I think this is excellent use of attributes and good way to refactor things. What others pointed out, this is different framework :)
Angular 2 Core
101–110 of 279 posts
Re: Angular 2 Core
#102Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is this right? I can't believe for a millisecond that 90% of all new JS jobs relate to Angular, it's a horrible and overblown framework with a high barrier to entry. Were you looking at a particular subset of jobs, a particular industry or in a particular location?
I've just been looking for JavaScript work in the UK. Certainly the majority (maybe not 90%, but definitely > 50%) of jobs mention Angular. It's difficult to tell how many of these are just "put something cool on the advert to attract the hipsters" and how many are actual "we use or will use angular heavily in production" though.
In terms of roles I see posted on LinkedIn in the UK (which may or may not be representative of the industry as a whole, but it's all I've got to go on), there's a lot of Angular, a lot of "Angular or similar (eg. Backbone)", and a lot of "MVC (eg. Angular, Backbone)". Many of those same roles do also mention jQuery, but not with the same sort of billing it might have had two years ago. I'm not sure I've ever seen a role specifically mentioning Ember.
Like quite a few others in this thread, I'm an Angular naysayer for the standard reasons, and would generally prefer to avoid it, but the market does rather dictate what we end up doing sometimes, for better or for worse.
Re: Angular 2 Core
#103To everybody trying to make this into a tech fight about Angular vs. React/whatever, I've been repeating this like a mantra and even mentioned it in a talk on javascript once[0]: You can argue about the minor details of the tech stack till you turn green and blue, but Angular wins because it succeeds in the only metric that really counts. jQuery: (for reference) 5,656 commits 7 branches 122 releases 199 contributors…
The number of contributors is an indicator of the terminal goal. It's not the terminal goal itself. It's very important to remember that.
Re: Angular 2 Core
#104Earlier quoted context omitted.
Angular was started 5 years ago.. Node was barely a proof of concept, and the JavaScript tooling at the time was centered around jQuery.. version 2 looks to be 1-2 years away, and the changes they make are really nice. I've chosen React + Flux for my current development, but in 2-3 years may well be looking to Angular 2. There's a lot to by critical about Angular... least of which is that it's own dependency system d…
> Angular was started 5 years ago.. quoted just to remind people that Angular as we know it is older than most other single-page app frameworks - even if it only became popular a year or two ago.
Re: Angular 2 Core
#105I want to be excited, but at the moment there's just so much new and unknown stuff I'm seeing that I'm just not sure. I don't like the new template syntax; html attributes with parentheses and whatnot just look non-standard and I don't really see why they did all that. I really need to dig into the design documentation and find out the whys behind all of these new features. ES6 is also new, of course; when I first sa…
class Foo {
constructor(bar: Bar, baz: Baz) {
...
}
}
There's also syntax for using @Inject annotations inline in the constructor to provide more flexibility. The architecture may be coming together, but it sounds like there's still a long way to go before it's a fully-realized framework with more friendly conventions.If anything, I think the upshot is that DOM handling has been pushed further to the edges, and the emphasis is on pure composition of classes and data structures, with less boilerplate, hand-waving, and framework-centricity.
Re: Angular 2 Core
#106I feel that Angular changes too much in HTML to be considered useful for long term projects.The new syntax is also disturbing. My ideal MVC for front end utilizes regular javascript and html tags. At most just add data-ang-click="" something like that instead of "(click)" the latter isn't even valid HTML. Sometimes I think Angular is mainly popular because it's supported by Google. If any regular developer made these…
Would you be able to embrace Angular if it became a de facto standard? Because it seems pretty close to doing that. Interesting stuff.
Re: Angular 2 Core
#107It's sad to see a post on HN specifically devoted to Angular utterly devolve into framework flame wars. If the title were "Why Angular 2 will be better than React" I could understand, but this is just a sneak preview of features to come. Can we please just choose the tools we prefer and build stuff instead of nursing our insecurities about the choices we've made?
When new language features of C# or other languages (e.g. Go) are brought up on here, inevitably those features and benefits will be contrast against other languages. And they should. Because we aren't hammers and everything isn't a nail, and even if we happen to use tool A today, we usually have the capacity to move to tool B tomorrow if it made sense.
Re: Angular 2 Core
#108To everybody trying to make this into a tech fight about Angular vs. React/whatever, I've been repeating this like a mantra and even mentioned it in a talk on javascript once[0]: You can argue about the minor details of the tech stack till you turn green and blue, but Angular wins because it succeeds in the only metric that really counts. jQuery: (for reference) 5,656 commits 7 branches 122 releases 199 contributors…
Re: Angular 2 Core
#109To everybody trying to make this into a tech fight about Angular vs. React/whatever, I've been repeating this like a mantra and even mentioned it in a talk on javascript once[0]: You can argue about the minor details of the tech stack till you turn green and blue, but Angular wins because it succeeds in the only metric that really counts. jQuery: (for reference) 5,656 commits 7 branches 122 releases 199 contributors…
Some like Angular, some like React, some like Ember. Companies are successful with all 3 of these frameworks. And that's what counts. What's important is whether the tools help us get things done. And all 3 frameworks do exactly that, in different ways.
You can try to say "I win", but you only win if your product works better than your competitors, not if you have a "better" framework.
Re: Angular 2 Core
#110Earlier quoted context omitted.
... because jobs? I'm in agreement with your point, but... if 'the market' wants angular... 'the market' is going to have a hell of a time dealing with a mess in a couple of years when many of the decision makers that mandated angular move on to something else and leave piles of mess behind for someone else to clean up.
There may not be moving on. Or it may take a very long time. Angular is that big already. Previously there was no the framework for web frontend development (like Rails for Ruby). From now on you will need convincing reasons to use anything else, even if it is clearly better. Moving on to something else will be much harder.