61–70 of 87 posts
I can't believe in the team behind Angular 2.x they STILL have the same basic flaw in their thinking about UI development: their ideology is in contradiction to the idea of keeping it simple yet flexible.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Google (who is backing Angular) doesn't have nearly as much skin in the game as Facebook (who is backing React). Excellent point. Here's another "smell" with angular: http://angularjs.org versus https://angular.io/ . The former is AngularJS 2.0 and the latter is AngularJS 1.0... they maintain two websites for two versions of the same framework. It boggles my mind. Who thought it would be a good idea to separate ver…
The reason is because Angular 2 merges Angular Dart and AngularJS into one framework. Can't say I have first hand knowledge, but I have heard that Angular dominates internally at Google. UI Bootstrap is also separate from Angular (if that is what is meant by quick-and-dirty bootstrap site) - I am currently the lead developer of the project, and not once in my tenure have I deleted any comments, and I know of no insta…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The reason is because Angular 2 merges Angular Dart and AngularJS into one framework. Can't say I have first hand knowledge, but I have heard that Angular dominates internally at Google. UI Bootstrap is also separate from Angular (if that is what is meant by quick-and-dirty bootstrap site) - I am currently the lead developer of the project, and not once in my tenure have I deleted any comments, and I know of no insta…
I'll engage because I'd like to get to the bottom of this. > The reason is because Angular 2 merges Angular Dart and AngularJS into one framework. One technical reason for a seismic marketing change does not inspire confidence. Is Angular, Angular JS 2.0? Is AngularJS, AngularJS 1.0? Incoherency at the starting gate will not win new converts. > Can't say I have first hand knowledge, but I have heard that Angular domi…
I can't speak to the online interactions as to the comments, but I do recall the comments being outdated and not useful in a bunch of cases.
The Angular team is very professional and pleasant to interact with in my experience though. Igor once told me that open source is hard - I was skeptical at first, but being in charge of a major project myself now, I wholeheartedly agree. It is challenging to keep development going at a good clip, manage the team, and satisfy developers using the product, who are a ruthless bunch.
What is this FRP thing JS developers talking about? What I should read to learn more about it?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> React will stick around because it's backed by Facebook and if Facebook says this is the way to go with front-end development then that is all the convincing most folks need. Not just that. Facebook uses it for their flagship website (and as React Native for their mobile apps). So does Instagram. So does Netflix. If you have the React developer tools installed you can literally go to facebook.com or netflix.com and…
> Google (who is backing Angular) doesn't have nearly as much skin in the game as Facebook (who is backing React). Excellent point. Here's another "smell" with angular: http://angularjs.org versus https://angular.io/ . The former is AngularJS 2.0 and the latter is AngularJS 1.0... they maintain two websites for two versions of the same framework. It boggles my mind. Who thought it would be a good idea to separate ver…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I agree with you. I also like being "closer to the machine" so to speak. One day, my dev browser will support ES6/7 and I won't need babel + webpack/browserify while doing locally development, debugging will be done on unmunged code and TDD will be easy to practice as the feedback loop will be back to normal.
If you ditch Babel you won't be able to use ES8/9.
http://www.indeed.com/jobtrends?q=%22angularJS%22%2C+%22Reac...
Isn't this like comparing apples to a fruit salad? Quoting from the React website, "Lots of people use React as the V in MVC," whereas Angular is the whole kit `n' kaboodle. I thought React was supposed to be used in tandem with a Flux-like component that stores the state of the application, thereby allowing the developer to adopt the functional reactive programming style. Anyways, I think React will be short lived,…
Isn't this like comparing apples to a fruit salad? Quoting from the React website, "Lots of people use React as the V in MVC," whereas Angular is the whole kit `n' kaboodle. I thought React was supposed to be used in tandem with a Flux-like component that stores the state of the application, thereby allowing the developer to adopt the functional reactive programming style. Anyways, I think React will be short lived,…
React will be short-lived because of Web Components, not because of Elm. Either that, or React will evolve to be a Web Components framework. The days of proprietary component silos are numbered, IMO.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Honestly? I would start with React. The way Angular 2 has been going, they are adopting a lot of new ideas from React.
The team I'm apart of started a project 2 months ago. We chose React and Redux over Ember, Angular, et al. A main decision factor was that we needed the server to render our initial HTML, neither Angular nor Ember can achieve this easily, we'd most likely have to lean on a third-party service. Angular looked particularly unattractive with Angular 1 being as good as dead and we didn't feel confident starting with Angu…