As I delve into the world of controllerAs syntax in AngularJS, I've encountered a snag when attempting to bind a service variable. The traditional approach using `$scope.$watch` or `$scope.$on` would require injecting `$scope`, which seems counterintuitive to the essence of controllerAs.
Currently, I am facing an issue where after clicking a button and invoking `config.setAttribute(attr)`, the controller triggers the service's `setAttribute` function but not `getAttribute`. As a result, `config.attribute` remains unchanged.
Am I missing something in my approach? Would it be necessary to inject `$scope` or switch to using `$scope` in the controller syntax instead?
View:
<div data-ng-controller="ConfigCtrl as config">
<h3>Customize</h3>
<pre>Current attribute: {{config.attribute}}</pre>
<label>Attributes</label>
<div data-ng-repeat="attr in config.attributes">
<button ng-click="config.setAttribute(attr)">{{attr.name}}</button>
</div>
</div>
Service:
(function() {
'use strict';
angular.module('app')
.factory('Customization', Customization);
function Customization() {
var service = {
attribute: null,
getAttributes: getAttributes,
setAttribute: setAttribute,
getAttribute: getAttribute
}
return service;
/////
function getAttributes() {
return [
{name: 'Attr1', value: '1'},
{name: 'Attr2', value: '2'} // etc.
];
}
function setAttribute(attr) {
service.attribute = attr;
}
function getAttribute() {
return service.attribute;
}
}})();
Controller:
(function(){
'use strict';
angular.module('app')
.controller('ConfigCtrl', ConfigCtrl);
function ConfigCtrl(Customization){
var vm = this;
vm.attribute = Customization.getAttribute(); // bind
vm.attributes = [];
// Functions
vm.setAttribute = Customization.setAttribute;
init();
/////
function init(){
// Get attributes array
vm.attributes = Customization.getAttributes();
}
}})();