Inter-Controller communication, the angular way - angularjs

Question

I'm trying to figure out the "preferred" or "angular-way" of sharing properties or state between controllers/directives. There are several methods to implement this, but I want to keep with best-practice. Below are some banal examples of how this can be implemented:
1. Using $scope.$watch
// The parent controller/scope
angular.module('myModule').controller('parentController', ['$scope', function($scope) {
$scope.state = {
myProperty: 'someState'; // Default value to be changed by some DOM element
};
}]);
// The child controller/scope.
angular.module('myModule').controller('childController', ['$scope', function($scope) {
$scope.$watch('state.myProperty', function (newVal) {
// Do some action here on state change
});
}]);
Edit: Based on answers below, this is bad practice and should be avoided. It is untestable and places an unwanted DOM dependancy.
2. Using $broadcast
// The parent controller
angular.module('myModule').controller('parentController', ['$scope', function($scope) {
var myProperty = 'someState';
$scope.setState = function (state) {
myProperty = state; // Set by some other controller action or DOM interaction.
$scope.$broadcast('stateChanged', state); // Communicate changes to child controller
}
}]);
// The child controller.
angular.module('myModule').controller('childController', ['$scope', function($scope) {
$scope.$on('stateChanged', function (evt, state) {
// Do some action here
}
}]);
Edit: Equally bad practice as you need to know the placement of the controllers in the DOM in order to determine weather to use $broadcast (down the DOM) or $emit (up the DOM).
3. Using service
angular.module('myModule').factory('stateContainer', [function () {
var state = {
myProperty: 'defaultState'
},
listeners = [];
return {
setState: function (newState) {
state.myProperty = newState;
angular.forEach(listeners, function (listener) {
listener(newState);
});
},
addListener: function (listener) {
listeners.push(listener);
}
}
}]);
// The parent controller
angular.module('myModule').controller('parentController', ['$scope', 'stateContainer', function($scope, stateContainer) {
$scope.setState = function (state) {
stateContainer.setState(state);
};
}]);
// The child controller.
angular.module('myModule').controller('childController', ['$scope', 'stateContainer', function($scope, stateContainer) {
stateContainer.addListener(function (newState) {
// Do some action here
});
}]);
There are probably some approaches I've missed here, but you get the idea. I'm trying to find the best approach. Although verbose, I personally lean towards #3 in the list here. But I come from a Java and jQuery background where listeners are widely used.
Edit: Answers below are insightful. One talks of sharing state between parent/child directives using the require directive configuration. The other talks of sharing service or service properties directly to the scope. I believe that depending on the need, they are both right in what is or is not best practice in Angular.

Answer 1

Any of these will work if done correctly, but a variant on service is the preferred way AFAIK.
The question is, do you even need a listener in the service case? Angular itself will update any views (which is the purpose of the controller), so why do you need a listener or watch? It is sufficient to change the value itself for the view to be changed.
app.factory('stateService',function() {
return {
myState: "foo"
}
})
.controller('one',function($scope,stateService) {
$scope.changeState = function() {
stateService.myState = $scope.state;
};
})
.controller('two',function($scope,stateService) {
$scope.svc = stateService;
})
You can then do the following in your view (incomplete):
<div ng-controller="one">
<input name="state" ng-model="state"></input>
<button type="submit" ng-click="changeState()">Submit</button>
</div>
<div ng-controller="two">{{svc.myState}}</div>
Truth is, you don't even need to go that far with having a button and a function. If you just tie the ng-model together it will work:
<div ng-controller="one">
<input name="state" ng-model="svc.myState"></input>
</div>
<div ng-controller="two">{{svc.myState}}</div>
Try the following jsfiddle http://jsfiddle.net/cwt9L6vn/1/

Answer 2

There is no such thing as parent and child controllers in AngularJS. There are only parent and child directives, but not controllers. A directive can have a controller that it exposes as an API to other directives.
Controllers are not related to the DOM hierarchy so they can't have children. They also don't create their own scope. So you never know if you have to $broadcast or $emit to talk to other controllers.
If you start using $broadcast from a controller, then you're going to get stuck not knowing if the other controller is up or down. That's when people start doing stuff like $rootScope.$broadcast(..) which is a very bad practice.
What you are looking for are directives that require other directives.
var app = angular.modeul('myApp',[]);
// use a directive to define a parent controller
app.directive('parentDir',function() {
return {
controller: function($scope) {
this.myFoo = function() {
alert("Hello World");
}
}
});
// use a directive to enforce parent-child relationship
app.directive('childDir',function() {
return {
require: '^parentDir',
link: function($scope, $el, $attr, parentCtrl) {
// call the parent controller
parentCtrl.myFoo();
}
});
Using the require feature of a directive does two important things.
Angular will enforce the relationship if it's not optional.
The parent controller is injected into the child link function.
There is no need to $broadcast or $emit.
Another option that is also effective is to use directives to expose an API.
// this directive uses an API
app.directive('myDir',function() {
return {
scope: {
'foo': '&'
},
link: function($scope, $el, $attr) {
// when needed, call the API
$scope.foo();
}
});
// in the template
<div ng-controller="parentController">
<div my-dir foo="parentController.callMyMethod();"></div>
</div>