According to AngularJS's tutorial, a controller function just sits within the global scope.
http://docs.angularjs.org/tutorial/step_04
Do the controller functions themselves automatically get parsed into an encapsulated scope, or do they dwell within the global scope? I know that they are passed a reference to their own $scope, but it appears that the function themselves are just sitting in the global scope. Obviously this can cause problems down the road, and I have learned through experience and education to encapsulate Further more, if they do dwell within the global scope, would it not be considered a best practice to encapsulate them within an object to be referenced like this:
Object.functionName();
Rather than this:
functionName();
So as to prevent issues that occur with the pollution of the global scope (ie overriding functions, etc..)
AngularJS supports 2 methods of registering controller functions - either as globally accessible functions (you can see this form in the mentioned tutorial) or as a part of a modules (that forms a kind of namespace). More info on modules can be found here: http://docs.angularjs.org/guide/module but in short one would register a controller in a module like so:
angular.module('[module name]', []).controller('PhoneListCtrl', function($scope) { $scope.phones = [..]; $scope.orderProp = 'age'; });
AngularJS uses a short, global-function form of declaring controllers in many examples but while this form is good for quick samples it rather shouldn't be used in real-life applications.
In short: AngularJS makes it possible to properly encapsulate controller functions but also exposes a simpler, quick & dirty way of declaring them as global functions.
If you love us? You can donate to us via Paypal or buy me a coffee so we can maintain and grow! Thank you!
Donate Us With