Angular has several cases where the syntax trips you up, or where it’s just not clear what should you use. Most famously, there’s services vs. factories and ng-show vs ng-if . More recently we now have components vs. directives.

Another thing that I’ve seen people get mad about time after time is the & binding for passing functions to directives/components. “The & callback binding trips me up EVERY TIME I just hate it.”

Let’s understand exactly what it is. Once you grok it, you’ll never get it wrong again.

Can you use it in a sentence?

First, here’s an example component that has one of these & bindings:

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 angular . module ( 'app' ). component ( 'foo' , { templateUrl : '...' , bindings : { callback : '&' }, controller : function () { // ... this . callback (); } });

As you can see, we have a simple binding called callback . The usage of this component would look something like this:

<foo callback="$ctrl.myCallback()"></foo>

This means that whenever the foo directive would call the callback binding, the myCallback function on the caller’s controller would be triggered.

The tricky bit: parameters

Now, what everyone get mixed up with is using & with functions that get parameters.

Say that our callback wants to pass an argument. The component would be created like so:

<foo callback="$ctrl.myCallback(value)"</foo>

But inside the component, we calling syntax would look quite foreign the first time you see it:

this.callback({value: 'whatever'});

WAT

Yes. Doing something like this.callback('whatever') wouldn’t work.

What’s going on?

Technically speaking, when you use the & binding, Angular doesn’t just do 2-way binding the regular way.

It takes the expression you use, in our example $ctrl.myCallback(value) and saves it.

When you call it, Angular evaluates that expression on the parent scope.

You see, when using & you don’t have to pass function, though that’s what we do 99.9% of the time. You can pass in any expression, and it would work.

So, in our example, we could have used:

<foo callback="$ctrl.values.push(value)"></foo>

And whenever we’d perform this.callback({value: 'whatever'}) it would get appended to the parent controller’s values array.

Because the & binding is so generic, it doesn’t really have a notion of function parameters – the expression could be anything.

When you pass it the object, it is actually a mapping of local variables to override. Angular takes the expression and evaluates it in the parent scope, but with the values you pass it added as the locals.

Wiseass note: Yes, this means we can call this.callback({value: 'whatever', $ctrl: something}) and the function call would be performed on the something object and not on our parent controller – because we override it!

Dear god, why?!

This was done so that you’ll be able to pass expressions instead of functions to anything in Angular.

Have you ever used ng-click="$ctrl.value = true" or something along those lines? Sometimes it’s easier to not use a function.

The core team wanted us to have this flexibility, and the price is that we have to call function in a way that feels a bit clunky.

But remember: You’re not really calling a function, you’re evaluating the expression with those values!

Now you know

If you’ll make the mental switch from treating & as “function binding” to just “expression binding”, I think you’ll be alright from now on.