I am new to learning Angularjs and kinda confused. I want to ask that if the same controller is binded at different pages does those pages share the same scope variable or they have their own isolated scope? Remember both of the pages are using the same controller.
From the documentation:
When a Controller is attached to the DOM via the ng-controller
directive, Angular will instantiate a new Controller object, using the
specified Controller's constructor function. A new child scope will be
created and made available as an injectable parameter to the
Controller's constructor function as $scope.
So 1) it is not the same controller, those are two instances of the same constructor functions (a.k.a class) and 2) new scope is created as a child of a scope controller is attached to.
Another point from documentation:
Scopes are arranged in hierarchical structure which mimic the DOM
structure of the application.
So two separate DOM elements cannot have same scope - it would heavily affect Angular structure. Each controller can only get an access to the scope of element it is attached to.
If you suffering because of one scope being updated when another one is changed, please post your code as you can have "surprise closure" in your controller definition.
I want to ask that if the same controller is binded at different pages does those pages share the same scope variable or they have their own isolated scope? Remember both of the pages are using the same controller.
Yes, I echo others thoughts here. if you are using same controller for any number of pages the scope will remains same for each page. Unless one does not change the scope, the value remains as it was during the initialization.
eg. Your controller is as below
myApp.controller('FirstCtrl', function( $scope){
$scope.myVar = 'this is my scope';
});
and if you are using same controller for two pages then for page one and page two will have same value of myVar. Hence below html in one page one
<div ng-model="myVar"></div>
and below html in page two
<span ng-model="myVar"></span>
will display as
<div ng-model="myVar">this is my scope</div>
and
<span ng-model="myVar">this is my scope</span>
respectively.
Given this, I would like to add that it is also possible of sharing $scope between different controllers using $emit, $broadcast and $on.
Read more about this at http://www.dotnet-tricks.com/Tutorial/angularjs/HM0L291214-Understanding-$emit,-$broadcast-and-$on-in-AngularJS.html
Hope this helps.
Related
angularJS seems to create new scopes, in that there are parent scope, child scope, and sibling scope.
What determines when a new scope is created? For example, if I use ng-inspector to view the scopes present, there is the $rootScope, and also other scopes, but it is not obvious to me what the other scopes correspond to, nor is it clear to me when these other scopes are created/destroyed. I believe they are created/destroyed because the $id changes. Changes occur if I navigate around and press forwards/back.
Angular creates new scope for every instantiated controller on that part of DOM.
Angular also creates scope for every directive (except scope:false, that means for directives with isolated scope, and scope:true). A scope is also created for built in directives such as ng-repeat where it creates scope for every repeated item.
Also when you use ng-if directive it can remove and add parts of the DOM and when it adds it all the controllers and directives will add their scopes again.
Angular's scope tree pretty much will mirror the dom tree. Directives can create new scope. Not just your directives, but also built in Angular directives like ng-if. It's a bit of an in depth topic...
Here is a blog post that explains things more in depth.
Hope that helps!
I just started out with Angular and have been reading through a lot of Tutorials.
Now the free one at CodeSchool which was my starting point doesn't mention $scope at all.
From what I've gathered, the controllerAs syntax is relatively new (1.2.0) but it seems to allow you to get away without using $scope directly.
Some articles say "use controllerAs" with an explanation, but most just use $scope. But I couldn't find any explanation why they'd choose it.
Is this now mainly a case of favoring one over the other or are there still reasons to use $scope?
Even many new directive plugins use it instead of allowing you to bind it to a particular controller.
edit: To clarify, I want to know when to use $scope, not the reasons not to use it :)
In the Angular documentation for ngController it explains the advantages to using 'controller as' vs. injecting $scope. Here's what it says:
Using controller as makes it obvious which controller you are accessing in the template when multiple controllers apply to an element.
If you are writing your controllers as classes you have easier access to the properties and methods, which will appear on the scope, from inside the controller code.
Since there is always a . in the bindings, you don't have to worry about prototypal inheritance masking primitives.
For my own part I've found using 'controller as' quite beneficial as it forces me to consider whether code I'm adding to a controller would be more appropriately added into a service or directive.
For example: watches. Watches are something you should avoid in controllers but having easy access to $scope allows you to set them up easily. Using 'controller as' has forced me to think more carefully about whether I really need to do a watch. Usually a watch can be accomplished with a directive. This has led me to create smaller controllers that only set up an initial state and communicate with services, a pattern I've found much more performant and maintainable.
The best answer I can give you is this:
The short:
Whenever you want to expose logic to the template, use Scope.
Whenever you want to persist logic to an element, use ngController.
If you want to expose your controller's values directly in the template (through the scope), use the "controller as syntax".
The long:
An Explanation
Scope or $scope, as you've put it, is where we maintain values (no matter the type: Function, Object, String, etc.) that may be available to the template within that scope. For example, consider the following:
The HTML:
<div ng-controller="MyCtrl">
<div>{{ message }}</div>
</div>
<div ng-controller="MyCtrl as ctrl">
<div>{{ ctrl.message }}</div>
</div>
See those interpolations? Well, guess what? They're both accessing Scope. The "controller as syntax" creates an alias for MyCtrl and publishes it on the local scope. Once the element has been linked, if you look at $scope you will actually find a property ctrl that exposes the controller.
The Javascript
function MyCtrl($scope) {
$scope.message = "controller MyCtrl";
this.message = "controller as syntax";
}
Where ever I use MyCtrl these two messages are available. But to readily access a value on the controller itself we use the "controller as alias" syntax.
They are honestly two different methodologies. The controller as * syntax allows the developer to put the controller onto the scope and more easily access said controller. So, in the end it all ends up on the scope. Otherwise, say through a directive's link function, you have to access the controller the require property. The controller's methods and properties don't necessarily need to be exposed to the template, rather just used in the logic. (In addition, you can access a controller through a jqLite's data() function as well).
Sometimes when propagating a controller to multiple elements we want something that is available by default to every element that uses this controller. This is particularly valuable when creating directives. Take a look at ngModel and see how we have multiple methods common to every element that uses ngModel.
Scope vs. Controller
The major thing to consider is that a child controller can inherit the scope of it's parent. The cool thing is that the child scope will inherit that bit of parental controller properties from the parent.
<!-- ctrl1 -->
<div ng-controller="MyCtrl as ctrl1">
<div>{{ ctrl1.message }}</div>
<!-- ctrl2 -->
<div ng-controller="MyCtrl as ctrl2">
<div>{{ ctrl2.message }}</div>
</div>
</div>
Notice that both are using the same controller but they have different aliases. Now, the controller properties are being passed down to the children through Scope. So the child can access the parent through it's alias. So, through this syntax you can clearly see the separation of the two instances of MyCtrl. They both have a message property on their scopes, but they are easily distinguished without digging through parents, children, siblings, etc.
In Conclusion
If you want to expose values to the template use scope. If you want to bind values to an element that don't necessarily need to be exposed in the template, use the controller. If you need to access values from your controller in your template, use the controller as syntax. Using the controller as * syntax places the controller's values on the scope under the alias created in the syntax. So, in that case, you are using both the controller and the scope together.
As stated in the Angular documentation the benefits are
Using controller as makes it obvious which controller you are
accessing in the template when multiple controllers apply to an
element.
If you are writing your controllers as classes you have easier access to the properties and methods, which will appear on the scope,
from inside the controller code.
Since there is always a . in the bindings, you don't have to worry about prototypal inheritance masking primitives.
I really like it since it makes it easy to differentiate between which controller I am currently accessing.
I read a few blogs and came to a conclusion for usage purpose do not mix $scope and this.
There is a reason for that , "this" and $scope can be different they are not always the same for example-
If I have defined a controller on "this" and I call another controller in it then the $scope will be set to the controller I called but "this" will always be the current context that is the controller in which I called the other controller.
So in this case $scope and "this" will not be same and using them interchangeably here may lead to some unexprcted behaviour.
Please correct me If I am wrong.
Consider following AngularJS app:
http://jsfiddle.net/pathes/QPL3R/ - application based on tutorial from angularjs.org homepage,
http://jsfiddle.net/pathes/cUaEv/ - its Jasmine tests.
Method addPane() pushes a pane into controller's pane list, paneCount() returns its length. After creating 3 panes, accessing method paneCount() from binding {{paneCount()}} and directly in test: scope.paneCount() returns 0.
It appears that AngularJS creates two instances of controller - one accessible from controller methods, another from scope's. Does anybody know why there's a need of creating two instances? Is there a way to access the same properties from both controller and scope methods?
the problem is the controller definition of yours! you defined the scope twice. once in controller itself and once in the directive definition of the tabs directive. the directive definition overrides the scope of the controller and therefore the count will not be correct.
http://jsfiddle.net/pathes/Z2EWT/ - i've forked your fiddle with the update
// scope: {}, not necessary because defined in controller ctrl
hope this helps :)
I have a shared function which returns of the scope of the topmost element (document) in my AngularJS application.
function topScope() {
return angular.element(document).scope();
}
This always works and I am always guaranteed to have access to any subscopes located within the application (whether it be inside controllers or directives).
Here's an example of what I would use it for:
topScope().$emit('pageReady');
Now I've noticed that $rootScope also works the same way.
$rootScope.$emit('pageReady');
Which also works and achieves the same affect. But since $rootScope is designed to be the "$scope off the shelf" scope (any scope created will inherit it's methods and properties) then does this still mean that it is in fact the topmost scope of the page? Thus being the parent of the scope object attached to the document node?
$rootScope is a parent scope of all scopes in a given AngularJS application. Since it is possible to bootstrap multiple AngularJS applications on one page (only manually, this can't be done using ng-app) it is also possible to have multiple $rootScope instances in one HTML documents.
Each $rootScope is "attached" to either the element where ngApp was declared or the element passed into angular.bootstrap as described here.
In short, the $rootScope is a root of all scopes for one AngularJS application but there is no "super-root" scope that would serve as a parent scope of all other scopes for a given HTML document.
In your case using the $rootScope might be OK if you've got only one AngularJS application in the whole HTML document.
Can anyone explain the difference between $scope and $rootScope?
I think
$scope:
We can get ng-model properties in particular controller from the particular page by using this.
$rootScope
We can get all ng-model properties in any controller from any page by using this.
Is this correct? Or anything else?
"$rootScope” is a parent object of all “$scope” angular objects created in a web page.
$scope is created with ng-controller while $rootscope is created with ng-app.
The main difference is the availability of the property assigned with the object. A property assigned with $scope cannot be used outside the controller in which it is defined whereas a property assigned with $rootScope can be used anywhere.
Example: If in the example below you replace $rootScope with $scope the department property will not be populated from the first controller in the second one
angular.module('example', [])
.controller('GreetController', ['$scope', '$rootScope',
function($scope, $rootScope) {
$scope.name = 'World';
$rootScope.department = 'Angular';
}
])
.controller('ListController', ['$scope',
function($scope) {
$scope.names = ['Igor', 'Misko', 'Vojta'];
}
]);
<script src="https://ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/angularjs/1.2.23/angular.min.js"></script>
<body ng-app="example">
<div class="show-scope-demo">
<div ng-controller="GreetController">
Hello {{name}}!
</div>
<div ng-controller="ListController">
<ol>
<li ng-repeat="name in names">{{name}} from {{department}}</li>
</ol>
</div>
</div>
</body>
According to Angular's Developer's Guide to Scopes:
Each Angular application has exactly one root scope, but may have several child scopes. The application can have multiple scopes, because some directives create new child scopes (refer to directive documentation to see which directives create new scopes). When new scopes are created, they are added as children of their parent scope. This creates a tree structure which parallels the DOM where they're attached.
Both controllers and directives have reference to the scope, but not to each other. This arrangement isolates the controller from the directive as well as from DOM. This is an important point since it makes the controllers view agnostic, which greatly improves the testing story of the applications.
$rootScope is available globally, no matter what controller you are in, whereas $scope is only available to the current controller and it's children.
In other way we can look at this; $rootScope is global while $scope is local. When Controller is assigned to a page, so a $scope variable can be use here because it binds to this controller. But when we want to share its value across to other controllers or services, then $rootScope is being used (**there are alternative ways, we can share values across but in this case we want to use $rootScope).
Your second question about how you define those two words are correct.
Lastly a bit off track, please use $rootScope with care. Similar to the way you use global variables, can be a pain to debug and you may accidentally change the global variable somewhere inside a timer or something which makes your reading incorrect.
Every application has atleast one single rootScope and its lifecycle is the same as the app and every controller can have it's own scope, that is not shared with others.
Have a look at this article :
https://github.com/angular/angular.js/wiki/Understanding-Scopes
I recommend you read the official in-depth Angular documentation for scopes. Start at the section 'Scope Hierarchies':
https://docs.angularjs.org/guide/scope
Essentially, $rootScope and $scope both identify specific parts of the DOM within which
Angular operations are carried out
variables declared as part of either the $rootScope or $scope are available
Anything that belongs to the $rootScope is available globally across your Angular app, whereas anything that belongs to a $scope is available within the part of the DOM to which that scope applies.
The $rootScope is applied to the DOM element that is the root element for the Angular app (hence the name $rootScope). When you add the ng-app directive to an element of the DOM, this becomes the root element of the DOM within which $rootScope is available. In other words, properties etc of $rootScope will be available throughout your entire Angular application.
An Angular $scope (and all of it's variables and operations) is available to a particular subset of the DOM within your application. Specifically, the $scope for any particular controller is available to the part of the DOM to which that particular controller has been applied (using the ng-controller directive). Note though that certain directives e.g. ng-repeat, when applied within a part of the DOM where the controller has been applied, can create child scopes of the main scope - within the same controller - a controller doesn't necessarily contain only one scope.
If you look at the generated HTML when you run your Angular app, you can easily see which DOM elements 'contain' a scope, as Angular adds the class ng-scope on any element to which a scope has been applied (including the root element of the app, which has the $rootScope).
By the way, the '$' sign at the start of $scope and $rootScope is simply an identifier in Angular for stuff that's reserved by Angular.
Note that using $rootScope for sharing variables etc. between modules and controllers isn't generally considered best practice. JavaScript developers talk about avoiding 'pollution' of the global scope by sharing variables there, since there may be clashes later on if a variable of the same name is used somewhere else, without the developer realising it's already declared on the $rootScope. The importance of this increases with the size of the application and the team that's developing it. Ideally the $rootScope will only contain constants or static variables, that are intended to be consistent at all times across the app. A better way of sharing stuff across modules may be to use services and factories, which is a another topic!
Both are Java script objects and the difference is illustrated by diagram as below.
NTB:
First angular application try to find the property of any model or function in $scope , if it doesn't
found the property in $scope , then it search in parent scope in upper hierarchy. If the property is
still not found in upper hierarchy then angular tries to resolve in $rootscope.
New styles, like John Papa's AngularJS Styleguide, are suggesting that we shouldn't be using $scope to save current page's properties at all. Instead we should use the controllerAs with vm approach where the view binds to the controller object itself. Then use a capture variable for this when using the controllerAs syntax. Choose a consistent variable name such as vm, which stands for ViewModel.
You will still need the $scope for its watching capabilities though.