Why we moved from Angular 2 to Vue.js and why we didn’t choose React • Hacker News Board

Re: Why we moved from Angular 2 to Vue.js and why we didn’t choose React

#41

Post by camus2 » Fri, Sep 01, 2017, 2:31 PM UTC

Pigo wrote: post #12

I've been attempting to learn Angular2 and React, but haven't delved into Vue. Angular2 is just different, but it makes more sense to me than 1 if you take the time to learn the concepts. If you go into 2 thinking your 1 skills will translate, then I get why you'd be frustrated. But I found 1 to be very vague conceptually, so many different ways to do the same thing that you end up with many bad implementations. And…

> Angular2 is cake imo.

Angular.X totally lacks of vision. For years it didn't know what it wanted to be, pilling up layers of layers of complexity with IoC containers (useless in a weakly and dynamically typed language such as javascript), Some custom HTML that even needs its own parser, Rx.JS (which is self sufficient if you use it, you literally do not need something on top of that). For what result? it's not faster, snappier in the client, lighter when it comes to the payload, not easier to learn or to test or to use. You don't need some ajax libs either, the fetch API already exists. Angular.X is trying to be the "JEE" of the front-end, except it miss the point of JEE which are a bunch of stable specs, which Angular isn't.

Re: Why we moved from Angular 2 to Vue.js and why we didn’t choose React

#42

Post by jcroll » Fri, Sep 01, 2017, 2:31 PM UTC

ArchReaper wrote: post #29

Maybe my viewpoint is too 'elitist' or something, but I have a hard time taking this seriously when one of the chief complaints of Typescript is that it is too "difficult" It really makes me question the validity of the rest of the points.

Yeah was interested to hear what their points would be but couldn't get past when they started complaining about typescript.

Re: Why we moved from Angular 2 to Vue.js and why we didn’t choose React

#43

Post by aloisdg » Fri, Sep 01, 2017, 2:33 PM UTC

christophilus wrote: post #37

che_shirecat wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It should take no more than 20 minutes to learn JSX. it should, but in practicality, for most front-end devs especially junior ones, it's not. Moving Angular 1 devs to Vue gets actual work going 3-4 times (anecdotal experience) quicker than with React. For most smaller shops/startups Vue is almost always a better idea - it's much easier finding devs (especially remote/<100k comp ones) with previous Angular 1 experi…

If you know only JS, JSX is much easier to pick up than some proprietary templating language. How do I do an if, a loop, a map, ... any code at all? In JSX, the answer is squiggly-brackets and regular old JS code. In Angular's templating system and Vue's, you've got to relearn all of these and more.

You can use JSX without trouble with Vue

Re: Why we moved from Angular 2 to Vue.js and why we didn’t choose React

#44

Post by hockeybias » Fri, Sep 01, 2017, 2:36 PM UTC

ArchReaper wrote: post #29

Maybe my viewpoint is too 'elitist' or something, but I have a hard time taking this seriously when one of the chief complaints of Typescript is that it is too "difficult" It really makes me question the validity of the rest of the points.

Typescript is great and one reason is that it is a superset of JavaScript. I'm concurring wholeheartedly...

Re: Why we moved from Angular 2 to Vue.js and why we didn’t choose React

#45

Post by rajeshamara » Fri, Sep 01, 2017, 2:41 PM UTC

slackingoff2017 wrote: post #14

rajeshamara wrote: post #6

2 flaws with this article. 1) Using a Beta product and complaining on Angular2. You could have waited till the product is matured 2) Blaming for the developers inefficiency on Typescript. If your developers coding speed is reduced blame on your developers. Your title and article appears that something is wrong with Angular2 and moved to Vue.js. Before you post such articles make sure what your write makes sense

Angular 2 kinda sucks. Simple oversights like not having a way to change focus on input fields leads me to believe it's run by crazy purists. There's many other mistakes, like not having access to component state for custom validators and the infamous change detection errors. Sometimes the error messages border on horrific, reminds me of debugging assembly. Some of these issues don't have any good solutions. The need…

No Framework is perfect. There are always tradeoffs. Just because some things didn't work for you doesn't mean you can generalize and say Angular2 is bad. The way the Author wrote, he is generalizing things and making assumptions based on baseless facts

Re: Why we moved from Angular 2 to Vue.js and why we didn’t choose React

#46

Post by emodendroket » Fri, Sep 01, 2017, 2:41 PM UTC

jinder wrote: post #15

"We invested in a beta product and then shock horror - it changes before it's released. Let's blame the framework on that poor choice." "We were unable to learn how to use TypeScript properly, so let's abandon gradual typing and suffer a net loss in productivity over the longer term."

The stuff about a total rewrite to go to regular JavaScript is completely bogus as well. How does this guy think Typescript runs?

Re: Why we moved from Angular 2 to Vue.js and why we didn’t choose React

#47

Post by emodendroket » Fri, Sep 01, 2017, 2:42 PM UTC

keymone wrote: post #16

everybody who feels so strongly about separation of code from templates - do you realize that down there it's still just bunch of string concat calls? it's literally what ERB templates in Ruby compile to, and similarly in literally every other template language. rather than focusing on "omg html in my js" you should focus on "omg presentation code in my business logic code" because that's when you realize where the r…

That's not really the point of separation of concerns. It's for the benefit of programmers, especially maintenance programmers, not the machine.

Re: Why we moved from Angular 2 to Vue.js and why we didn’t choose React

#48

Post by camus2 » Fri, Sep 01, 2017, 2:44 PM UTC

jinder wrote: post #15

"We invested in a beta product and then shock horror - it changes before it's released. Let's blame the framework on that poor choice." "We were unable to learn how to use TypeScript properly, so let's abandon gradual typing and suffer a net loss in productivity over the longer term."

> "We invested in a beta product and then shock horror - it changes before it's released. Let's blame the framework on that poor choice."

Angular.2 has been in beta for years. And when it went out of beta it basically became something else. This is not a good thing. It's normal for teams to be excepting at least some level of stability in the library they are using. And now that Angular.X pretends to be using semver, it's going to be even worse.

The Angular team doesn't care about stability or lacked vision when they started 2, but a stable API is a valid expectation for a developer team.

But it's not surprising as frameworks with huge API surfaces like ExtJS have pulled the same trick for years, with the same results. Their downfall is more the consequence of API breaking than anything else.

Re: Why we moved from Angular 2 to Vue.js and why we didn’t choose React

#49

Post by dugmartin » Fri, Sep 01, 2017, 2:44 PM UTC

> With Typescript things that were really easy to do on Javascript like defining a simple object were more complicated to do on Typescript.

Sure defining a simple JS object has no overhead as opposed to maybe the 15-30 seconds of overhead that creating the Typescript interface entails. But that few additional seconds of overhead gives you this for rest of the (weeks, months and years) of the systems lifetime:

  1. Instant IDE/editor code completion and error checking
  2. Compile time checked contracts when that object is passed to another function
  3. Compile time checks for misspelled or non-existent members of the object.
  4. Instant refactoring of member names across files with any number of editors and IDEs
  5. A chance to take a little higher level look at the design of your system.

After using Typescript for a couple of years now I've found that when I design my types well the overall design and flow of the system tends towards beauty. That is probably why the Haskell folks are always over on the sidelines smirking.

Re: Why we moved from Angular 2 to Vue.js and why we didn’t choose React

#50

Post by emodendroket » Fri, Sep 01, 2017, 2:44 PM UTC

pweissbrod wrote: post #27

keymone wrote: post #16

everybody who feels so strongly about separation of code from templates - do you realize that down there it's still just bunch of string concat calls? it's literally what ERB templates in Ruby compile to, and similarly in literally every other template language. rather than focusing on "omg html in my js" you should focus on "omg presentation code in my business logic code" because that's when you realize where the r…

I got a theory about that. Somewhere along the way our IDEs and code editors trained us that different languages always belong in different files. Eventually people saw this as an aesthetically tidy arrangement to strive for. Mixing bits of different languages "inline" within the same file got a bad rap despite the fact it was often a sensible approach to organizing common logic together. You write html inside js? or…

My theory is that a lot of us have gone down this road, eventually found the thing getting unwieldy and difficult to maintain, and swearing never again.