51–60 of 150 posts
It's weird, but it's weird in the exact way that JS prototypical inheritance is weird. So it's important to learn.
Anyways the fix is simple, always initialize your variables before you use them. Either in the controller or using an ng-init.
Sometimes I feel like I'm the only one who actually likes Angular. Two way data bindings are very convenient for writing UI. I don't want to write an event listener for every onclick, onchange, and onkeypress. I want the values in my models and the values in the DOM to be in sync. I like using nearly straight up HTML as my template. I do this in Django, so why not in Angular? I like that I don't need to render things…
I agree on the documentation being unusual. I found the Angular Style Guide to be a huge help: https://github.com/johnpapa/angular-styleguide
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've never understood any comparison between React and Angular. To me it seems like trying to compare a slick car to a fancy car garage. They try to solve quite different problems, right?
> They try to solve quite different problems, right? Sort of. The problem React is solving is a subset of the problem Angular is solving. It's a bit more like comparing an older model sports car to a modern engine.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not to mention his example is just straight wrong about $scope and ng-if. His JSFiddle examples are all using angular 1.1.5. Angular 1.2 properly binds scope inside an ng-if. I agree that angular 1.1.5 had it's warts, if that's what this is supposed to be about. The current release version of angular is 1.4, about to be 1.5. Edit: After fully reading through this blog post; it's almost all wrong. Dirty Checking: Yes,…
+1 on just saying no to server side rendering. This should be idiomatic.
Sometimes I feel like I'm the only one who actually likes Angular. Two way data bindings are very convenient for writing UI. I don't want to write an event listener for every onclick, onchange, and onkeypress. I want the values in my models and the values in the DOM to be in sync. I like using nearly straight up HTML as my template. I do this in Django, so why not in Angular? I like that I don't need to render things…
Anedoctally, as the author of another JS framework (http://mithril.js.org), I see a lot of people migrating away from Angular due to complexity, bloat and performance issues. I, myself, spent a good two years wrestling w/ Angular problems full time before jumping ship. Our apps were quite complex and we were fully invested in trying to make Angular work, and definitely not just making a half-assed effort to like it. So it's definitely not just newbies.
He missed so much. How about non-standard invalid HTML? Breaking all searchability and accessibility? Encouraging voodoo coding?
What's ironic is that angular 2 is fully rewritten in part to fix all of these issues, but none of that is mentioned, and the only focus is on how much Angular 2 sucks because it's not compatible with 1. There is also no mention of clear migration path and ability to run angular 1 and 2 side by side [2]
I've put 4 Angular sites in production and never faced issues due to any of these problems. I've had issues with caching, end to end testing of ajax calls, sharing functionality with non angular parts of the site. The very fact that the OP listed these issues tells me that he's not actually used Angular in production. Angular 1.x has limitations for sure but it works quite well in most scenarios.
[0] http://larseidnes.com/2014/11/05/angularjs-the-bad-parts/
[1] http://jimhoskins.com/2012/12/14/nested-scopes-in-angularjs....
[2] http://angularjs.blogspot.com/2015/08/angular-1-and-angular-...
EDIT: shortened. EDIT2: added conclusion
http://wildermuth.com/2015/09/01/Angular_v_React_v_Aurelia_v...
So, they trot out the same tired arguments against Angular that people have been making since the beginning, and this makes the front page where people engage in serious discussion about it? Did I miss some subtle novelty about this post, or is Angular ennui just that popular on HN?
Not to mention his example is just straight wrong about $scope and ng-if. His JSFiddle examples are all using angular 1.1.5. Angular 1.2 properly binds scope inside an ng-if. I agree that angular 1.1.5 had it's warts, if that's what this is supposed to be about. The current release version of angular is 1.4, about to be 1.5. Edit: After fully reading through this blog post; it's almost all wrong. Dirty Checking: Yes,…
As someone who's going to need to make a recommendation soon about whether or not to use Angular on a new project, this part worries me. The apps my company builds are full of data grids (Enterprise CRUD-based stuff) and it's entirely reasonable for us to have a 100-row grid with 20 columns as just one of the components on our page. So that's 2000 data bindings right there just for the data values. We'd also have metadata on every cell bound to classes and validation state. If we allow in-place editing, a single one of those fields can be updated. We can't have the entire grid re-checked after every update if that's going to hit the limit on acceptable performance. We'd need to limit it to the row (eg: cross-field validation rules) and elements outside the grid (eg: change toolbar button states.)
Does Angular 2 have similar limitations? Should we wait for Angular 3 and Object.Observe?
Sometimes I feel like I'm the only one who actually likes Angular. Two way data bindings are very convenient for writing UI. I don't want to write an event listener for every onclick, onchange, and onkeypress. I want the values in my models and the values in the DOM to be in sync. I like using nearly straight up HTML as my template. I do this in Django, so why not in Angular? I like that I don't need to render things…
How is that specific to Angular?