I am already doing that. We are focusing too much on the factory method. My
question is regarding the $timeout method
'use strict';
mintApp.factory('DataFactory', ["$http", function($http) {
var factory = {};
factory.getUserData = function() {
return
$http.get('../MINT/scripts/php/get_user_data').then(function(results) {
if (results.status === 200) {
return results.data.User;
} else {
return {
status : results.status,
error : 'Failed to get User Data'
}
}
});
};
return factory;
}]);
and then in the controller I use it
DataFactory.getUserData().then(function(results) {
$scope.account = results;
});
On Thursday, May 1, 2014 7:31:20 PM UTC-4, Jeff Hubbard wrote:
>
> It sounds to me like DataFactory should return a promise instead.
>
> On Thursday, May 1, 2014 1:13:44 PM UTC-7, Billy Figueroa wrote:
>>
>> I do have a service. Its called DataFactory.
>>
>> I just found that you can achieve the same results with out using a
>> factory and calling the factory in each controller.
>>
>> The way I have my app setup I am getting the current users data in a
>> MainController which I set on the body tag so EVERY single page and
>> controller instantiated with that route will have MainController as a
>> parent.
>>
>> I could then load the data using $timeout OR as you mentioned just use a
>> service. Using a service means I call my DataFactory in every single
>> controller that I need that data which although it seems like thats the
>> point of services and dependency injection, it causes multiple calls of the
>> same code. Whereas with a simple timeout I can just grab the data that is
>> already there in the parent controller.
>>
>> I am using the service/ factory method for sure, but I just wanted to
>> know if its bad practice to do it the other way
>>
>> On Thursday, May 1, 2014 4:06:43 PM UTC-4, Chris Rhoden wrote:
>>>
>>> The 0 isn't necessary, and using $timeout to defer some action isn't an
>>> antipattern, but the rest of your message concerns me. If you're
>>> communicating between controllers using $scope, you're doing it wrong. Make
>>> a service if two controllers need to share state.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, May 1, 2014 at 4:04 PM, Billy Figueroa <[email protected]>wrote:
>>>
>>>> Is is bad practice to use $timeout with a time of 0?
>>>>
>>>> i.e.
>>>> $timeout(function() {
>>>> // some action here
>>>> }, 0);
>>>>
>>>> I find that sometimes data doesn't load in a child controller and I may
>>>> want to use this. I have avoided using it, but what are peoples experience
>>>> with this?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> 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/d/optout.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> chrisrhoden
>>>
>>
--
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/d/optout.
