Combating AngularJS executing controller twice - angularjs

I understand AngularJS runs through some code twice, sometimes even more, like $watch events, constantly checking model states etc.
However my code:
function MyController($scope, User, local) {
var $scope.User = local.get(); // Get locally save user data
User.get({ id: $scope.User._id.$oid }, function(user) {
$scope.User = new User(user);
local.save($scope.User);
});
//...
Is executed twice, inserting 2 records into my DB. I'm clearly still learning as I've been banging my head against this for ages!

The app router specified navigation to MyController like so:
$routeProvider.when('/',
{ templateUrl: 'pages/home.html',
controller: MyController });
But I also had this in home.html:
<div data-ng-controller="MyController">
This digested the controller twice. Removing the data-ng-controller attribute from the HTML resolved the issue. Alternatively, the controller: property could have been removed from the routing directive.
This problem also appears when using tabbed navigation. For example, app.js might contain:
.state('tab.reports', {
url: '/reports',
views: {
'tab-reports': {
templateUrl: 'templates/tab-reports.html',
controller: 'ReportsCtrl'
}
}
})
The corresponding reports tab HTML might resemble:
<ion-view view-title="Reports">
<ion-content ng-controller="ReportsCtrl">
This will also result in running the controller twice.

AngularJS docs - ngController
Note that you can also attach controllers to the DOM by declaring it
in a route definition via the $route service. A common mistake is to
declare the controller again using ng-controller in the template
itself. This will cause the controller to be attached and executed
twice.
When you use ngRoute with the ng-view directive, the controller gets attached to that dom element by default (or ui-view if you use ui-router). So you will not need to attach it again in the template.

I just went through this, but the issue was different from the accepted answer. I'm really leaving this here for my future self, to include the steps I went through to fix it.
Remove redundant controller declarations
Check trailing slashes in routes
Check for ng-ifs
Check for any unnecessary wrapping ng-view calls (I accidentally had left in an ng-view that was wrapping my actual ng-view. This resulted in three calls to my controllers.)
If you are on Rails, you should remove the turbolinks gem from your application.js file. I wasted a whole day to discover that. Found answer here.
Initializing the app twice with ng-app and with bootstrap. Combating AngularJS executing controller twice
When using $compile on whole element in 'link'-function of directive that also has its own controller defined and uses callbacks of this controller in template via ng-click etc. Found answer here.

Just want to add one more case when controller can init twice (this is actual for angular.js 1.3.1):
<div ng-if="loading">Loading...</div>
<div ng-if="!loading">
<div ng-view></div>
</div>
In this case $route.current will be already set when ng-view will init. That cause double initialization.
To fix it just change ng-if to ng-show/ng-hide and all will work well.

Would like to add for reference:
Double controller code execution can also be caused by referencing the controller in a directive that also runs on the page.
e.g.
return {
restrict: 'A',
controller: 'myController',
link: function ($scope) { ....
When you also have ng-controller="myController" in your HTML

When using angular-ui-router with Angular 1.3+, there was an issue about Rendering views twice on route transition. This resulted in executing controllers twice, too. None of the proposed solutions worked for me.
However, updating angular-ui-router from 0.2.11 to 0.2.13 solved problem for me.

I tore my app and all its dependencies to bits over this issue (details here: AngularJS app initiating twice (tried the usual solutions..))
And in the end, it was all Batarang Chrome plugin's fault.
Resolution in this answer:
I'd strongly recommend the first thing on anyone's list is to disable it per the post before altering code.

If you know your controller is unintentionally executing more than once, try a search through your files for the name of the offending controller, ex: search: MyController through all files. Likely it got copy-pasted in some other html/js file and you forgot to change it when you got to developing or using those partials/controllers. Source: I made this mistake

I had the same problem, in a simple app (with no routing and a simple ng-controller reference) and my controller's constructor did run twice. Finally, I found out that my problem was the following declaration to auto-bootstrap my AngularJS application in my Razor view
<html ng-app="mTest1">
I have also manually bootstrapped it using angular.bootstrap i.e.
angular.bootstrap(document, [this.app.name]);
so removing one of them, it worked for me.

In some cases your directive runs twice when you simply not correct close you directive like this:
<my-directive>Some content<my-directive>
This will run your directive twice.
Also there is another often case when your directive runs twice:
make sure you are not including your directive in your index.html TWICE!

Been scratching my head over this problem with AngularJS 1.4 rc build, then realised none of the above answers was applicable since it was originated from the new router library for Angular 1.4 and Angular 2 at the time of this writing. Therefore, I am dropping a note here for anyone who might be using the new Angular route library.
Basically if a html page contains a ng-viewport directive for loading parts of your app, by clicking on a hyperlink specified in with ng-link would cause the target controller of the associated component to be loaded twice. The subtle difference is that, if the browser has already loaded the target controller, by re-clicking the same hyperlink would only invoke the controller once.
Haven't found a viable workaround yet, though I believe this behaviour is consistent with the observation raised by shaunxu, and hopefully this issue would be resolved in the future build of new route library and along with AngularJS 1.4 releases.

In my case, I found two views using the same controller.
$stateProvider.state('app', {
url: '',
views: {
"viewOne#app": {
controller: 'CtrlOne as CtrlOne',
templateUrl: 'main/one.tpl.html'
},
"viewTwo#app": {
controller: 'CtrlOne as CtrlOne',
templateUrl: 'main/two.tpl.html'
}
}
});

The problem I am encountering might be tangential, but since googling brought me to this question, this might be appropriate. The problem rears its ugly head for me when using UI Router, but only when I attempt to refresh the page with the browser refresh button. The app uses UI Router with a parent abstract state, and then child states off the parent. On the app run() function, there is a $state.go('...child-state...') command. The parent state uses a resolve, and at first I thought perhaps a child controller is executing twice.
Everything is fine before the URL has had the hash appended.
www.someoldwebaddress.org
Then once the url has been modified by UI Router,
www.someoldwebaddress.org#/childstate
...and then when I refresh the page with the browser refresh button, the $stateChangeStart fires twice, and each time points to the childstate.
The resolve on the parent state is what is firing twice.
Perhaps this is a kludge; regardless, this does appear to eliminate the problem for me: in the area of code where $stateProvider is first invoked, first check to see if the window.location.hash is an empty string. If it is, all is good; if it is not, then set the window.location.hash to an empty string. Then it seems the $state only tries to go somewhere once rather than twice.
Also, if you do not want to rely on the app's default run and state.go(...), you can try to capture the hash value and use the hash value to determine the child state you were on just before page refresh, and add a condition to the area in your code where you set the state.go(...).

For those using the ControllerAs syntax, just declare the controller label in the $routeprovider as follows:
$routeprovider
.when('/link', {
templateUrl: 'templateUrl',
controller: 'UploadsController as ctrl'
})
or
$routeprovider
.when('/link', {
templateUrl: 'templateUrl',
controller: 'UploadsController'
controllerAs: 'ctrl'
})
After declaring the $routeprovider, do not supply the controller as in the view. Instead use the label in the view.

In my case it was because of the url pattern I used
my url was like /ui/project/:parameter1/:parameter2.
I didn't need paramerter2 in all cases of state change. In cases where I didn't need the second parameter my url would be like /ui/project/:parameter1/. And so whenever I had a state change I will have my controller refreshed twice.
The solution was to set parameter2 as empty string and do the state change.

I've had this double initialisation happen for a different reason. For some route-transitions in my application I wanted to force scrolling to near the top of the page (e.g. in paginated search results... clicking next should take you to the top of page 2).
I did this by adding a listener to the $rootScope $on $viewContentLoaded which (based on certain conditions) executed
$location.hash('top');
Inadvertently this was causing my routes to be reevaluated and the controllers to be reinitialised

My issue was updating the search parameters like so $location.search('param', key);
you can read more about it here
controller getting called twice due to append params in url

In my case renaming the controller to a different name solved the problem.
There was a conflict of controller names with "angular-ui-tree" module: I renamed my controller from "CatalogerTreeController" to "TreeController" and then this controller starts to be initiated twice on the page where "ui-tree" directive used because this directive uses controller named "TreeController".

I had the same problem and after trying all the answers I finally found that i had a directive in my view that was bound to the same controller.
APP.directive('MyDirective', function() {
return {
restrict: 'AE',
scope: {},
templateUrl: '../views/quiz.html',
controller: 'ShowClassController'
}
});
After removing the directive the controller stopped being called twice. Now my question is, how can use this directive bound to the controller scope without this problem?

I just solved mine, which was actually quite disappointing. Its a ionic hybrid app, I've used ui-router v0.2.13. In my case there is a epub reader (using epub.js) which was continuously reporting "no document found" once I navigate to my books library and select any other book. When I reloaded the browser book was being rendered perfectly but when I selected another book got the same problem again.
My solve was very simple. I just removed reload:true from $state.go("app.reader", { fileName: fn, reload: true }); in my LibraryController

I have the same issue in angular-route#1.6.7, and it because the extra slash in the end of regex route:
.when('/goods/publish/:classId/', option)
to
.when('/goods/publish/:classId', option)
and it works correctly.

Just adding my case here as well:
I was using angular-ui-router with $state.go('new_state', {foo: "foo#bar"})
Once I added encodeURIComponent to the parameter, the problem was gone: $state.go('new_state', {foo: encodeURIComponent("foo#bar")}).
What happened?
The character "#" in the parameter value is not allowed in URLs. As a consequence, angular-ui-router created my controller twice: during first creation it passed the original "foo#bar", during second creation it would pass the encoded version "foo%40bar". Once I explicitly encoded the parameter as shown above, the problem went away.

My issue was really difficult to track down. In the end, the problem was occurring when the web page had missing images. The src was missing a Url. This was happening on an MVC 5 Web Controller. To fix the issue, I included transparent images when no real image is available.
<img alt="" class="logo" src="">

I figured out mine is getting called twice is because i was calling the method twice from my html.
`<form class="form-horizontal" name="x" ng-submit="findX() novalidate >
<input type="text"....>
<input type="text"....>
<input type="text"....>
<button type="submit" class="btn btn-sm btn-primary" ng-click="findX()"
</form>`
The highlighted section was causing findX() to be called twice. Hope it helps someone.

Related

angular usage of $location in directive repaints all other directives

I have a page that uses several directives:
<section class="start_page page--no-vcenter">
<u-search>
<u-search-form></u-search-form>
<u-news-form></u-news-form>
<u-search-pane></u-search-pane>
</u-search>
<u-news>
<u-news-pane></u-news-pane>
</u-news>
</u-search>
</section>
When i use a service that uses $location and sets the search() parameters inside of one of the directives all directives repaint.
return $location.search(obj);
How can avoid this repainting of the other directives?
Im using Angular 1.2.28.
The solution was quite simple since i was only updating the search() part, resp. the query params.
Here you can use
$routeProvider.when('/somewhere', {
controller: 'SomeCtrl',
reloadOnSearch: false
})
When changing the path it would be more complicated, i guess.
The issue on github is this: https://github.com/angular/angular.js/issues/1699
And the solution i found in this answer:
https://stackoverflow.com/a/17606908/541949

Unable to render the variables inside controller function to view

Here is my code on plunkr
I am unable to get the view on orders.html from the controller OrdersController inside controllerOrder.js file. For some reason I am not able to render the variables of OrdersController controller onto the view.
EDIT:
Try this link.
In controllerCustomer.js file, it was controllersAs: 'OrdersCtrl' instead of controllerAs: 'OrdersCtrl'. And answer to your question is yes, it is redundant to specify the controller in the template as well.
Generally, UI Router is regarded as a better solution for AngularJS routing. You can checkout this link for more details.

Preserve traditional anchor behavior with ng-include

I am not building a single-page application, but rather a "traditional" site that uses AngularJS in places. I've hit the following problem (using 1.3.0-beta.6):
Standard, working anchor links:
Link text
... [page content]
<a id="foo"></a>
<h1>Headline</h1>
[more content]
That works fine. Now I introduce a template partial somewhere:
<script type="text/ng-template" id="test-include.html">
<p>This text is in a separate partial and inlcuded via ng-include.</p>
</script>
which is invoked via:
<div ng-include="'test-include.html'"></div>
The partial is included properly, but the anchor link no longer works. Clicking on "Link text" now changes the displayed URL to /#/foo rather than /#foo and the page position does not change.
My understanding is that using ng-include implicitly tells Angular that I want to use the routes system and overrides the browser's native anchor link behavior. I've seen recommendations to work around this by changing my html anchor links to #/#foo, but I can't do that for other reasons.
I don't intend to use the routes system - I just want to use ng-include without it messing with browser behavior. Is this possible?
The reason is that angular overrides the behavior of standard HTML tags which include <a> also. I'm not sure when this change happened because angular v1.0.1 works fine with this.
You should replace the href attribute with ngClick as:
<a ng-click="scroll()">Link text</a>
And in a controller so:
function MyCtrl($scope, $location, $anchorScroll) {
$scope.scroll = function() {
$location.hash('foo');
$anchorScroll();
};
};
Demo: http://jsfiddle.net/HB7LU/3261/show/
Or simply use double hash as:
<a href='##foo'>Link text</a>
Demo: http://jsfiddle.net/HB7LU/3262/show/
Update: I did not know that you want no modification in HREF. But you can still achieve the desired result by overriding the existing a directive as:
myApp.directive('a', function() {
return {
restrict: 'E',
link: function(scope, element) {
element.attr('href', '#' + element.attr('href'));
}
};
});
Demo: http://jsfiddle.net/HB7LU/3263/
My understanding is that using ng-include implicitly tells Angular
that I want to use the routes system and overrides the browser's
native anchor link behavior. I've seen recommendations to work around
this by changing my html anchor links to #/#foo, but I can't do that
for other reasons.
Routing system is defined in a separate module ngRoute, so if you did not injected it on your own - and I am pretty sure you did not - it is not accessible at all.
The issue is somehow different here.
ng-include depends on: $http, $templateCache, $anchorScroll, $animate, $sce. So make use of ng-include initiate all these services.
The most natural candidate to investigate would be $anchorScroll. The code of $anchorScroll does not seem to do any harm, but the service depends on $window, $location, $rootScope. The line 616 of $location says:
baseHref = $browser.baseHref(), // if base[href] is undefined, it defaults to ''
So basically the base href is set to '', if it was no set before.
Now look HERE - from BalusC answer :
As to using named anchors like , with the tag
you're basically declaring all relative links relative to it,
including named anchors. None of the relative links are relative to
the current request URI anymore (as would happen without the
tag).
How to mitigate the issue?
I do not have much time today, so cannot test it myself, but what I would try to check as the first option is to hook up to '$locationChangeStart' event and if the new url is of #xxxxxx type just prevent the default behaviour and scroll with $anchorScroll native methods instead.
Update
I think this code should do the work:
$scope.$on("$locationChangeStart", function (event, next, current) {
var el, elId;
if (next.indexOf("#")>-1) {
elId = next.split("#")[1];
el = document.getElementById(elId);
if(el){
// el.scrollIntoView(); do not think we need it
window.location.hash = "#" + elId;
event.preventDefault();
}
}
});
This is the best solution, and works in recent versions of Angular:
Turn off URL manipulation in AngularJS
A lot late to the party but I found that adding a simple target="_self" fixes it.
Link
Rather than applying the angular application to the entire page, you can isolate the application to just the places you want to perform an ng-include. This will allow links outside the scope of the application to retain their normal functionality, while allowing links within the application to be handled as desired.
See this plunkr:
http://plnkr.co/edit/hOB7ixRM39YZEhaz0tfr?p=preview
The plunkr shows a link outside the app that functions as normal, and a link within the app that is handled using an overriding a directive to restore normal functionality. HTML5 mode is enabled to retain 'standard' URLs (rather than 'hashbang' [without the bang!] URLs).
You could equally run the whole of the page within the app, but I thought it would be worth demonstrating how to isolate angular to certain parts of the page in any case.

Changes to scope on click are not being updated across my app

Started using Angular last week, read/watched many tutorials and I'm currently trying to build a newsfeed type application.
Here's the skinny: I have a service that gets data from the server. On the newsfeed itself I have two controllers: one that has the entire newsfeed in its scope and another that has an instance for each newsfeed article. If the user clicks an icon on an individual post it should call a service that has been injected into both controllers and then broadcasts a message that the main controller picks up. The main controller then updates a variable in a filter, filtering the newsfeed content based on the user's selection.
Here's the problem: Everything works fine except that the main controller doesn't update the bound variable in the HTML. I have read close to every SO article on two-way binding within an ng-repeat and the related struggles, but in my case the bound variable falls outside an ng-repeat, hence why I'm posting.
The code:
services.factory('filterService', function() {
var filterService = {};
filterService.filterKey = '';
filterService.getFilter = function() {
return filterService.filterKey;
};
filterService.setFilter = function(name) {
filterService.filterKey = name;
$rootScope.$broadcast('changeFilter');
};
return filterService;
});
app.controller('CommentCtrl', function($scope, $timeout, $http, filterService) {
$scope.setSearchParam = function(param) {
alert('clicked: ' + param)
filterService.setFilter(param);
}
app.controller('FeedCtrl', function($scope, articles, filterService, $timeout) {
$scope.articles = articles;
$scope.model = {
value: ''
};
$scope.$on('changeFilter', function() {
console.log(filterService.filterKey);
$scope.model.value = filterService.filterKey
}
});
});
<div class="articles">
<div class="articleStub" ng-repeat="article in articles|filter:model.value">
<div ng-controller="CommentCtrl">
<div class="{{article.sort}}">
<div class="leftBlock">
<a href="#" ng-click="setSearchParam(article.sort)">
<div class="typeIcon">
<i ng-class="{'icon-comments':article.question, 'icon-star':article.create, 'icon-ok-sign':article.notype}"></i>
</div>
</a>
Note: the FeedCtrl controller is called in the app.config $routeprovider function thing whatever its called
Edited to add: the alert and console checks both work, so I'm assuming the issue is not in the filterService or CommentCtrl.
Here's the Plnkr: http://plnkr.co/edit/bTit7m9b04ADwkzWHv88?p=preview
I'm adding another answer as the other is still valid, but is not the only problem!
Having looked at your code, your problems were two fold:
You had a link to href="#"
This was causing the route code to be re-run, and it was creating a new instance of the controller on the same page, but using a different scope. The way I found this out was by adding the debug line: console.log("running controller init code for $scope.$id:" + $scope.$id); into script.js under the line that blanks the model.value. You'll notice it runs on every click, and the $id of the scope is different every time. I don't fully understand what was happening after that, but having two of the same controller looking after the same bit of the page can't be a good thing!
So, with that in mind, I set href="". This ruins the rendering of the button a bit, but it does cure the problem of multiple controllers being instantiated. However, this doesn't fix the problem... what's the other issue?
angular.element.bind('click', ....) is running 'outside the angular world'
This one is a bit more complicated, but basically for angular data-bindings to work, angular needs to know when the scope gets changed. Most of the time it's handled automagically by angular functions (e.g. inside controllers, inside ng-* directives, etc.), but in some cases, when events are triggered from the browser (e.g. XHR, clicks, touches, etc.), you have to tell angular something has changed. You can do this with $scope.$apply(). There are a few good articles on the subject so I'd recommend a bit of reading (try here to begin with).
There are two solutions to this - one is to use the ng-click directive which wraps the native click event with $scope.$apply (and has the added advantage that your markup is more semantic), or the other is to do it yourself. To minimise the changes to your code, I just wrapped your click code in scope.$apply for you:
element.bind('click', function() {
// tell angular that it needs to 'digest' the changes you're about to make.
scope.$apply(function(){
var param = scope.article.sort;
filterService.setFilter(param);
})
});
Here's a working version of your code: http://plnkr.co/edit/X1AK0Bc4NZyChrJEknkN?p=preview
Note I also set up a filter on the list. You could easily ad a button to clear it that is hidden when there's no filter set:
<button ng-click="model.value=''" ng-show="model.value">Clear filter</button>
Hope this helps :)
I actually think the problem is not that your model.value isn't getting updated - all that code looks fine.
I think the problem lies in your filter.
<div class="articleStub" ng-repeat="article in articles|filter:model.value">
This filter will match any object with any field that contains model.value. What you actually want to do is the following:
<div class="articleStub"
ng-repeat="article in articles|filter:{sort: model.value}:true">
To specify that you only want to match against the sort property of each article. The final true parameter means that it'll only allow strict matches as well, so ed wouldn't match edward.
Note that | filter:{sort: model.value}:true is an angular expression, the :s are like JavaScript commas. If you were to imagine it in JavaScript it would be more like: |('filter',{sort:model.value}, true) where | is a special 'inject a filter here' function..
EDIT:
I'm finding it hard to debug your example without having the working code in front of me. If you can make it into a plunker I can help more, but in the meantime, I think you should try to make your code less complicated by using a different approach.
I have created a plunker that shows an easy way to filter a list by the item that you click. I've used very little code so hopefully it's quite easy to understand?
I would also recommend making your feed items into a directive. The directives can have their own controller so it would prevent you having to do the rather ugly repeating of a ng-controller.

Router and refresh multiples ng-inludes

I start with code:
when('/admin', {
templateUrl: 'partials/admin/layout.html',
controller: AdminCtrl
})
when('/admin/products', {
templateUrl: '????',
controller: AdminProductsCtrl
})
Template "tree":
index.html ---> <div ng-view/>
---layout.html ---> <div ng-include=menu/> and <div ng-include=body/>
------menu.html
------products.html
Actually I do this:
function AdminCtrl($scope) {
$scope.menu = 'partials/admin/menu.html';
}
function AdminProductsCtrl($scope) {
$scope.menu = 'partials/admin/menu.html';
$scope.body = 'partials/admin/products/index.html';
}
The point is: What I put in '????', if I put layout.html this work fine, but I like just "refresh" ng-include=body. I think that my concepts about Angularjs is wrong.
Other problem is, when AdminProductsCtrl "take the control" of layout.html I miss the AdminCtrl $scope, this implicates repeat all AdminCtrl $scope in AdminProductsCtrl $scope (for example $scope.menu).
Thanks a lot, and sorry for "my english".
UPDATE
After think.. and think... I understanding that routes not apply for my app, then I manage all functionality under one url 'site.com/#/admin'. The menu.html is manage for AdminMenuCtrl, this controller contains a model for each 'ng-include' and contains one method for each menu entry. When the user click a menu entry, the associate method in the $scope replace $scope.includes.body with the 'new' html. The partial cointains your ng-controller.
This works fine by now :D. And the best is that I don't need use $rootScope.
The new problem is a bit more complicated, the ng-include require a tag (i.e DIV) and ng-controller too. Then my design is affected for this. In code language:
DESING:
<div>MENU-HTML</div>
<div>BODY-HTML</div>
TEMPLATE:
<div ng-include="menu"></div>
<div ng-include="body"></div>
AFTER RETRIEVE PARTIALS:
<div ng-include="menu"><div ng-controller="MenuCtrl">MENU-HTML</div></div>
<div ng-include="body"><div ng-controller="ListProductsCtrl">BODY-HTML</div></div>
THE IDEAL THING:
1 - ng-include don't 'include' into the DIV, instead 'replace' the DIV.
2 - ng-controller DIV is replaced for nothing in the DOM.
It's possible now with angular? Is a bad approach this idea? The point 2 with $route is possible, not with ng-controller directive.
I believe you are correct in your example you would set ???? to layout.html but the idea is to have different views based on the route so pointing to the same layout.html is not ideal.
If you are trying to keep a static menu on all pages I would add the menu to your index.html and then choose a different templateUrl for each route (ie /admin goes to partials/admin.html and /admin/products goes to partials/products.html) and not use the ngInclude.
I'm new to AngularJS but I'm getting the impression that you generally want to use ngView with routes to templateUrls OR use ngInclude (possibly with ngSwitch) if you want to roll your own view switching. I'm sure there are times when using both is appropriate but as a newbie it confuses me somewhat. Resident experts please correct me if I'm wrong!
For your second issue there might be some helpful information here and here for tips on sharing the same model across multiple controllers but you probably don't need to for your example.
An alternative is to use a string constant path to your partial in layout.html and remove the references to $scope.menu in your controller code by using:
<div ng-include="'partials/admin/menu.html'"/>

Resources