I'm starting to develop my first big project using AngularJS and while I was thinking about the design for the app, I found something that I don't understand.
I was thinking in a single-page app, so I'm using ng-view and routeProvider to route each query to the right template and controller. However, some of my templates are a bit plex and I first thought to use different controllers to manage each one. This is, different sections of the same template would be managed by different controllers. The problem (or at least, what I thought was the problem) is that routeProvider only lets to associate one template to one controller. This made me think that I could not use another controller for a template except the one I specified in routing configuration using routeProvider.
Then I started to figure out how to restructure the future project so I could maintain each different functionality in the same template being managed by a single controller and still let interact controllers between them.
After some headaches, I decided to try and implement my first approach to see how it failed and... What a suprise! It worked perfectly! But, I don't know exactly why.
Let me show you this simple example:
script.js
angular.module('myApp', [
'ngRoute'
])
.config(function ($routeProvider, $locationProvider) {
$routeProvider
.when('/', {
templateUrl: 'main',
controller: 'MainCtrl'
});
$locationProvider.html5Mode(true);
});
angular.module('myApp')
.controller('MainCtrl', function ($scope) {
// whatever...
});
});
angular.module('myApp')
.controller('FirstCtrl', function ($scope) {
$scope.first = function(){
alert("First");
};
});
});
angular.module('myApp')
.controller('SecondCtrl', function ($scope) {
$scope.second= function(){
alert("Second");
};
});
});
main.html
<div ng-controller="FirstCtrl">
<button ng-click="first()">First!</button>
</div>
<div ng-controller="SecondCtrl">
<button ng-click="second()">Second!</button>
</div>
index.html
<body ng-app="myApp">
<div ng-view=""></div>
</body>
I thought if you configure the route to associate "main" template to "MainCtrl" controller, that would be the only controller interacting with the template, but it's not.
I first thought the "first" and "second" functions would not be found because "FirstCtrl" and "SecondCtrl" weren't declared in the routes configuration. I thought maybe routeProvider would be "wrapping" (or something like that) the "main" template and the "MainCtrl" controller, and "main" template would not have access to the rest of the controllers.
But that's not correct, the "first" and "second" functions from different controllers works correctly. So, what is the point in specifying a controller for a template in routes configuration? You could just set a template to render for a specified query and that template could use any controller of the module.
Maybe this is not a good design, I don't know.
Could you help me to understand this better?
Thanks!
I'm starting to develop my first big project using AngularJS and while I was thinking about the design for the app, I found something that I don't understand.
I was thinking in a single-page app, so I'm using ng-view and routeProvider to route each query to the right template and controller. However, some of my templates are a bit plex and I first thought to use different controllers to manage each one. This is, different sections of the same template would be managed by different controllers. The problem (or at least, what I thought was the problem) is that routeProvider only lets to associate one template to one controller. This made me think that I could not use another controller for a template except the one I specified in routing configuration using routeProvider.
Then I started to figure out how to restructure the future project so I could maintain each different functionality in the same template being managed by a single controller and still let interact controllers between them.
After some headaches, I decided to try and implement my first approach to see how it failed and... What a suprise! It worked perfectly! But, I don't know exactly why.
Let me show you this simple example:
script.js
angular.module('myApp', [
'ngRoute'
])
.config(function ($routeProvider, $locationProvider) {
$routeProvider
.when('/', {
templateUrl: 'main',
controller: 'MainCtrl'
});
$locationProvider.html5Mode(true);
});
angular.module('myApp')
.controller('MainCtrl', function ($scope) {
// whatever...
});
});
angular.module('myApp')
.controller('FirstCtrl', function ($scope) {
$scope.first = function(){
alert("First");
};
});
});
angular.module('myApp')
.controller('SecondCtrl', function ($scope) {
$scope.second= function(){
alert("Second");
};
});
});
main.html
<div ng-controller="FirstCtrl">
<button ng-click="first()">First!</button>
</div>
<div ng-controller="SecondCtrl">
<button ng-click="second()">Second!</button>
</div>
index.html
<body ng-app="myApp">
<div ng-view=""></div>
</body>
I thought if you configure the route to associate "main" template to "MainCtrl" controller, that would be the only controller interacting with the template, but it's not.
I first thought the "first" and "second" functions would not be found because "FirstCtrl" and "SecondCtrl" weren't declared in the routes configuration. I thought maybe routeProvider would be "wrapping" (or something like that) the "main" template and the "MainCtrl" controller, and "main" template would not have access to the rest of the controllers.
But that's not correct, the "first" and "second" functions from different controllers works correctly. So, what is the point in specifying a controller for a template in routes configuration? You could just set a template to render for a specified query and that template could use any controller of the module.
Maybe this is not a good design, I don't know.
Could you help me to understand this better?
Thanks!
Share Improve this question asked Mar 8, 2014 at 19:19 JorgeJorge 2231 gold badge4 silver badges10 bronze badges 1- This is exactly my dilemma at this very moment. In my case, I'm using Yeoman with the Angular generator (which bootstraps the routing for you) and there was certain template requiring more than one controller. I'll take your approach but I'm curious to know if you kept it or move to something else. Thanks! – Aldo Commented Jul 15, 2014 at 23:07
2 Answers
Reset to default 4When using $route provider as you're stating:
.config(function ($routeProvider, $locationProvider) {
$routeProvider
.when('/', {
templateUrl: 'main',
controller: 'MainCtrl'
});
$locationProvider.html5Mode(true); });
You're actually wrapping everything within the './' route with MainCrtl.
Therefore when you inject the Main.html view in <div ng-view=></div> you get the following rendering:
<body ng-app="myApp">
<div ng-controller='MainCtrl'>
<div ng-controller="FirstCtrl">
<button ng-click="first()">First!</button>
</div>
<div ng-controller="SecondCtrl">
<button ng-click="second()">Second!</button>
</div>
</div>
</body>
Really, the point is just so you don't have to do <div ng-controller="MyCtrl"> in the view. This could have some advantages, like a view that may hold different data for different contexts but still be the same html.
发布者：admin，转转请注明出处：http://www.yc00.com/questions/1745122242a4612481.html
评论列表（0条）