Angular.js, equivalent controller writing that fails - javascript

I'm starting with Angular.js and have a question; What's wrong with the second way to express the controller? Take a look at the jsfiddle below
http://jsfiddle.net/yDhv8/
function HelloCtrl($scope, testFactory, testFactory2)
{
$scope.fromFactory = testFactory.sayHello("World");
$scope.fromFactory2 = testFactory2.sayHello("World");
}
myApp.controller('GoodbyeCtrl', ['$scope', 'testFactory', 'testFactory2', function($scope, testFactory, testFactory2) {
$scope.fromFactory = testFactory.sayGoodbye("World");
$scope.fromFactory2 = testFactory2.sayGoodbye("World");
}]);
Any references that may be useful to understand what's going on will be appreciated,
Cheers,

Everything is fine. you just got confused. use app.controller
myApp is the module name, not a variable name.
app.controller(......)

If you run this in a javascript debugger, you'll find that the variable 'myApp' is not defined. You can either use the 'app' reference that you assigned to the original module call, or use the following syntax:
angular.module('myApp').controller(...)

Related

Scope variable not visible within ng-click handler

I'm pretty new to Angular and am trying to figure out what's wrong here. There is a controller defined like this:
(function(){
function myController($scope, CommsFactory) {
$scope.doSomething = function() {
var x = $scope; // <- Doesn't work because $scope is not defined
}
}
angular
.module('aModule')
.controller('myController', myController);
})();
The doSomething() method is then called by a button click like:
<input type="button" ng-click="doSomething()" class="btn--link" value="do it"/>
This seems straightforward to me but the problem is that, when I break within the method, $scope is not defined. This is different from most of the examples I've seen, and I can't figure out why. Shouldn't it be visible here? Obviously a lot of code is missing - I've tried to show only the relevant bits - could I be missing something somewhere else?
You're declaring a module then you need to add [].
Something like this:
angular.module('aModule', [])
.controller('myController', myController);
Usage
angular.module(name, [requires], [configFn]);
Arguments
name.- The name of the module to create or retrieve.
requires (optional).- If specified then new module is being created. If unspecified then the module is being retrieved for further
configuration.
configFn (optional).- Optional configuration function for the module. Same as Module#config().
Please, I would to recommend to read this guide about Angular Module:
angular.module
(function() {
function myController($scope) {
$scope.doSomething = function() {
var x = $scope;
console.log(x);
}
}
angular
.module('aModule', [])
.controller('myController', myController);
})();
<script src="https://ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/angularjs/1.2.23/angular.min.js"></script>
<div data-ng-app="aModule">
<div data-ng-controller="myController">
<input type="button" ng-click="doSomething()" class="btn--link" value="do it" />
</div>
</div>
Your code is generally working fine as demonstrated in this fiddle.
Your main problem seems to be in the usage of $scope. $scope is an object containing all variables and methods which should be available in the corresponding template. For this reason, you would always reference a member of $scope, instead of the whole object.
Furthermore, John Papas AngularJS style guide recommends the usage of controllerAs in favor of $scope for multiple reasons as stated in Y030
By convention, you should also give your controllers uppercase names and use explicit Dependency Injection
A typical use case would rather look like:
(function(){
angular
.module('aModule', [])
.controller('myController', MyController);
MyController.$inject = ['$scope', 'CommsFactory'];
function MyController($scope, CommsFactory) {
var vm = this;
vm.doSomething = doSomething;
function doSomething() {
var $scope.x = "Did it!";
}
}
})();
SOLVED: It turns out that what I was experiencing had something to do with the way in which the Chrome debugger works. It appears to do some kind of lazy loading of variables defined outside of the function in which you break (or at least this as far as I've characterized it). What this means, at least in my case, is that if I break inside of the method, and $scope isn't actually used within that method (which, unfortunately, I was doing a lot because I was trying to verify that $scope was visible), then the debugger will report that $scope is unavailable.

AngularJS module.constant() : how to define a constant inside a module only?

On a page, I have several Angular modules.
For each module I define a constant which contains the version of the module.
var module1 = angular.module('module1').constant('version', '1.2.3');
var module2 = angular.module('module2').constant('version', '2.0.0');
...
I though a constant was defined inside a module. But when I use the constant inside module1, the value I get is '2.0.0'...
Is there a way to define a constant (or anything else) which is proper to a module ?
Edit: for alternative solutions, could you please explain how to use it, for example in a controller declaration ?
module2.controller('myCtrl', function( $scope, $http, $q, ..., version ){
// Here I can use the constant 'version'
}
A very good question. I could think of a quick fix for this:
angular.module('module1').constant('module1.version', '1.2.3');
angular.module('module2').constant('module2.version', '2.0.0');
I don't know how much it suits your needs. But I hope it helps.
The main problem is the naming in Angular. You cannot have the same name for services/constants/values etc. They will be overwritten. I solved this problem with "namespaces" like I showed you above.
Example of injecting namespace like names: http://codepaste.net/5kzfx3
Edit:
For your example, you could use it like so:
module2.controller('myCtrl', ['$scope', '$http', '$q', ... , 'module2.version'], function( $scope, $http, $q, ..., version ){
// Here I can use the constant 'version'
}
That happens because module2 is overriding module1 constant.
You can use moduleName.version as a name, but it's not possible to use the same name.

When I reference local angular lib I get error: Argument is not a function, got undefined and CDN works ok? [duplicate]

I am writing a sample application using angularjs. i got an error mentioned below on chrome browser.
Error is
Error: [ng:areq] http://errors.angularjs.org/1.3.0-beta.17/ng/areq?p0=ContactController&p1=not%20a%20function%2C%20got%20undefined
Which renders as
Argument 'ContactController' is not a function, got undefined
Code
<!DOCTYPE html>
<html ng-app>
<head>
<script src="../angular.min.js"></script>
<script type="text/javascript">
function ContactController($scope) {
$scope.contacts = ["abcd#gmail.com", "abcd#yahoo.co.in"];
$scope.add = function() {
$scope.contacts.push($scope.newcontact);
$scope.newcontact = "";
};
}
</script>
</head>
<body>
<h1> modules sample </h1>
<div ng-controller="ContactController">
Email:<input type="text" ng-model="newcontact">
<button ng-click="add()">Add</button>
<h2> Contacts </h2>
<ul>
<li ng-repeat="contact in contacts"> {{contact}} </li>
</ul>
</div>
</body>
</html>
With Angular 1.3+ you can no longer use global controller declaration on the global scope (Without explicit registration). You would need to register the controller using module.controller syntax.
Example:-
angular.module('app', [])
.controller('ContactController', ['$scope', function ContactController($scope) {
$scope.contacts = ["abcd#gmail.com", "abcd#yahoo.co.in"];
$scope.add = function() {
$scope.contacts.push($scope.newcontact);
$scope.newcontact = "";
};
}]);
or
function ContactController($scope) {
$scope.contacts = ["abcd#gmail.com", "abcd#yahoo.co.in"];
$scope.add = function() {
$scope.contacts.push($scope.newcontact);
$scope.newcontact = "";
};
}
ContactController.$inject = ['$scope'];
angular.module('app', []).controller('ContactController', ContactController);
It is a breaking change but it can be turned off to use globals by using allowGlobals.
Example:-
angular.module('app')
.config(['$controllerProvider', function($controllerProvider) {
$controllerProvider.allowGlobals();
}]);
Here is the comment from Angular source:-
check if a controller with given name is registered via $controllerProvider
check if evaluating the string on the current scope returns a constructor
if $controllerProvider#allowGlobals, check window[constructor] on the global window object (not recommended)
.....
expression = controllers.hasOwnProperty(constructor)
? controllers[constructor]
: getter(locals.$scope, constructor, true) ||
(globals ? getter($window, constructor, true) : undefined);
Some additional checks:-
Do Make sure to put the appname in ng-app directive on your angular root element (eg:- html) as well. Example:- ng-app="myApp"
If everything is fine and you are still getting the issue do remember to make sure you have the right file included in the scripts.
You have not defined the same module twice in different places which results in any entities defined previously on the same module to be cleared out, Example angular.module('app',[]).controller(.. and again in another place angular.module('app',[]).service(.. (with both the scripts included of course) can cause the previously registered controller on the module app to be cleared out with the second recreation of module.
I got this problem because I had wrapped a controller-definition file in a closure:
(function() {
...stuff...
});
But I had forgotten to actually invoke that closure to execute that definition code and actually tell Javascript my controller existed. I.e., the above needs to be:
(function() {
...stuff...
})();
Note the () at the end.
I am a beginner with Angular and I did the basic mistake of not including the app name in the angular root element. So, changing the code from
<html data-ng-app>
to
<html data-ng-app="myApp">
worked for me. #PSL, has covered this already in his answer above.
I had this error because I didn't understand the difference between angular.module('myApp', []) and angular.module('myApp').
This creates the module 'myApp' and overwrites any existing module named 'myApp':
angular.module('myApp', [])
This retrieves an existing module 'myApp':
angular.module('myApp')
I had been overwriting my module in another file, using the first call above which created another module instead of retrieving as I expected.
More detail here: https://docs.angularjs.org/guide/module
I just migrate to angular 1.3.3 and I found that If I had multiple controllers in different files when app is override and I lost first declared containers.
I don't know if is a good practise, but maybe can be helpful for another one.
var app = app;
if(!app) {
app = angular.module('web', ['ui.bootstrap']);
}
app.controller('SearchCtrl', SearchCtrl);
I had this problem when I accidentally redeclared myApp:
var myApp = angular.module('myApp',[...]);
myApp.controller('Controller1', ...);
var myApp = angular.module('myApp',[...]);
myApp.controller('Controller2', ...);
After the redeclare, Controller1 stops working and raises the OP error.
Really great advise, except that the SAME error CAN occur simply by missing the critical script include on your root page
example:
page: index.html
np-app="saleApp"
Missing
<script src="./ordersController.js"></script>
When a Route is told what controller and view to serve up:
.when('/orders/:customerId', {
controller: 'OrdersController',
templateUrl: 'views/orders.html'
})
So essential the undefined controller issue CAN occur in this accidental mistake of not even referencing the controller!
This error might also occur when you have a large project with many modules.
Make sure that the app (module) used in you angular file is the same that you use in your template, in this example "thisApp".
app.js
angular
.module('thisApp', [])
.controller('ContactController', ['$scope', function ContactController($scope) {
$scope.contacts = ["abcd#gmail.com", "abcd#yahoo.co.in"];
$scope.add = function() {
$scope.contacts.push($scope.newcontact);
$scope.newcontact = "";
};
}]);
index.html
<html>
<body ng-app='thisApp' ng-controller='ContactController>
...
<script type="text/javascript" src="assets/js/angular.js"></script>
<script src="app.js"></script>
</body>
</html>
If all else fails and you are using Gulp or something similar...just rerun it!
I wasted 30mins quadruple checking everything when all it needed was a swift kick in the pants.
If you're using routes (high probability) and your config has a reference to a controller in a module that's not declared as dependency then initialisation might fail too.
E.g assuming you've configured ngRoute for your app, like
angular.module('yourModule',['ngRoute'])
.config(function($routeProvider, $httpProvider) { ... });
Be careful in the block that declares the routes,
.when('/resourcePath', {
templateUrl: 'resource.html',
controller: 'secondModuleController' //lives in secondModule
});
Declare secondModule as a dependency after 'ngRoute' should resolve the issue. I know I had this problem.
I was getting this error because I was using an older version of angular that wasn't compatible with my code.
These errors occurred, in my case, preceeded by syntax errors at list.find() fuction; 'find' method of a list not recognized by IE11, so has to replace by Filter method, which works for both IE11 and chrome.
refer https://github.com/flrs/visavail/issues/19
This error, in my case, preceded by syntax error at find method of a list in IE11. so replaced find method by filter method as suggested https://github.com/flrs/visavail/issues/19
then above controller not defined error resolved.
I got the same error while following an old tutorial with (not old enough) AngularJS 1.4.3. By far the simplest solution is to edit angular.js source from
function $ControllerProvider() {
var controllers = {},
globals = false;
to
function $ControllerProvider() {
var controllers = {},
globals = true;
and just follow the tutorial as-is, and the deprecated global functions just work as controllers.

Angularjs -> how to initialise variables in angular-style

I am trying to re-write an application using angular.js, but I still do not see how it works (more or less).
For instance. In my previous code, I had a function that was executed once everything was loaded that initialised variables, accessed for everyone in a window.variable style.
Now I want the same here.
My idea was to build a factory to return an object with all the variables, and then make that everyone had access to this object (somehow).
The questions are:
1- Am I right? I should initialise variables through a factory?
2- And how can I "call" this factory-method at the beginning of the code? with the module.run function?
Cheers,
I'd probably put the variables in a service, and then inject that into a wrapping angular controller. Any other controllers that you would want to have access to these 'global' variables would be nested under the wrapping controller, thus inheriting the variables.
var app = angular.module("app", []);
app.service("globVars", function () {
var vars = {};
vars.someVar = "a";
vars.someOtherVar = "b";
return vars;
});
app.controller("WrappingCtrl", function ($scope, globVars) {
$scope.globVars = globVars;
});
app.controller("NestedCtrl", function ($scope) {
console.log($scope.globVars.someVar); // => "a"
});
<html ng-app="app">
<div id="wrapper" ng-controller="WrappingCtrl">
<div class="nested" ng-controller="NestedCtrl">
{{globVars.someVar}}
</div>
</div>
</html>
I think you should avoid using global variables as much as you could
But if you have to use them, you are right, you can initialize them in module.run and add the module in the app dependencies
If you want to access some variables, you must see to $rootScope, because you can access $rootScope everywhere.
Also you must use angular config and run functions.
I advice to you don't use global scope, because it affects on app speed, memory leaks etc.

How do you get a reference to an angularjs controller defined in a module?

I have a jasmine test and I can't get a reference to the controller constructor function as it was defined in a module. See my gist here https://gist.github.com/hcabnettek/5222429
I need to unit test a controller defined like
angular.module('foo', []).controller('fooCtrl', function($scope){ $scope.foo = 'bar'; });
Can anyone possibly help me out?
Thanks!
http://www.itaware.eu/2012/10/19/angularjs-unit-tests-and-end-to-end-tests/
The key was the module() function in angular-mocks. Now it works using the string controller name as defined inside the module.

Categories

Resources