When working with AngularJS, we pass parameters using dependency injection. For instance,
function checkInCtrl ($scope, $rootScope, $location, $http){
…..
….
}
However, when the code is minified, it looks like this:
function checkInCtrl(a,b,c,d){
}
As a result, 'a', 'b', 'c', and 'd' are not recognized as '$scope', '$rootScope', '$location', and '$http' by Angular, causing the code to fail. To address this, AngularJS provides a solution:
checkInCtrl.$inject = ['$scope', '$rootScope', $location', '$http'];
Using the above syntax allows for injecting different dependencies. This method worked well until employing custom Angular services as dependencies.
For example,
function checkInCtrl ($scope, $rootScope, $location, $http){
…..
….
}
This setup works fine with the given solution. However, if the function includes:
function checkInCtrl ($scope, $rootScope, $location, $http, customService){
…..
….
}
Where 'customService' may be defined as:
angular.module(customService, ['ngResource'])
.factory('abc', function($resource) {
return $resource('/abc');
})
In such cases, the minified version of the code may not be interpreted correctly by Angular.
Due to project time constraints, we didn't delve deep into this issue and proceeded without minifying the controllers. The primary question here is whether this issue is inherent in Angular or if there was an error on my part that led to its malfunctioning. And, if this problem indeed exists, what would be the solution?