Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Angular 2 Release Candidate

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 139 posts

Re: Angular 2 Release Candidate

#11

Post by keithnz »

maxharris wrote: post #2

I'm coming at this from the perspective of someone who has never used Angular 1.x or 2.x. I guess the first thing on my mind is: can I make Angular 2 work just like React does? Is there any way to use it without making/(being allowed to make) separate HTML templates and CSS files? If not, this is a serious disadvantage. Having the view layer scattered across 3X the files (vs React) would make it very hard to follow t…

I read something a while ago that I think really sums the key difference, is that angular and other frameworks inject javascript into html and its awkward. React injects HTML into javascript, and it seems, that way around is a lot more powerful as you have all of javascript to manipulate html rather than having HTML/Templating/Extensions to manipulate Javascript.

The two advantages are speed (it's supposed to be faster) and its closer to the web component standard than react, so if/when web components become mainstream it could be a lot easier migrating from angular2. However, both of those wouldn't be my prime reasons for choosing a framework though.

Re: Angular 2 Release Candidate

#13

Post by robwormald »

symlinkk wrote: post #12
robwormald wrote: post #9

Angular core team member here, happy to answer questions

Why is everything packaged separately now? Also, any ETA on 1.0?

couple of reasons. one big one is flexibility. angular2 (er, @angular) runs on client, server, native (react native/nativescript) and we hope many other platforms in the future. this lets us packages for common dependencies for various platforms, as well as enabling us to not ship the template compiler for precompiled apps.

the other is providing a single entry point to each of those packages, which makes it easy to configure for rollup/webpack2 etc when you want to use the ES6 source over the CJS.

Re: Angular 2 Release Candidate

#14

Post by robwormald »

robwormald wrote: post #13
symlinkk wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is everything packaged separately now? Also, any ETA on 1.0?

couple of reasons. one big one is flexibility. angular2 (er, @angular) runs on client, server, native (react native/nativescript) and we hope many other platforms in the future. this lets us packages for common dependencies for various platforms, as well as enabling us to not ship the template compiler for precompiled apps. the other is providing a single entry point to each of those packages, which makes it easy to…

re 1.0, when it's done :D

Re: Angular 2 Release Candidate

#15

Post by exclusiv »

keithnz wrote: post #11
maxharris wrote: post #2

I'm coming at this from the perspective of someone who has never used Angular 1.x or 2.x. I guess the first thing on my mind is: can I make Angular 2 work just like React does? Is there any way to use it without making/(being allowed to make) separate HTML templates and CSS files? If not, this is a serious disadvantage. Having the view layer scattered across 3X the files (vs React) would make it very hard to follow t…

I read something a while ago that I think really sums the key difference, is that angular and other frameworks inject javascript into html and its awkward. React injects HTML into javascript, and it seems, that way around is a lot more powerful as you have all of javascript to manipulate html rather than having HTML/Templating/Extensions to manipulate Javascript. The two advantages are speed (it's supposed to be fast…

I think a lot is preference. I think HTML in JS is dirty just like HTML in server side strings. Other people feel the opposite, that putting new tags which are similar to inline onclicks and other events that we moved away from w jQuery is dirty. There is truth to both.

Angular gives a lot of flexibility in code style and structure. You can componetize everything and have all your component files in one folder. You can inline it. Or you can go more MVC style folder structure like I do.

I personally like my html being approachable to junior devs and not being so chopped up and abstracted away from static HTML markup like it might be with React. Not sold on the new tag styles of A2 but I suppose it will just take some adjustment.

Re: Angular 2 Release Candidate

#16

Post by robwormald »

robwormald wrote: post #14
robwormald wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

couple of reasons. one big one is flexibility. angular2 (er, @angular) runs on client, server, native (react native/nativescript) and we hope many other platforms in the future. this lets us packages for common dependencies for various platforms, as well as enabling us to not ship the template compiler for precompiled apps. the other is providing a single entry point to each of those packages, which makes it easy to…

re 1.0, when it's done :D

err... 2.0

Re: Angular 2 Release Candidate

#17

Post by zkhalique »

jalami wrote: post #5

I realize a lot of companies flocked to Angular and it's used in a lot of places, but from the outside it seems to be fighting on two fronts. 1. Companies currently implementing it not wanting it to change or for there to be a quick and painless migration from 1.x to 2.x. So, less change, more hand-holding. The web changed a lot though, so its change is understandable. 2. Trendsetters and upcoming companies looking f…

React is just about dirty-checking the view, while Angular dirty-checks the model.

I mean, seriously, that's the main difference conceptually. You just modify some data structure and both frameworks will update some view.

Re: Angular 2 Release Candidate

#18

Post by [deleted] »

jalami wrote: post #5

I realize a lot of companies flocked to Angular and it's used in a lot of places, but from the outside it seems to be fighting on two fronts. 1. Companies currently implementing it not wanting it to change or for there to be a quick and painless migration from 1.x to 2.x. So, less change, more hand-holding. The web changed a lot though, so its change is understandable. 2. Trendsetters and upcoming companies looking f…

[deleted]

Re: Angular 2 Release Candidate

#19

Post by mchaver »

robwormald wrote: post #9

Angular core team member here, happy to answer questions

Since Angular 2 is so different from Angular 1 and there is not a universal solution to upgrade from 1 to 2, do you think there would have been a better PR/current user reaction if it was named something else?

Re: Angular 2 Release Candidate

#20

Post by Scarbutt »

keithnz wrote: post #11
maxharris wrote: post #2

I'm coming at this from the perspective of someone who has never used Angular 1.x or 2.x. I guess the first thing on my mind is: can I make Angular 2 work just like React does? Is there any way to use it without making/(being allowed to make) separate HTML templates and CSS files? If not, this is a serious disadvantage. Having the view layer scattered across 3X the files (vs React) would make it very hard to follow t…

I read something a while ago that I think really sums the key difference, is that angular and other frameworks inject javascript into html and its awkward. React injects HTML into javascript, and it seems, that way around is a lot more powerful as you have all of javascript to manipulate html rather than having HTML/Templating/Extensions to manipulate Javascript. The two advantages are speed (it's supposed to be fast…

So Java Servlets was the right approach all this time?
Post reply on HN