piece of lightweight AMD compatible implementation.
check out compiled file here: https://github.com/normanzb/chuanr/blob/master/Chuanr.js
and the source code: https://github.com/normanzb/chuanr/tree/master/src
Alternative
Alternatively rather than compile every lib you are using to be independent/self-contained, what we do in our project is simply use below amdshim instead of the real require.js. so on cq component level you can call into require() function as usual:
require(['foo/bar'], function(){});
The amd shim will not send the http request to the module immediately, instead it will wait until someone else loads the module.
and then at the bottom of the page, we collect all the dependencies, send the requirements to server side handler (scriptmananger) for dynamic merging (by internally calling into r.js):
var paths = [];
for (var path in amdShim.waiting){
paths.push(path);
}
document.write('/scriptmananger?' + paths.join(','));
The amdShim we are using: https://github.com/normanzb/amdshim/tree/exp/defer

How to disable the JavaScript Minifier in CodeKit?

What's the best way to disable JavaScript minification in CodeKit? All those *-ck.js files it creates are making a mess of our repository's submodules.
Note that adding a rule to .gitignore doesn't work because its rules aren't inherited by submodules.

In CodeKit Preferences select Languages / JavaScript to edit the default settings for JavaScript handling. (These can be overridden for each file in a project.)
Change the setting for the second processing step (labelled "Then:") from "Concatenate + minifiy" to "Concatenate imported files". For any script file already in the project check whether it already has individual settings which still differ from this new default.
In this case, "*-ck.js"-files should only be created in case a source file imports another for concatenation but not for ordinary script files.
Alternatively you might specify a different output path for the generated ck-Files in CodeKit Preferences / JavaScript / Output Paths in order not to let the generated files clutter the source directory.

I believe the menu has been updated, but the answer from immo still stands. Under Javascript Language settings you can click a dropdown for output style and change it from minified to non-minified.

One workaround is to set the output path to something like codekit-ignore in Preferences > JavaScript > Output Paths, relative to the project's root folder.
Then add /codekit-ignore to .gitignore.
Easy to cleanup and feels better than find . -iregex '.*-ck\.js' -delete.

In the preferences see 'Skipped Items' under 'General' and add *.js to the list.

There are several ways to stop javascript minification in Code Kit but the easiest and simplest way to do so is simple to navigate to the javascript file you wish not to minify in the file view, and configure your Javascript Options to the right hand side.
This method provides benefits such as JSHint & JSLint without the minification and can be configured on a site by site, file by file basis giving you greater control.
Let me know if you have any further issues, i'd be happy to help.

Best practice for using JavaScript in Django

I want to push my Django project with some JavaScript/jQuery. To make it right from the beginning on I'd like to know, which way of organizing the .js-files ist the optimal one.
For loading one big file includes less overhead than loading many small ones and also because it looks cleaner in the code I considered to make one global .js-file and include that with the base.html (from which every template inherites). However, the result would be, that JavaScript would try to assign all the event-binings, even if the elements which the events should be bind to aren't in the current document. With all the jQuery-selectors which then would have to do their work that can't be too efficient. From earlier web-development experience I know that one can do something like if(location.href == '/some/url/') { (JavaScript code) ... }. That seems not practicable for me in this case, for with changing URLs, I'd have to change the URLconf and the .js-file (while using reverse() and {% url %} to prevent that elsewhere). I guess there is no possibility to make use of the named URLs here?
Has anyone an idea how to organize the JavaScript without having a file for every single template on the one hand and without killing performance unnecessarily?

I don't know that this question is specific to Django - similar issues come up managing Javascript in all sorts of systems.
That said, I usually try to tier my Javascript files, so that truly global scripts and libraries are included in one file, scripts specific to a section of the site are included in a set of section-specific files, and scripts specific to a single page are included in yet another site of page-specific files (or in inline code, depending on the context).
Django has good support for this approach, because you can tier your templates as well. Include the global script in your base.html template, then create a mysection-base.html template that inherits from base.html and just adds the Javascript (and CSS) files specific to that section. Then subpages within that section can inherit from mysection-base.html instead of base.html, and they'll all have access to the section-specific scripts.

I find django-compressor invaluable as it automatically compresses and minifies your JavaScript and CSS pre-deployment. It even automatically handles SASS, LESS and CoffeeScript if they float your boat.

Apps from http://djangopackages.com/grids/g/asset-managers/ may help.

You use modular javascript.
Choose your packager of choice (mine is browserify) that packages all your modules into one package that you minify and gzip. You send this file to the client and it is cached.
This means you have all your code cached, minimize HTTP requests and stay lean and efficient.
And since you have modular code you just load your code as you would normally.
Personally I would use some form feature detection to load modules. You can choose to feature detect on almost any feature (some css selector, routes, url segments).
Feature detection would look like this :
var Features = {
"class": "name",
"class2": "name2",
"dynamic-scroll": "dynamic-scroll",
"tabstrip": "tabstrip",
...
}
for (var key in Features) {
require(Features[key]);
}
Where as routing with davis would look like
Davis(function() {
this.get("blog", function(req) {
require("blog")(req);
});
this.get("blog/:post", function(req) {
require("blog-post")(req);
});
this.get("shop", function(req) {
require("shop")(req);
});
...
});
Alternatively you can try an event driven architecture. This means each module binds to events
// some-module
mediator.on("blog-loaded", function() {
// load in some libraries
// construct some widgets
mediator.emit("blog-ui-build", widgets);
});
And you would need some bootstrapping in place to kick off the event loop. Feel free to look at an EDA demo