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

Angular v8.0

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 210 posts

Re: Angular v8.0

#71

Post by sdegutis »

stupidcar wrote: post #39
sheeshkebab wrote: post #6

Angular feels like frontend framework built by backend java Spring developers, that hate frontend development.

This feels like an argument made by somebody who has never built a serious project in either, and has instead formed an opinion based on quick glance at the respective syntaxes. To me, Angular is what HTML and the DOM would look like if they had been designed from the beginning for application development: - Custom elements backed by controller classes. - Data-binding and event-binding syntax baked into HTML - Compon…

Every time I look at Angular, I remember that they use string literals for both HTML and CSS which is strongly off-putting. Especially because for HTML, it becomes another template language like Vue.js, whereas React.js is just JavaScript with a simple and predictable syntax transformation.

Re: Angular v8.0

#72

Post by pure »

Angular is really a great framework. I think a lot of people complaining about Angular haven't actually built an app in Angular 4+. I also wish the Angular team had just called Angular 2 something else, since the 1 -> 2 transition frustrated a lot of people who jumped ship and never looked back. I also understand that people just have different preferences, which is fine, too.

Out of the box, you get: routing with lazy loading, full TypeScript support and a TypeScript-first ecosystem, a great CLI that completely abstracts Webpack and the build process, easy and mostly automatic updates with the CLI, reactivity with RxJS baked-in and supported widely in the community, a great forms library, and, of course, a component-based approach to UI development. The uniformity is a big benefit. It's easy to ramp up on a new Angular project, and there are fewer decisions to make when starting a new one. The built-in parts of the framework are all high quality and an easy bet. There's no need to evaluate different routers, form libraries, HTTP clients, get back up to speed on configuring Webpack only to forget how until next time, etc.

It's also interesting to see the React community move towards some of the things that Angular has been doing for years: embracing TypeScript, extracting business logic to services (or you can call them Hooks), creating injectable shared state (or you can call it Context).

Re: Angular v8.0

#73

Post by christophilus »

pier25 wrote: post #69

While the effort by the Angular team deserves praise, I think for the vast majority of use cases it is a mistake to do it all client side. With some exceptions, there is really no benefit in making a SPA but there are many drawbacks. I don't say this lightly. I used AngularJS in 2015 and since then I've been making SPAs in React, Vue, and Inferno + Mobx.

I tend to agree. But in defense of the SPA, my experience is that over time, most screens accrete complexity.

You start out with a simple content screen. Then the client wants comments. Then they want richer comments. Then they want live comments. Etc.

Over time, most of my web applications tend to require richer and richer interactivity on each screen. As a result, it's nice to have started out with a client-side framework, rather than hitting some threshold where you suddenly need to switch things over.

Re: Angular v8.0

#74

Post by sixbrx »

sdegutis wrote: post #71
stupidcar wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This feels like an argument made by somebody who has never built a serious project in either, and has instead formed an opinion based on quick glance at the respective syntaxes. To me, Angular is what HTML and the DOM would look like if they had been designed from the beginning for application development: - Custom elements backed by controller classes. - Data-binding and event-binding syntax baked into HTML - Compon…

Every time I look at Angular, I remember that they use string literals for both HTML and CSS which is strongly off-putting. Especially because for HTML, it becomes another template language like Vue.js, whereas React.js is just JavaScript with a simple and predictable syntax transformation.

You see the template and css as literals in little Angular examples, but the normal case is that the literals are just names of the separate html and (s)css file names.

Re: Angular v8.0

#75

Post by tvphan »

holografix wrote: post #16

I was recently at a Microsoft heavy tech conference and spoke to at least 50 .Net developers. Anyone who also did front end did so in Angular. I was surprised at how popular it is!

The Stack Overflow developer survey showed that React and Angular are neck to neck so there's obviously a lot of people who use it.

However, you can see just how popular React is by number of npm packages that depend on it: https://github.com/facebook/react

Re: Angular v8.0

#76

Post by onemoresoop »

pure wrote: post #72

Angular is really a great framework. I think a lot of people complaining about Angular haven't actually built an app in Angular 4+. I also wish the Angular team had just called Angular 2 something else, since the 1 -> 2 transition frustrated a lot of people who jumped ship and never looked back. I also understand that people just have different preferences, which is fine, too. Out of the box, you get: routing with la…

I started working with angular 7 this February and I have to admit the learning curve was steep at first but after the slow start I quickly built my first project and now fully appreciate its power. I also think I am lucky to have taken a stab at it in its current stages, 4+ as I lost my patience for too much noise and too many changes. I also have many praises for Visual Studio Code. The reasons you mentioned are very valid and thats the reason Angular got adopted by enterprises. The uniformity the framework imposes on the projects makes it easy for other devs to jump in, to pick up a project done by somebody else, etc..

For all people who resent SPAs, continue using all jquery and other libs for small or existing projects but do consider a framework like angular if you want to build a stable web application (or a suite of web applications), you will appreciate it after your initial dive. I also recommend a youtube channel with clear non ADD turorials: search for ‘kudvenkat angular’ on youtube.

Re: Angular v8.0

#77

Post by pjmlp »

holografix wrote: post #16

I was recently at a Microsoft heavy tech conference and spoke to at least 50 .Net developers. Anyone who also did front end did so in Angular. I was surprised at how popular it is!

I do enterprise Java and .NET consulting, in what concerns Web frontends, if we use a SPA framework, it is most likely Angular.

If we are using just a couple of WebComponents with traditional server side rendering, then Vue.

Re: Angular v8.0

#78

Post by davedx »

pure wrote: post #72

Angular is really a great framework. I think a lot of people complaining about Angular haven't actually built an app in Angular 4+. I also wish the Angular team had just called Angular 2 something else, since the 1 -> 2 transition frustrated a lot of people who jumped ship and never looked back. I also understand that people just have different preferences, which is fine, too. Out of the box, you get: routing with la…

As a long time React developer, I second this. Especially this part:

> There's no need to evaluate different routers, form libraries

These two things have been the bane of my React development experience ever since the days of "flux". Every new React project I start I end up using a different set of libraries, and it's not just me either -- a very experienced React dev I work with just switched our React e-commerce SPA's form library out.

Coming back to Angular after a long time (I used to work with AngularJS) has been like a breath of fresh air. The project I'm using it on is clean, simple, consistent. The code is readable, every form and component works the same way.

If I was building something with less consistent / regular UX then I would still definitely use React, but Angular has really pleasantly surprised me.

Re: Angular v8.0

#79

Post by cjblomqvist »

royjacobs wrote: post #3

Congratulations on the release! For all the talk of React and Vue I still like the 'batteries-included' approach of Angular. I mostly do Kotlin in my day job so Angular aligns fairly nicely with the way applications are structured. I don't get the militant need for terseness that's seen in approaches like React Hooks. I also don't need the choice between multiple backwards-incompatible (or competing) routers, nor do…

But Vue got the batteries included? You have a router included and you can just keep your store as an object or use Vuex for larger applications (if you feel the need for even more structure). All this is according to the official docs, thus included and best practice?

Re: Angular v8.0

#80

Post by mcescalante »

bdcravens wrote: post #68
royjacobs wrote: post #3

Congratulations on the release! For all the talk of React and Vue I still like the 'batteries-included' approach of Angular. I mostly do Kotlin in my day job so Angular aligns fairly nicely with the way applications are structured. I don't get the militant need for terseness that's seen in approaches like React Hooks. I also don't need the choice between multiple backwards-incompatible (or competing) routers, nor do…

What batteries does Angular include that Vue doesn't?

I think instead of meaning specific components (http and routing come to mind) that more often people mean by "batteries included" that Angular has an opinionated way to do most everything, and their docs/guides include examples. In my experience, Vue and React allow a higher degree of freedom in choosing how you would like to approach various things, and there are more choices for some core behaviors for them as well
Post reply on HN