A great way to enhance your coding practice is by integrating angular.js and require.js together. This allows for better modularization of components within your projects.

If you're looking for a solid example, check out this seed project that effectively combines angular.js with require.js.

In my interpretation of the OP's query, the core question at hand is:

When developing an Angular 1.x application in the current era of Grunt/Gulp/Broccoli and Bower/NPM, along with additional library dependencies, does the use of Require provide a distinct advantage over using Angular alone?

In simpler terms:

"Is Require necessary for efficient component-loading in Angular, especially if other methods of script-loading are available?"

My assessment is that the answer to this lies in the context of your specific project and toolset limitations. If you have the flexibility to adopt newer technologies and modern practices, Angular's inherent modularization features may negate the need for Require's AMD pattern.

RequireJS indeed played a crucial role in advancing Javascript applications by introducing modularization and reducing global scope dependencies. However, when closely examining the compatibility between Angular and Require, it becomes evident that Angular's modular structure could potentially render AMD somewhat redundant. While it is feasible to integrate Angular modules with AMD, the process can be intricate and time-consuming.

According to insights from Brian Ford, a member of the Angular core team, combining RequireJS with AngularJS may not yield significant practical benefits in most scenarios.

With regard to managing dependencies for scalable Javascript applications, alternatives like Bower and NPM, particularly NPM, offer compelling solutions that may outperform AMD/Require in certain aspects. The shift towards ES6 and CommonJS modules coupled with the popularity of NPM signifies a trend towards utilizing more robust and efficient tools.

Exploring the concept of lazy-loading reveals that while RequireJS facilitates lazy-downloading, Angular's lazy-loading mechanism differs in that it involves concatenating and minifying resources rather than fetching files dynamically from the server. Additionally, various other tools and techniques exist to achieve lazy-loading, some of which may offer more flexibility than Require.

During development, automation tools like Yeoman generators and webpack streamline the process of loading script files, eliminating the need for manual inclusion in HTML. By leveraging these tools, developers can focus on writing code rather than managing script dependencies.

In conclusion, while Require remains a valuable tool for specific use cases, embracing modern practices and tools tailored to the Angular ecosystem can lead to more efficient and scalable development processes. Integrating ES6 modules, leveraging automation tools, and adopting granular lazy-loading approaches can enhance the overall development experience and future-proof your Angular applications.

(Regularly updated to align with industry trends and best practices.)

Indeed, it does seem logical.

Angular modules do not aim to address the issue of script load ordering or lazy script fetching. These objectives are independent, and both module systems can coexist to achieve their respective goals.

Source: Official website of Angular JS

In my personal view, this question is subjective, so I will share my subjective perspective.

Angular comes with a built-in modularization mechanism. When you start creating your app, the first step is usually

var app = angular.module("myApp");

followed by

app.directive(...);

app.controller(...);

app.service(...);

If you take a look at angular-seed, a clean starter app for Angular, you'll notice that they have divided directives, services, controllers, etc. into separate modules and then included those modules as dependencies in the main app.

For example:

var app = angular.module("myApp",["Directives","Controllers","Services"];

Angular also dynamically loads these modules into memory, not their script files.

When it comes to lazy loading script files, in my opinion, unless you are working on an exceptionally large project, it may be unnecessary because Angular inherently streamlines the amount of code you need to write. Compared to most other frameworks, an app developed in Angular typically sees a 30-50% reduction in lines of code.

Employing RequireJS alongside AngularJS can be beneficial, but it's crucial to have a solid understanding of how each of them handles dependency injection. While both involve injecting dependencies, the types of dependencies they inject are quite distinct.

AngularJS utilizes its own dependency system, allowing you to inject AngularJS modules into a newly created module for reusing implementations. For example, if you create a module named "first" that includes an AngularJS filter called "greet":

angular
  .module('first', [])
  .filter('greet', function() {
    return function(name) {
      return 'Hello, ' + name + '!';
    }
  });

Now, if you wish to utilize the "greet" filter in another module named "second" that also implements a "goodbye" filter, you can achieve that by injecting the "first" module into the "second" module:

angular
  .module('second', ['first'])
  .filter('goodbye', function() {
    return function(name) {
      return 'Goodbye, ' + name + '!';
    }
  });

However, without RequireJS, you must ensure that the "first" AngularJS module is loaded on the page before creating the "second" AngularJS module. As stated in the documentation:

Depending on a module implies that the required module needs to be loaded before the requiring module is loaded.

This is where RequireJS comes in handy, as it offers a clean way to inject scripts onto the page, aiding in organizing script dependencies.

When it comes to the "first" and "second" AngularJS modules, using RequireJS involves separating them into different files to manage script dependencies effectively:

// firstModule.js file
define(['angular'], function(angular) {
  angular
    .module('first', [])
    .filter('greet', function() {
      return function(name) {
        return 'Hello, ' + name + '!';
      }
    });
});

// secondModule.js file
define(['angular', 'firstModule'], function(angular) {
  angular
    .module('second', ['first'])
    .filter('goodbye', function() {
      return function(name) {
        return 'Goodbye, ' + name + '!';
      }
    });
});

In this setup, we rely on the "firstModule" file being injected before the content of the RequireJS callback can be executed, necessitating the loading of the "first" AngularJS module to create the "second" AngularJS module.

It's important to note that injecting "angular" as a dependency in the "firstModule" and "secondModule" files is essential for utilizing AngularJS within the RequireJS callback function. Also, configuring RequireJS to map "angular" to the library code is necessary. While you can load AngularJS conventionally on the page using a script tag, doing so negates the benefits of RequireJS.

For more information on RequireJS support in AngularJS core starting from version 2.0, check out my blog post.

For further insights on this topic, read my blog post "Making sense of RequireJS with AngularJS" at this link.

AngularJS, as @ganaraj pointed out, emphasizes dependency injection as a core feature. While experimenting with creating simple seed applications with and without RequireJS, I discovered that RequireJS might be too complex for many use cases.

However, this does not diminish RequireJS's value in terms of script loading capabilities and maintaining code cleanliness during development. By utilizing the r.js optimizer (https://github.com/jrburke/r.js) in conjunction with almond (https://github.com/jrburke/almond), you can achieve efficient script loading. Nevertheless, considering that Angular handles dependencies at the core level, you may want to explore other client-side options like HeadJS, LABjs, or even server-side solutions like MVC4 Bundler for your specific application needs.

Absolutely, using RequireJS is crucial, especially when working with large single page applications.

In certain circumstances, RequireJS is essential. For instance, when designing PhoneGap apps with AngularJS and integrating Google Maps API. Without an AMD loader like RequireJS, the app would crash immediately upon launch if offline, unable to load the necessary Google Maps API scripts. Using an AMD loader allows for displaying an error message to the user instead.

However, the process of integrating AngularJS and RequireJS can be challenging. To simplify this, I developed angularAMD:

In short, it's logical. This topic was recently covered at ng-conf 2014. You can watch the discussion here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4yulGISBF8w

If you're looking to implement lazy loading of controllers and directives in AngularJS, it would be wise to consider using RequireJS. By combining multiple lazy dependencies into single script files, you can significantly improve the efficiency of lazy loading. RequireJS offers an optimization tool that simplifies the process of merging files. For more information, check out

Utilizing requireJS alongside Angular is a logical choice, as I dedicated several days to experimenting with various technical solutions.

Developing an Angular Seed with RequireJS on the Server Side was a straightforward task. Using the SHIM notation for non-AMD modules instead of AMD was my preference, as managing two different Dependency Injection systems seemed overly complex.

Leveraging grunt and r.js to concatenate JavaScript files on the server based on the SHIM configuration (dependency) file was my approach, allowing me to reference only one JS file in my application.

For further details, feel free to check out my Angular Seed on GitHub: https://github.com/matohawk/angular-seed-requirejs

In my experience, avoiding the use of Require.js is essential. Many applications that utilize Require.js end up with a chaotic mix of various module pattern architectures like AMD, Revealing, and different flavors of IIFE. There are alternative methods for on-demand loading, such as the loadOnDemand Angular module. Introducing unnecessary elements only clutter your code and result in a low signal-to-noise ratio, making it difficult to decipher and maintain.

My strategy involves utilizing the following resource:

This site offers insights into how to effectively implement AngularJS + RequireJS, emphasizing the organization of code by features and component type.

Response by Brian Ford

AngularJS utilizes its own module system and generally does not require a tool like RJS.

Source: https://github.com/yeoman/generator-angular/issues/40

When it comes to project complexity, the use of Angular really depends on how modularized your project is. You have the ability to map your controllers and easily import those JavaScript classes into your index.html page.

However, as your project grows larger or if you anticipate such a scenario, it may be beneficial to integrate Angular with requirejs. Check out a demo app for this integration in this article.