You can do that, but then your parent controllers are acting like a service 
from the previous example. If you have a lot of sibling child controllers 
keeping state in the parent controller, then your parent controller is 
going to have a lot of data that does not pertain to it.

I have looked at ui-router, but ui-router doesn't handle the state of not 
refreshing sibling states/controllers on the page. I also heard the angular 
team is going to base the next version off of ui-router, which is a good.

On Friday, January 24, 2014 7:04:17 AM UTC-8, Paul Spaulding wrote:
>
> You could also setup a parent view and controller with child controllers 
> and views for both /payments and /settings.  The parent controller could 
> maintain state while allowing the child controllers to reinitialize as 
> angular wants to behave.  The child controllers can see the parent $scope 
> variables, and the parents and children can send messages between them 
> using $broadcast and $emit.
>
> On Thursday, January 23, 2014 2:58:58 PM UTC-5, jonr wrote:
>>
>> This is just to brainstorm some things; let me know if I'm crazy and on 
>> the wrong path of thinking. So I have /payments and /settings as routes as 
>> an example. I go to /payments and the payments controller loads with the 
>> view. I go to /settings and the settings controller loads with the view. I 
>> go back to /payments and again the controller reloads with the view. 
>> Everything in the controller is reinitialized, but this controller is being 
>> used no where else in the application. So what do we do? We cache the data 
>> being returned in ajax calls in a service and if they reload the controller 
>> the service will check to see if it is already cached and if it is return 
>> the cached values. Another thing is if I am trying to keep track of state 
>> in that controller I need to store more data in the service. So now for the 
>> payments controller I have a  payments service which is responsible for 
>> making all the payments related ajax calls and for caching data that the 
>> controller would need to keep track of state.
>>
>> I feel like there should be an option to cache controllers than to always 
>> reinitialize them because then you don't have to cache data in services you 
>> are using for controllers and reinitialize the controllers every time. 
>>
>> If I press the back button, I'm going back to a previous state in the 
>> application. It seems weird that going back will actually reinitialize the 
>> controller and the data being displayed on the page could be different 
>> (this case would happen if you aren't caching everything in the service). 
>>
>> Let me know what you guys think.
>>
>> Jon
>>
>>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"AngularJS" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/angular.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Reply via email to